```

[Senate Report 115-262]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                      Calendar No. 439
115th Congress   }                                       {      Report
                                 SENATE 
 2d Session      }                                       {     115-262                     
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

 THE JOHN S. McCAIN NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                                  2019

                              R E P O R T

                         [TO ACCOMPANY S. 2987]

                                   on

     TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 FOR MILITARY 
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, 
TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR 
                             OTHER PURPOSES

                               ----------                              

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                  June 5, 2018.--Ordered to be printed

                                                      Calendar No. 439
115th Congress   }                                       {      Report
                                 SENATE 
 2d Session      }                                       {     115-262                     
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

 THE JOHN S. McCAIN NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                                  2019

                              R E P O R T

                         [TO ACCOMPANY S. 2987]

                                   on

     TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 FOR MILITARY 
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, 
TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR 
                             OTHER PURPOSES

                               __________

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                  June 5, 2018.--Ordered to be printed

                                   ______
                                   

                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

30-285                         WASHINGTON : 2018 

  

                      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
TIM SCOTT, South Carolina            GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
                    Christian Brose, Staff Director
               Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff Director

                                  (ii)

  
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
Purpose of the Bill..............................................     1
Committee Overview...............................................     2
Preamble to the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act 
  for Fiscal Year 2019...........................................     3
Summary of Discretionary Authorizations and Budget Authority 
  Implication....................................................     6
Budgetary Effects of This Act (Sec. 4)...........................     6
DIVISION A--Department of Defense Authorizations.................     7
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT.............................................     7
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................     7
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101)...............     7
    Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................     7
        Deployment by the Army of an interim cruise missile 
          defense capability (sec. 111)..........................     7
    Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................     8
        Multiyear procurement authority for F/A-18E/F Super 
          Hornet and EA-18G aircraft program (sec. 121)..........     8
        Multiyear procurement authority for E-2D Advanced Hawkeye 
          (AHE) aircraft program (sec. 122)......................     8
        Extension of limitation on use of sole-source 
          shipbuilding contracts for certain vessels (sec. 123)..     8
        Prohibition on availability of funds for Navy port 
          waterborne security barriers (sec. 124)................     9
        Multiyear procurement authority for Standard Missile-6 
          (sec. 125).............................................     9
        Limitation on availability of funds for the Littoral 
          Combat Ship (sec. 126).................................    10
        Nuclear refueling of aircraft carriers (sec. 127)........    10
        Limitation on funding for Amphibious Assault Vehicle 
          Product Improvement Program (sec. 128).................    10
    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................    11
        Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement of E-
          8 JSTARS aircraft (sec. 141)...........................    11
        B-52H aircraft system modernization report (sec. 142)....    11
        Repeal of funding restriction for EC-130H Compass Call 
          Recapitalization Program and review of program 
          acceleration opportunities (sec. 143)..................    12
    Subtitle E--Defense-Wide, Joint, and Multiservice Matters....    12
        Multiyear procurement authority for C-130J aircraft 
          program (sec. 151).....................................    12
        Quarterly updates on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter 
          program (sec. 152).....................................    12
        Authority to procure additional polar-class icebreakers 
          (sec. 153).............................................    14
    Budget Items.................................................    14
        Army.....................................................    14
            Interim cruise missile defense capability for the 
              Army...............................................    14
            Army Tactical Missile System.........................    14
            Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle........................    14
            Stryker modification.................................    15
            Stryker upgrade......................................    15
            Bradley Program (Modifications)......................    15
            Paladin Integrated Management........................    15
            Small caliber reduction..............................    15
            Army ammunition reduction............................    15
            Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.........................    16
            U.S. Southern Command unfunded priorities increase...    16
            Army automated data processing equipment.............    16
        Navy.....................................................    17
            F-35C Joint Strike Fighter...........................    17
            E-2D Advanced Hawkeye................................    17
            USMC OA-X light attack procurement...................    17
            C-40 aircraft........................................    18
            USMC Medium-Altitude Long-Endurance Unmanned Aircraft 
              System procurement.................................    19
            EA-18G cognitive electronic warfare..................    19
            Adaptive Radar Countermeasure........................    20
            F-35B modifications..................................    20
            F-35C modifications..................................    20
            F-35 spares and repair parts.........................    21
            Sidewinder...........................................    21
            Long range anti-ship missile.........................    22
            Harpoon block II.....................................    22
            Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile...............    22
            MK48 torpedoes.......................................    23
            LCS module weapons...................................    23
            Advanced low-cost munitions ordnance.................    23
            Virginia-class submarine advance procurement.........    23
            DDG-1000.............................................    24
            Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.......................    24
            Arleigh Burke-class destroyer advance procurement....    24
            Littoral Combat Ship.................................    25
            LPD-class amphibious transport ship advance 
              procurement........................................    25
            Outfitting...........................................    25
            Service craft........................................    26
            Completion of prior year shipbuilding programs.......    27
            Cable ship...........................................    27
            Other navigation equipment...........................    27
            DDG-1000 class support equipment.....................    27
            Items less than $5 million...........................    28
            LCS mine countermeasures mission modules.............    28
            LCS anti-submarine warfare mission modules...........    28
            LCS surface warfare mission modules..................    28
            Surface ship torpedo defense.........................    29
            Cooperative Engagement Capability....................    29
            Minesweeping system replacement......................    29
            Shallow water mine countermeasures...................    29
            Next Generation Surface Search Radar.................    30
            Cryptologic communications equipment.................    30
            Sonobuoys............................................    30
            Navy port waterborne security barriers...............    31
            Amphibious Assault Vehicle Survivability Upgrade.....    31
            Command post systems.................................    31
            Training devices.....................................    32
        Air Force................................................    32
            F-35A Joint Strike Fighter...........................    32
            OA-X light attack aircraft...........................    32
            KC-46A Pegasus.......................................    33
            MQ-9.................................................    34
            B-52.................................................    34
            Long range anti-ship missile certification on the B-
              52.................................................    34
            A-10 replacement wing program........................    34
            F-35A modifications..................................    35
            C-130 propulsion upgrade.............................    35
            Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System........    35
            F-35A spares and repair parts........................    36
            Air Force long range anti-ship missile...............    36
            Small Diameter Bomb II...............................    37
            Cargo and utility vehicles...........................    37
            Security and tactical vehicles.......................    38
            Special purpose vehicles.............................    38
            Fire fighting/crash rescue vehicles..................    38
            Materials handling vehicles..........................    38
            Runway snow removal and cleaning equipment...........    39
            Air Force physical security system...................    39
            Base maintenance and support equipment...............    39
        Defense Wide.............................................    39
            Joint Service Provider...............................    39
    Items of Special Interest....................................    39
        Aircraft carrier acquisition.............................    39
        Army M4 Carbine Forward Extended Rails...................    40
        Avoiding future work stoppages on EC-130H Compass Call 
          Recapitalization.......................................    40
        B-2 modernization programs...............................    41
        B-52 re-engining.........................................    41
        Briefing on tactical wheeled vehicle acquisition plans...    42
        CH-53K Heavy Lift Replacement............................    42
        Continued F-15 C/D fleet modernization...................    43
        Explosive Ordnance Disposal technology development.......    43
        F-35 modifications to Block 4 configuration..............    43
        Ford-class sustainment and product support...............    44
        Guided missile frigate (FFG(X))..........................    44
        HH-60 Combat Rescue Helicopter program...................    45
        Immersive virtual shipboard environment training.........    45
        Intermediary Low-Cost Tactical Extended Range Missile....    45
        John Lewis-class fleet oiler multiyear procurement 
          strategy...............................................    46
        Light-weight polymer technologies for ammunition and 
          small arms.............................................    46
        Maneuver Short Range Air Defense to counter Unmanned 
          Aircraft Systems.......................................    47
        Navy equipment for the Heavy Polar Icebreaker program....    47
        Navy small arms weapons training.........................    47
        Preservation of F-117 aircraft with certified combat 
          sorties................................................    48
        Presidential protection..................................    48
        Report on Air Force plan for fighter aircraft............    49
        Report on Navy's current and future state of long range 
          strike capability......................................    49
        Rifle Marksmanship Training..............................    49
        San Antonio-class Flight II amphibious transport ship 
          multiyear procurement strategy.........................    50
        Small Unit Support Vehicle report........................    50
        Stryker A1 Production....................................    51
        Swarm attack defense of Navy ships.......................    51
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............    53
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    53
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 201)...............    53
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................    53
        Codification and reauthorization of Defense Research and 
          Development Rapid Innovation Program (sec. 211)........    53
        Procedures for rapid reaction to emerging technology 
          (sec. 212).............................................    53
        Activities on identification and development of enhanced 
          personal protective equipment against blast injury 
          (sec. 213).............................................    54
        Human factors modeling and simulation activities (sec. 
          214)...................................................    54
        Expansion of mission areas supported by mechanisms for 
          expedited access to technical talent and expertise at 
          academic institutions (sec. 215).......................    55
        Advanced manufacturing activities (sec. 216).............    56
        National security innovation activities (sec. 217).......    56
        Partnership intermediaries for promotion of defense 
          research and education (sec. 218)......................    57
        Limitation on use of funds for Surface Navy Laser Weapon 
          System (sec. 219)......................................    57
        Expansion of coordination requirement for support for 
          national security innovation and entrepreneurial 
          education (sec. 220)...................................    58
        Limitation on funding for Amphibious Combat Vehicle 1.2 
          (sec. 221).............................................    58
        Defense quantum information science and technology 
          research and development program (sec. 222)............    58
        Joint directed energy test activities (sec. 223).........    59
        Requirement for establishment of arrangements for 
          expedited access to technical talent and expertise at 
          academic institutions to support Department of Defense 
          missions (sec. 224)....................................    60
        Authority for Joint Directed Energy Transition Office to 
          conduct research relating to high powered microwave 
          capabilities (sec. 225)................................    60
        Joint artificial intelligence research, development, and 
          transition activities (sec. 226).......................    60
    Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................    60
        Report on comparative capabilities of adversaries in key 
          technology areas (sec. 231)............................    60
        Report on active protection systems for armored combat 
          and tactical vehicles (sec. 232).......................    61
        Next Generation Combat Vehicle (sec. 233)................    61
        Report on the future of the defense research and 
          engineering enterprise (sec. 234)......................    62
        Modification of reports on mechanisms to provide funds to 
          defense laboratories for research and development of 
          technologies for military missions (sec. 235)..........    63
        Report on Mobile Protected Firepower and Future Vertical 
          Lift (sec. 236)........................................    63
        Improvement of the Air Force supply chain (sec. 237).....    63
        Review of guidance on blast exposure during training 
          (sec. 238).............................................    64
        List of technologies and manufacturing capabilities 
          critical to Armed Forces (sec. 239)....................    64
        Report on requiring access to digital technical data in 
          future acquisitions of combat, combat service, and 
          combat support systems (sec. 240)......................    65
        Competitive acquisition strategy for Bradley Fighting 
          Vehicle transmission replacement (sec. 241)............    65
        Independent assessment of electronic warfare plans and 
          programs (sec. 242)....................................    65
    Budget Items.................................................    66
        Army.....................................................    66
            Army defense research sciences.......................    66
            Army quantum information sciences....................    66
            University and industry research centers.............    66
            Sensors and electronic survivability.................    67
            Aviation technology..................................    67
            Weapons and munitions technology.....................    67
            Human factors engineering technology.................    68
            Command, Control, and Communications technology......    68
            Aviation advanced technology.........................    69
            Extended Range Cannon Artillery gun..................    69
            Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology....    69
            Army Next Generation Combat Vehicle Prototype........    69
            High performance computing modernization program.....    70
            Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation funds for 
              minor Science and Technology military construction.    70
            Military engineering advanced technology.............    71
            Position, navigation and timing technology...........    71
            Command, Control, and Communication advanced 
              technology.........................................    71
            Anti-Personnel Improved Conventional Munition........    72
            Tactical Exploitation of National Capabilities Radio 
              Frequency Exploitation--Electronic Intelligence....    72
            Indirect Fire Protection Capability..................    73
            Mobile Protected Firepower...........................    73
            Suite of Vehicle Protection Systems--EMD (Vehicle 
              Protection Suite Project)..........................    73
            Army contract writing system.........................    74
            Major T&E investment.................................    74
            High energy laser testing............................    74
        Navy.....................................................    75
            Navy basic research initiatives......................    75
            Navy defense research sciences.......................    75
            Navy quantum information sciences....................    75
            Directed energy applied research.....................    75
            Warfighter sustainment applied research..............    76
            Undersea warfare applied research....................    76
            Innovative Naval prototypes--applied research........    76
            USMC advanced technology demonstration...............    76
            Innovative Naval prototypes--advanced technology 
              development........................................    77
            Advanced combat systems technology...................    77
            Surface and shallow water mine countermeasures.......    77
            Advanced submarine system development................    78
            Common Hull Auxiliary Multi-mission Platform 
              acceleration.......................................    78
            Littoral Combat Ship mission modules.................    78
            Land attack technology...............................    79
            F/A-18 infrared search and track.....................    79
            Small and medium unmanned undersea vehicles..........    79
            Large unmanned undersea vehicles.....................    80
            Littoral airborne mine countermeasures...............    80
            Surface mine countermeasures.........................    80
            AV-8B Aircraft--Engineering Development..............    80
            Physiological episode safety improvements............    81
            EA-18G cognitive electronic warfare..................    81
            EA-18G offensive airborne electronic attack special 
              mission pod........................................    82
            LPD-17 class systems integration.....................    82
            SM-6 Block 1B 21 inch rocket motor...................    82
            Amphibious assault ship acceleration.................    82
            Electronic Procurement System........................    83
            Navy Information Technology Systems Development......    83
            Management, technical, and international support.....    83
            Maritime Strike Tomahawk.............................    84
            Integrated surveillance system.......................    84
            Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile extended range    84
            Tactical Targeting Network Technology................    85
            F/A-18 E/F engine enhancements.......................    85
            Amphibious Assault Vehicle...........................    85
        Air Force................................................    86
            Air Force defense research sciences..................    86
            Air Force quantum information sciences...............    86
            High energy laser research initiatives...............    86
            Materials............................................    86
            Aerospace vehicle technologies.......................    87
            Affordable responsive modular rocket.................    87
            Multi-mode propulsion applied research...............    87
            Solid Rocket Motor Produce On-Demand.................    88
            Aerospace propulsion.................................    88
            Aerospace sensors....................................    88
            Skywave Technologies Laboratory......................    88
            High energy laser research...........................    89
            High powered microwave research......................    89
            Advanced materials for research......................    89
            Materials affordability..............................    89
            Sustainment in science and technology................    90
            Aerospace technology development and demonstration 
              increase for operational energy capability 
              improvements.......................................    90
            Aerospace propulsion and power technology............    90
            Multi-mode propulsion advanced technology development    91
            Technology for the sustainment of strategic systems..    91
            Electronic combat technology.........................    91
            Demonstrator Laser Weapons System....................    92
            Prototype Tanker.....................................    92
            Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon................    92
            Technology transition program........................    93
            Air Force supply chain innovation....................    93
            Contracting Information Technology System............    93
            Advanced Battle Management System....................    94
            JSTARS recap radar...................................    94
            Major Test and Evaluation Management.................    94
            Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System........    94
            B-52.................................................    95
            Airborne Early Warning and Control System............    95
            Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul System.............    95
            Defense Enterprise Accounting Management System 
              Increment 2........................................    96
        Defense Wide.............................................    96
            Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency defense 
              research sciences..................................    96
            Critical materials...................................    96
            Defense-wide quantum information sciences............    97
            Basic research initiatives...........................    97
            Activities to determine more effective personal 
              protective equipment against blast injury..........    97
            Joint munitions program..............................    97
            Applied research for the advancement of science and 
              technology priorities..............................    98
            Tactical technology..................................    98
            Multi-Azimuth Defense Fast Intercept Round Engagement 
              System.............................................    98
            Materials and biological technology..................    99
            Combating terrorism technology support...............    99
            Advanced aerospace systems...........................    99
            Blackjack............................................   100
            Defense Innovation Unit Experimental.................   100
            Networked communications capabilities................   100
            Enhancing cybersecurity for small vendors............   100
            Defense-wide manufacturing science and technology 
              program............................................   101
            Defense Logistics Agency manufacturing technology 
              program............................................   101
            Defense Logistics Agency generic logistics research 
              and development technology demonstrations..........   101
            Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
              Program and Environmental Security Technology 
              Certification Program increases....................   102
            Microelectronics technology development and support..   103
            Advanced electronics technologies....................   103
            Network-centric warfare technology...................   103
            Sensor technology....................................   103
            Quick reaction special projects......................   104
            Test and evaluation science and technology related to 
              hypersonics and directed energy....................   104
            Test and evaluation science and technology workforce 
              development........................................   104
            Operational energy capability improvement............   104
            National Security Innovation Activities..............   105
            Corrosion control and prevention funding increase....   105
            Trusted and assured microelectronics.................   105
            Defense Contract Management Agency information 
              technology development.............................   106
            Deputy Chief Management Officer policy and 
              integration........................................   106
            Defense-wide electronic procurement capabilities.....   106
            Trusted and assured microelectronics engineering and 
              manufacturing development..........................   107
            Hypersonic experimentation facilities................   107
            Joint mission environment test capability............   107
            Technical studies, support and analysis..............   108
            Developmental Test and Evaluation....................   108
            Policy research and development programs.............   108
            Personnel security and continuous evaluation 
              innovation.........................................   108
            Director, Operational Test and Evaluation cyber 
              projects...........................................   109
    Items of Special Interest....................................   109
        AC-130J High Energy Laser................................   109
        Acoustic Threat Detection................................   109
        Active Protection System for Abrams, Bradley, Stryker....   110
        Additive manufacturing within the military departments...   110
        Advanced countermeasure dispenser system for 4th 
          generation/legacy aircraft.............................   111
        Advanced hull technology.................................   111
        Advanced low-weight body armor report....................   111
        Aerospace sensors........................................   111
        Airless Tire Technology Demonstration....................   112
        Army Assured Mobility in Northern Regions................   112
        Combat Vehicle Light Weight Development Program..........   112
        Comptroller General review of Department of Defense 
          industry Independent Research and Development funding..   113
        Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Gremlins Air-
          Recoverable Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System.............   114
        Department of Defense Laboratory talent management and 
          succession planning....................................   114
        Diamond transistor technology for power conversion in 
          combat infrastructure..................................   114
        Fielding of radiation detection devices..................   114
        Hyper Velocity Projectile................................   115
        Improved Turbine Engine Program..........................   115
        Land-Bases Anti-Ship Missile.............................   116
        Military applications for Graphene.......................   116
        Modernizing Towed 105 Artillery Systems..................   116
        Next Generation Health Monitoring System (NGHMS).........   117
        Policy issues surrounding emerging technologies for 
          combat and non-combat use..............................   117
        Rapid-charging hybrid energy storage fuel cells..........   118
        Report on Metal Matrix Composites for Army Vehicles......   118
        Research, development, and procurement of wearable and 
          mobile remote power capabilities.......................   118
        Soldier Born Sensor (SBS) Program........................   118
        Surrogates for operational testing of torpedoes and 
          torpedo defensive systems..............................   119
        Technology and transition accelerators...................   119
        Trusted and assured microelectronics.....................   119
        Ultra Low Power Deployable Radar.........................   120
        Ultra-Lightweight Camouflage Net System..................   120
        Workforce and infrastructure for National Defense 
          Strategy priority technologies.........................   120
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................   123
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   123
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 301)...............   123
    Subtitle B--Energy and Environment...........................   123
        Further improvements to energy security and resilience 
          (sec. 311).............................................   123
        Funding of study and assessment of health implications of 
          per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances contamination in 
          drinking water by Agency for Toxic Substances and 
          Disease Registry (sec. 312)............................   123
        Military Mission Sustainment Siting Clearinghouse (sec. 
          313)...................................................   123
        Operational energy policy (sec. 314).....................   123
        Funding treatment of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and 
          perfluorooctanoic acid at State-owned and operated 
          National Guard installations (sec. 315)................   124
    Subtitle C--Reports..........................................   124
        Reports on readiness (sec. 321)..........................   124
        Report on cold weather capabilities and readiness of 
          United States Armed Forces (sec. 322)..................   124
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   124
        Pilot programs on integration of military information 
          support and civil affairs activities (sec. 331)........   124
        Reporting on future years budgeting by subactivity group 
          (sec. 332).............................................   125
        Restriction on upgrades to aviation demonstration team 
          aircraft (sec. 333)....................................   125
        U.S. Special Operations Command civilian personnel (sec. 
          334)...................................................   125
        Limitation on availability of funds for service-specific 
          Defense Readiness Reporting Systems (sec. 335).........   126
        Repurposing and reuse of surplus Army firearms (sec. 336)   126
        Limitation on availability of funds for establishment of 
          additional specialized undergraduate pilot training 
          facility (sec. 337)....................................   126
        Scope of authority for restoration of land due to mishap 
          (sec. 338).............................................   127
        Redesignation of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR) 
          (sec. 339).............................................   127
    Subtitle E--Logistics and Sustainment........................   127
        Limitation on modifications to Navy Facilities 
          Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM) 
          structure and mechanism (sec. 351).....................   127
    Budget Items.................................................   127
        United States Southern Command unfunded priorities 
          increase...............................................   127
        Army marketing and advertising reduction.................   127
        Army Operation and Maintenance budget request for 
          civilian pay...........................................   128
        United States Southern Command unfunded priorities 
          increase for sensor integration........................   128
        Enterprise information reduction.........................   128
        Navy facilities, sustainment, restoration, and 
          modernization increase.................................   128
        F-35 depot component repair capability...................   129
        Air Force demolition increases...........................   129
        Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System weapons 
          system sustainment.....................................   129
        Air Force weapon system sustainment increases............   130
        Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System flight 
          hours..................................................   130
        Deployable airbase systems...............................   130
        Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System personnel..   131
        Air National Guard increase per- and polyfluoroalkyl 
          substance environmental restoration funding transfer...   131
        Plan for incorporating logistics sustainment under attack 
          into war games.........................................   132
        Defense Security Service.................................   132
        Personnel security background investigations.............   133
        Funding for impact aid...................................   133
        Center for Disease Control study increase................   133
        Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse increase......   134
        Defense Environmental International Cooperation program 
          increase...............................................   134
        Department of Defense emerging contaminants increase.....   134
        Department of Defense environmental resiliency increase..   135
        Department of Defense rewards program reduction..........   135
        Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative........   135
        Air Force decrease per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance 
          environmental restoration funding transfer.............   136
        Foreign currency fluctuations............................   136
        Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps increase.........   136
        Air Force Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup....   136
        Air National Guard Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances 
          cleanup................................................   137
        Army Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup.........   137
        Navy Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup.........   137
    Items of Special Interest....................................   137
        Air Force runway infrastructure..........................   137
        All services marketing audit.............................   138
        Ammunition plant reform and stockpile of explosives......   138
        Arctic search and rescue.................................   139
        Assessment of assigning a Security Force Assistance 
          Brigade to U.S. Africa Command.........................   140
        Assessment of Department of Defense installation 
          management.............................................   140
        Assessment of hybrid electric drive performance..........   142
        Battery storage and safety programs clarification........   142
        Battery storage technology...............................   143
        Briefing on Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
          Registry PFAS report...................................   143
        Building energy resilience on military installations.....   143
        Comptroller General review of Defense-wide Working 
          Capital Fund overhead charges and fees.................   144
        Congressional notification of incidents..................   144
        Corrosion prevention and oversight.......................   145
        Cost benefit analysis of alternative-fueled vehicles and 
          infrastructure.........................................   146
        Cost benefit analysis on conducting organic depot level 
          maintenance on the joint surveillance target attack 
          radar system...........................................   146
        Depot best practices.....................................   147
        Development of future fluorine-free fire fighting foams..   148
        Employment of Special Operations Forces..................   149
        Encouraging the use of the Innovative Readiness Training 
          program................................................   149
        Establishment of the energy resilience project 
          development and implementation office..................   150
        Establishment of the occupational group for federal 
          energy managers........................................   151
        Guidance on utility privatization contracts..............   151
        High purity aluminum.....................................   151
        High-energy intensity report.............................   152
        High-pressure cold spray repair..........................   152
        Leveraging non-Department funds to address infrastructure 
          maintenance backlogs and project delays................   152
        Light emitting diodes for aviation applications..........   153
        M240 medium machine gun modernization....................   153
        Maintaining current balance of government and private 
          contractors under 10 U.S.C. 2466.......................   154
        Marine Corps Base of the Future..........................   155
        Marine Corps Policy on flame-resistant uniforms..........   155
        Military working dogs....................................   156
        Navy next generation small arms weapons training and 
          readiness requirements.................................   156
        Operational energy technologies..........................   157
        Paint training programs..................................   157
        Predicting soil-terrain-atmospheric conditions...........   158
        Privatization of stormwater conveyance systems...........   158
        Report on transportation infrastructure critical to 
          Eastern Range space operations.........................   158
        Report on universal camouflage inventory and use.........   159
        Review of Department of Defense mission assurance program   160
        Review of the Navy's shipyard improvement plan...........   161
        Rough terrain container handler..........................   162
        Surface Deployment and Distribution Command common and 
          logistics broker waiver process........................   163
        Use of fire extinguishers in Department of Defense 
          facilities and National Model Codes....................   163
        Use of Global Combat Support System-Army by deployed 
          units..................................................   163
        Water resources for Department of Defense installations..   164
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS......................   165
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   165
        End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)...............   165
        End strengths for commissioned officers on active duty in 
          certain grades (sec. 402)..............................   166
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   166
        End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............   166
        End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of 
          the reserves (sec. 412)................................   166
        End strengths for military technicians (dual status) 
          (sec. 413).............................................   167
        Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on 
          active duty for operational support (sec. 414).........   167
    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   167
        Military personnel (sec. 421)............................   167
        Limitation on use of funds for personnel in fiscal year 
          2019 in excess of statutorily specified end strengths 
          for fiscal year 2018 (sec. 422)........................   168
    Budget Items.................................................   168
        Military personnel funding changes.......................   168
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY...............................   169
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   169
        Part I--Officer Personnel Management Reform..............   169
            Modernizing officer personnel management in support 
              of the National Defense Strategy...................   169
            Repeal of codified specification of authorized 
              strengths of certain commissioned officers on 
              active duty (sec. 501).............................   172
            Annual defense manpower requirements report matters 
              (sec. 502).........................................   172
            Repeal of requirement for ability to complete 20 
              years of service by age 62 as qualification for 
              original appointment as a regular commissioned 
              officer (sec. 503).................................   173
            Enhancement of availability of constructive service 
              credit for private sector training or experience 
              upon original appointment as a commissioned officer 
              (sec. 504).........................................   173
            Standardized temporary promotion authority across the 
              military departments for officers in certain grades 
              with critical skills (sec. 505)....................   174
            Authority for promotion boards to recommend officers 
              of particular merit be placed higher on a promotion 
              list (sec. 506)....................................   175
            Authority for officers to opt out of promotion board 
              consideration (sec. 507)...........................   176
            Competitive category matters (sec. 508)..............   176
            Promotion zone matters (sec. 509)....................   176
            Alternative promotion authority for officers in 
              designated competitive categories of officers (sec. 
              510)...............................................   177
            Applicability to additional officer grades of 
              authority for continuation on active duty of 
              officers in certain military specialties and career 
              tracks (sec. 511)..................................   179
        Part II--Other Matters...................................   179
            Matters relating to satisfactory service in grade for 
              purposes of retirement grade of officers in highest 
              grade of satisfactory service (sec. 516)...........   179
            Reduction in number of years of active naval service 
              required for permanent appointment as a limited 
              duty officer (sec. 517)............................   180
            Repeal of original appointment qualification 
              requirement for warrant officers in the regular 
              Army (sec. 518)....................................   180
            Uniform grade of service of the Chiefs of Chaplains 
              of the Armed Forces (sec. 519).....................   180
            Written justification for appointment of Chiefs of 
              Chaplains in grade below grade of major general or 
              rear admiral (sec. 520)............................   180
    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management.....................   180
        Authority to adjust effective date of promotion in the 
          event of undue delay in extending Federal recognition 
          of promotion (sec. 521)................................   180
        Authority to designate certain reserve officers as not to 
          be considered for selection for promotion (sec. 522)...   180
        Expansion of personnel subject to authority of the Chief 
          of the National Guard Bureau in the execution of 
          functions and missions of the National Guard Bureau 
          (sec. 523).............................................   181
        Repeal of prohibition on service on Army Reserve Forces 
          Policy Committee by members on active duty (sec. 524)..   181
    Subtitle C--General Service Authorities......................   181
        Assessment of Navy standard workweek and related 
          adjustments (sec. 531).................................   181
        Manning of Forward Deployed Naval Forces (sec. 532)......   182
        Navy watchstander records (sec. 533).....................   182
        Qualification experience requirements for certain Navy 
          watchstations (sec. 534)...............................   182
        Repeal of 15-year statute of limitations on motions or 
          requests for review of discharge or dismissal from the 
          Armed Forces (sec. 535)................................   182
        Treatment of claims relating to military sexual trauma in 
          correction of military records and review of discharge 
          or dismissal proceedings (sec. 536)....................   182
    Subtitle D--Military Justice Matters.........................   183
        Punitive article on domestic violence under the Uniform 
          Code of Military Justice (sec. 541)....................   183
        Inclusion of strangulation and suffocation in conduct 
          constituting aggravated assault for purposes of the 
          Uniform Code of Military Justice (sec. 542)............   183
        Authorities of Defense Advisory Committee on 
          Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual 
          Assault in the Armed Forces (sec. 543).................   183
        Protective orders against individuals subject to the 
          Uniform Code of Military Justice (sec. 544)............   183
        Expansion of eligibility for Special Victims' Counsel 
          services (sec. 545)....................................   183
        Clarification of expiration of term of appellate military 
          judges of the United States Court of Military 
          Commission Review (sec. 546)...........................   183
        Expansion of policies on expedited transfer of members of 
          the Armed Forces who are victims of sexual assault 
          (sec. 547).............................................   184
        Uniform command action form on disposition of 
          unrestricted sexual assault cases involving members of 
          the Armed Forces (sec. 548)............................   184
        Inclusion of information on certain collateral conduct of 
          victims of sexual assault in annual reports on sexual 
          assault involving members of the Armed Forces (sec. 
          549)...................................................   184
    Subtitle E--Member Education, Training, Transition, and 
      Resilience.................................................   184
        Consecutive service of service obligation in connection 
          with payment of tuition for off-duty training or 
          education for commissioned officers of the Armed Forces 
          with any other service obligations (sec. 551)..........   184
        Consecutive service of active service obligations for 
          medical training with other service obligations for 
          education or training (sec. 552).......................   184
        Clarification of application and honorable service 
          requirements under the Troops-to-Teachers Program to 
          members of the Retired Reserve (sec. 553)..............   185
        Prohibition on use of funds for attendance of enlisted 
          personnel at senior level and intermediate level 
          officer professional military education courses (sec. 
          554)...................................................   185
        Repeal of program on encouragement of postseparation 
          public and community service (sec. 555)................   185
        Expansion of authority to assist members in obtaining 
          professional credentials (sec. 556)....................   185
        Enhancement of authorities in connection with Junior 
          Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs (sec. 557)...   185
    Subtitle F--Defense Dependents' Education and Military Family 
      Readiness Matters..........................................   186
        Part I--Defense Dependents' Education Matters............   186
            Continuation of authority to assist local educational 
              agencies that benefit dependents of members of the 
              Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian 
              employees (sec. 561)...............................   186
            Impact aid for children with severe disabilities 
              (sec. 562).........................................   186
            Department of Defense Education Activity policies and 
              procedures on sexual harassment of students of 
              Activity schools (sec. 563)........................   186
        Part II--Military Family Readiness Matters...............   187
            Improvement of authority to conduct family support 
              programs for immediate family members of the Armed 
              Forces assigned to special operations forces (sec. 
              566)...............................................   187
            Expansion of period of availability of Military 
              OneSource program for retired and discharged 
              members of the Armed Forces and their immediate 
              families (sec. 567)................................   187
            Expansion of authority for noncompetitive 
              appointments of military spouses by Federal 
              agencies (sec. 568)................................   187
            Improvement of My Career Advancement Account program 
              for military spouses (sec. 569)....................   187
            Access to military installations for certain 
              surviving spouses and other next of kin of members 
              of the Armed Forces who die while on active duty or 
              certain reserve duty (sec. 570)....................   188
            Department of Defense Military Family Readiness 
              Council matters (sec. 571).........................   188
            Multidisciplinary teams for military installations on 
              child abuse and other domestic violence (sec. 572).   188
            Provisional or interim clearances to provide 
              childcare services at military childcare centers 
              (sec. 573).........................................   189
            Pilot program on prevention of child abuse and 
              training on safe childcare practices among military 
              families (sec. 574)................................   189
            Pilot program on participation of military spouses in 
              Transition Assistance Program activities (sec. 575)   190
            Small business activities of military spouses on 
              military installations in the United States (sec. 
              576)...............................................   190
    Subtitle G--Decorations and Awards...........................   190
        Authorization for award of the Distinguished Service 
          Cross for Justin T. Gallegos for acts of valor during 
          Operation Enduring Freedom (sec. 581)..................   190
        Award of medals or other commendations to handlers of 
          military working dogs (sec. 582).......................   190
    Subtitle H--Other Matters....................................   190
        Authority to award damaged personal protective equipment 
          to members separating from the Armed Forces and 
          veterans as mementos of military service (sec. 591)....   190
        Standardization of frequency of academy visits of the Air 
          Force Academy Board of Visitors with academy visits of 
          boards of other military service academies (sec. 592)..   191
        Redesignation of the Commandant of the United States Air 
          Force Institute of Technology as President of the 
          United States Air Force Institute of Technology (sec. 
          593)...................................................   191
        Limitation on justifications entered by military 
          recruiters for enlistment or accession of individuals 
          into the Armed Forces (sec. 594).......................   191
        National Commission on Military, National, and Public 
          Service matters (sec. 595).............................   191
        Burial of unclaimed remains of inmates at the United 
          States Disciplinary Barracks Cemetery, Fort 
          Leavenworth, Kansas (sec. 596).........................   191
        Space-available travel on Department of Defense aircraft 
          for veterans with service-connected disabilities rated 
          as total (sec. 597)....................................   192
    Items of Special Interest....................................   192
        Administrative separation protections for members of the 
          Armed Forces...........................................   192
        Assessment of Department of Defense Education Activity's 
          policies and procedures on student misconduct..........   192
        Assessment of relocation of family members...............   193
        Comptroller General report on Department of Defense 
          original appointment and scrolling processes...........   193
        Comptroller General study of dependency determinations 
          for incapacitated adult children of military members...   194
        Dependent care flexible savings accounts.................   194
        Facilitation of separation process and State veterans 
          affairs offices........................................   195
        Improvements to licensure and credentialing for military 
          spouses................................................   195
        Inclusion of the study of hybrid warfare in professional 
          military education.....................................   197
        Military childcare subsidies.............................   197
        National Guard Federal promotion delays..................   197
        National Guard mental health pilot program...............   198
        Permanent change of station frequency and impact on 
          military families......................................   198
        Public-private partnerships on military installations....   199
        Reimbursement for certain costs incurred by states during 
          domestic emergencies...................................   199
        Responding to cases of traumatic brain injury sustained 
          in intimate partner violence event.....................   200
        Senior Military Acquisition Advisor eligibility..........   200
        Specialized workshops for transitioning servicemembers...   201
        Training requirement for background check submissions....   202
        Understanding military family experiences of intimate 
          partner violence and child abuse and neglect...........   202
        Use of data analytics to facilitate assignment matching 
          and military family stability..........................   203
        Use of reserve personnel for the Cyber Mission Force.....   203
        Warm handoff for transitioning servicemembers suffering 
          from post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain 
          injury.................................................   203
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..............   205
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   205
        Fiscal year 2019 increase in military basic pay (sec. 
          601)...................................................   205
        Repeal of authority for payment of personal money 
          allowances to Navy officers serving in certain 
          positions (sec. 602)...................................   205
        Department of Defense proposal for a pay table for 
          members of the Armed Forces using steps in grade based 
          on time in grade rather than time in service (sec. 603)   205
        Financial support for lessors under the Military Housing 
          Privatization Initiative during 2019 (sec. 604)........   205
        Modification of authority of President to determine 
          alternative pay adjustment in annual basic pay of 
          members of the uniformed services (sec. 605)...........   206
        Eligibility of reserve component members for high-
          deployment allowance for lengthy or numerous 
          deployments and frequent mobilizations (sec. 606)......   206
        Eligibility of reserve component members for nonreduction 
          in pay while serving in the uniformed services or 
          National Guard (sec. 607)..............................   207
        Temporary adjustment in rate of basic allowance for 
          housing following identification of significant 
          underdetermination of civilian housing costs for 
          housing areas (sec. 608)...............................   207
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   207
        One-year extension of certain expiring bonus and special 
          pay authorities (sec. 611).............................   207
    Subtitle C--Disability Pay, Retired Pay, and Survivor 
      Benefits...................................................   208
        Technical corrections in calculation and publication of 
          special survivor indemnity allowance cost of living 
          adjustments (sec. 621).................................   208
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   208
        Rates of per diem for long-term temporary duty 
          assignments (sec. 631).................................   208
        Prohibition on per diem allowance reductions based on the 
          duration of temporary duty assignment or civilian 
          travel (sec. 632)......................................   208
    Items of Special Interest....................................   208
        Defense Commissary Agency and small businesses...........   208
        Privatized on-base lodging program.......................   208
        Small business access to military exchange stores........   209
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................   211
    Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits...........   211
        Consolidation of cost-sharing requirements under TRICARE 
          Select and TRICARE Prime (sec. 701)....................   211
        Administration of TRICARE dental plans through the 
          Federal Employees Dental Insurance Program (sec. 702)..   211
        Contraception coverage parity under the TRICARE Program 
          (sec. 703).............................................   212
        Pilot program on opioid management in the military health 
          system (sec. 704)......................................   212
        Pilot program on treatment of members of the Armed Forces 
          for post-traumatic stress disorder related to military 
          sexual trauma (sec. 705)...............................   212
    Subtitle B--Health Care Administration.......................   213
        Improvement of administration of Defense Health Agency 
          and military medical treatment facilities (sec. 711)...   213
        Organizational framework of the military healthcare 
          system to support medical requirements of the combatant 
          commands (sec. 712)....................................   214
        Streamlining of TRICARE Prime beneficiary referral 
          process (sec. 713).....................................   215
        Sharing of information with State prescription drug 
          monitoring programs (sec. 714).........................   215
        Improvement of reimbursement by Department of Defense of 
          entities carrying out state vaccination programs in 
          connection with vaccines provided to covered 
          beneficiaries under the TRICARE program (sec. 715).....   216
    Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters........................   216
        Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-
          Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility 
          Demonstration Fund (sec. 721)..........................   216
        Increase in number of appointed members of the Henry M. 
          Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military 
          Medicine (sec. 722)....................................   216
        Cessation of requirement for mental health assessment of 
          members after redeployment from a contingency operation 
          upon discharge or release from the Armed Forces (sec. 
          723)...................................................   217
        Pilot program on earning by special operations forces 
          medics of credits towards a physician assistant degree 
          (sec. 724).............................................   217
        Pilot program on partnerships with civilian organizations 
          for specialized medical training (sec. 725)............   217
        Registry of individuals exposed to per- and 
          polyfluoroalkyl substances on military installations 
          (sec. 726).............................................   218
        Inclusion of gambling disorder in health assessments for 
          members of the Armed Forces and related research 
          efforts (sec. 727).....................................   218
        Comptroller General review of Defense Health Agency 
          oversight of TRICARE managed care support contractors 
          (sec. 728).............................................   218
    Items of Special Interest....................................   219
        Critical gaps in military physician specialties..........   219
    Emerging technologies to mitigate and prevent traumatic brain 
      injury.....................................................   220
        Expedited development and approval of medical products 
          for emergency use on the battlefield...................   220
        Explore feasibility of implementing a combat readiness 
          assessment tool........................................   220
        Extended Care Health Option respite care services........   221
        Health risk surveillance of servicemembers in the United 
          States Special Operations Command......................   221
    MHS GENESIS..................................................   221
        Mild traumatic brain injury screening tests..............   222
        Procurement of telehealth solutions and services.........   222
        Prostate cancer incidence among Active-Duty 
          servicemembers.........................................   222
        Rapid cerebral therapeutic hypothermia...................   223
        Regenerative medicine research and development...........   223
        Tricare access study.....................................   223
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND 
  RELATED MATTERS................................................   225
    Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................   225
        Permanent Supply Chain Risk Management Authority (sec. 
          801)...................................................   225
        Commercially available market research (sec. 802)........   225
        Comptroller General assessment on acquisition programs 
          and related initiatives (sec. 803).....................   225
    Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, 
      Procedures, and Limitations................................   226
        Department of Defense contracting dispute matters (sec. 
          811)...................................................   226
        Continuation of technical data rights during challenges 
          (sec. 812).............................................   227
        Increased micro-purchase threshold (sec. 813)............   227
        Modification of limitations on single source task or 
          delivery order contracts (sec. 814)....................   227
        Preliminary cost analysis requirement for exercise of 
          multiyear contract authority (sec. 815)................   227
        Inclusion of best available information regarding past 
          performance of subcontractors and joint venture 
          partners (sec. 816)....................................   227
        Modification of criteria for waivers of requirement for 
          certified cost and price data (sec. 817)...............   228
        Subcontracting price and approved purchasing systems 
          (sec. 818).............................................   228
        Comptroller General of the United States report on 
          progress payment financing of Department of Defense 
          contracts (sec. 819)...................................   228
        Authorization to limit foreign access to technology 
          through contracts (sec. 820)...........................   228
        Briefing requirement on services contracts (sec. 821)....   228
        Sense of Congress on awarding of contracts to responsible 
          companies that primarily employ American workers and do 
          not actively transfer American jobs to potential 
          adversaries (sec. 822).................................   229
    Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition 
      Programs...................................................   229
        Program cost, fielding, and performance goals in planning 
          major acquisition programs (sec. 831)..................   229
        Implementation of recommendations of the Independent 
          Study on Consideration of Sustainment in Weapons 
          Systems Life Cycle (sec. 832)..........................   229
        Pilot program to accelerate major weapons system programs 
          (sec. 833).............................................   229
    Subtitle D--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce.....   230
        Permanent authority for demonstration projects relating 
          to acquisition personnel management policies and 
          procedures (sec. 841)..................................   230
        Establishment of integrated review team on defense 
          acquisition industry-government exchange (sec. 842)....   230
        Exchange program for acquisition workforce employees 
          (sec. 843).............................................   230
    Subtitle E--Provisions Relating to Commercial Items..........   231
        Report on commercial item procurement reform (sec. 851)..   231
    Subtitle F--Industrial Base Matters..........................   231
        National technology and industrial base application 
          process (sec. 861).....................................   231
        Report on defense electronics industrial base (sec. 862).   231
        Support for defense manufacturing communities to support 
          the defense industrial base (sec. 863).................   232
    Subtitle G--Other Transactions...............................   232
        Change to notification requirement for other transactions 
          (sec. 871).............................................   232
        Data and policy on the use of other transactions (sec. 
          872)...................................................   232
    Subtitle H--Development and Acquisition of Software Intensive 
      and Digital Products and Services..........................   232
        Clarifications regarding proprietary and technical data 
          (sec. 881).............................................   232
        Implementation of recommendations of the final report of 
          the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Design and 
          Acquisition of Software for Defense Systems (sec. 882).   233
        Implementation of pilot program to use agile or iterative 
          development methods under section 873 of the National 
          Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (sec. 
          883)...................................................   233
        Enabling and other activities of the Cloud Executive 
          Steering Group (sec. 884)..............................   234
    Subtitle I--Other Matters....................................   235
        Prohibition on certain telecommunications services or 
          equipment (sec. 891)...................................   235
        Limitation on use of funds pending submittal of report on 
          Army Marketing and Advertising Program (sec. 892)......   235
        Permanent SBIR and STTR authority for the Department of 
          Defense (sec. 893).....................................   235
        Procurement of telecommunications supplies for 
          experimental purposes (sec. 894).......................   235
        Access by developmental and operational testing 
          activities to data regarding modeling and simulation 
          activity (sec. 895)....................................   235
    Items of Special Interest....................................   236
        Analysis of technical and security issues in Department 
          of Defense business systems............................   236
        Assessment of Superior Supplier Incentive Programs.......   236
        Incorporation of agile methods for testing in prototyping 
          and streamlined fielding initiatives...................   236
        Master plan for organic industrial base infrastructure...   237
        Serviceability and control of technical data.............   238
        Use of Federal Aviation Administration approval for 
          Department of Defense commercial derivative aircraft...   239
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT......   241
    Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Defense and Related 
      Matters....................................................   241
        Powers and duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
          Research and Engineering in connection with priority 
          emerging technologies (sec. 901).......................   241
        Redesignation and modification of responsibilities of 
          Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 
          (sec. 902).............................................   241
        Modification of responsibilities of the Under Secretary 
          of Defense for Policy (sec. 903).......................   243
        Report on allocation of former responsibilities of the 
          Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 
          and Logistics (sec. 904)...............................   243
        Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, 
          Assessments, Readiness, and Capabilities (sec. 905)....   243
        Clarification of responsibilities and duties of the Chief 
          Information Officer of the Department of Defense (sec. 
          906)...................................................   245
        Specification of certain duties of the Defense Technical 
          Information Center (sec. 907)..........................   246
        Limitation on termination of, and transfer of functions, 
          responsibilities, and activities of, the Strategic 
          Capabilities Office (sec. 908).........................   246
        Technical corrections to Department of Defense Test 
          Resource Management Center authority (sec. 909)........   246
    Subtitle B--Organization and Management of Other Department 
      of Defense Offices and Elements............................   247
        Modification of certain responsibilities of the Chairman 
          of the Joint Chiefs of Staff relating to joint force 
          concept development (sec. 921).........................   247
        Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and 
          Low-Intensity Conflict review of United States Special 
          Operations Command (sec. 922)..........................   247
        Qualifications for appointment as Deputy Chief Management 
          Officer of a military department (sec. 923)............   248
        Expansion of principal duties of Assistant Secretary of 
          the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition 
          (sec. 924).............................................   248
        Cross-functional teams in the Department of Defense (sec. 
          925)...................................................   248
        Deadline for completion of full implementation of 
          requirements in connection with organization of the 
          Department of Defense for management of special 
          operations forces and special operations (sec. 926)....   251
    Subtitle C--Organization and Management of the Department of 
      Defense Generally..........................................   253
        Limitation on availability of funds for major 
          headquarters activities of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 931).............................................   253
        Responsibility for policy on civilian casualty matters 
          (sec. 932).............................................   253
        Additional matters in connection with background and 
          security investigations for Department of Defense 
          personnel (sec. 933)...................................   253
        Program of expedited security clearances for mission-
          critical positions (sec. 934)..........................   254
        Information sharing program for positions of trust (sec. 
          935)...................................................   254
        Report on clearance in person concept (sec. 936).........   254
        Strategic Defense Fellows Program (sec. 937).............   254
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   255
        Analysis of Department of Defense business management and 
          operations datasets to promote savings and efficiencies 
          (sec. 941).............................................   255
        Research and development to advance capabilities of the 
          Department of Defense in data integration and advanced 
          analytics in connection with personnel security (sec. 
          942)...................................................   255
    Items of Special Interest....................................   256
        Department of Defense personnel security resourcing plans 
          and needs..............................................   256
        Department of Defense security clearance responsibilities   256
        Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Arctic.....   257
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS......................................   259
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   259
        General transfer authority (sec. 1001)...................   259
        Inclusion of funds for Air Force pass-through items in 
          Defense-wide budget for the Department of Defense (sec. 
          1002)..................................................   259
        Report on shift in requests for funds for Department of 
          Defense activities from funds for overseas contingency 
          operations to funds through the base budget (sec. 1003)   259
        Ranking of auditability of financial statements of the 
          organizations and elements of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 1004)............................................   260
        Transparency of accounting firms used to support 
          Department of Defense audit (sec. 1005)................   260
    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards......................   260
        Date of listing of vessels as battle force ships in the 
          Naval Vessel Register and other fleet inventory 
          measures (sec. 1011)...................................   260
        Annual reports on examination of Navy vessels (sec. 1012)   260
        Limitation on duration of homeporting of certain vessels 
          in foreign locations (sec. 1013).......................   261
        Specific authorization requirement for nuclear refueling 
          of aircraft carriers (sec. 1014).......................   261
        Dismantlement and disposal of nuclear-powered aircraft 
          carriers (sec. 1015)...................................   261
        National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1016)................   262
        Limitation on use of funds for retirement of hospital 
          ships (sec. 1017)......................................   262
    Subtitle C--Counterterrorism.................................   263
        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. 1021)............................................   263
        Extension of prohibition on use of funds to construct or 
          modify facilities in the United States to house 
          detainees transferred from United States Naval Station, 
          Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1022).......................   263
        Extension of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or 
          release of individuals detained at United States Naval 
          Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to certain countries 
          (sec. 1023)............................................   263
        Extension of prohibition on use of funds to close or 
          relinquish control of United States Naval Station, 
          Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 1024).......................   263
        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. 1025)..........................   264
    Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations........   264
        Strategic guidance documents within the Department of 
          Defense (sec. 1031)....................................   264
        Guidance on the electronic warfare mission area and joint 
          electromagnetic spectrum operations (sec. 1032)........   265
        Limitation on use of funds for United States Special 
          Operations Command Global Messaging and Counter-
          Messaging platform (sec. 1033).........................   266
        Sense of Congress on the basing of KC-46A aircraft 
          outside the continental United States (sec. 1034)......   267
        Relinquishment of legislative jurisdiction of criminal 
          offenses committed by juveniles on military 
          installations (sec. 1035)..............................   267
        Policy on response to juvenile-on-juvenile abuse 
          committed on military installations (sec. 1036)........   267
    Subtitle E--Studies and Reports..............................   267
        Report on highest-priority roles and missions of the 
          Department of Defense and the Armed Forces (sec. 1041).   267
        Annual reports by the Armed Forces on Out-Year 
          Unconstrained Total Munitions Requirements and Out-Year 
          inventory numbers (sec. 1042)..........................   268
        Comprehensive review of operational and administrative 
          chains-of-command and functions of the Department of 
          the Navy (sec. 1043)...................................   268
        Military aviation readiness review in support of the 
          National Defense Strategy (sec. 1044)..................   268
        Report on capabilities and capacities of Armored Brigade 
          Combat Teams (sec. 1045)...............................   269
        Improvement of annual report on civilian casualties in 
          connection with United States military operations (sec. 
          1046)..................................................   269
        Report on Department of Defense participation in Export 
          Administration Regulations license application review 
          process (sec. 1047)....................................   269
        Automatic sunset for future statutory reporting 
          requirements (sec. 1048)...............................   270
        Repeal of certain Department of Defense reporting 
          requirements that otherwise terminate as of December 
          31, 2021 (sec. 1049)...................................   270
        Report on potential improvements to certain military 
          educational institutions of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 1050)............................................   270
        Recruiting costs of the Armed Forces (sec. 1051).........   270
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   270
        Authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup 
          (sec. 1061)............................................   270
        Improvement of database on emergency response 
          capabilities (sec. 1062)...............................   271
        Acceptance and distribution by Department of Defense of 
          assistance from certain nonprofit entities in support 
          of missions of deployed United States personnel around 
          the world (sec. 1063)..................................   271
        United States policy with respect to freedom of 
          navigation and overflight (sec. 1064)..................   271
        Prohibition of funds for Chinese language instruction 
          provided by a Confucius Institute (sec. 1065)..........   272
    Items of Special Interest....................................   272
        Audit materiality standards relating to valuation........   272
        Business case analysis for the 168th Air Refueling Wing..   272
        Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Response 
          Enterprise.............................................   273
        Comptroller General report on monitoring ongoing 
          challenges in remotely piloted aircraft community......   274
        Comptroller General review of Federally Funded Research 
          and Development Centers................................   274
        Department of Defense information operations.............   275
        Marine Mammal Program and Support to Civil Authorities...   276
        Navy mine countermeasures aboard vessels of opportunity..   276
        Nimitz-class aircraft carrier service life assessment....   277
        Overclassification of Department of Defense information..   277
        Policy of the Department of Defense on contract terms to 
          support achievement of full financial audits...........   278
        Report on training and readiness of Navy surface ships...   278
        Review of Surface Warfare Officer initial training.......   278
        Strategic dispersal of capital ships.....................   279
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS.............................   281
    Subtitle A--Department of Defense Matters....................   281
        Inapplicability of certification of executive 
          qualifications by qualification review boards of Office 
          of Personnel Management for initial appointments to 
          Senior Executive Service positions in Department of 
          Defense (sec. 1101)....................................   281
        Direct hire authority for science and technology 
          reinvention laboratories and Major Range and Test 
          Facilities Base facilities for recent science, 
          technology, engineering, and mathematics graduates of 
          minority-serving institutions (sec. 1102)..............   281
        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. 1103).........   281
        Enhancement of flexible management authorities for 
          Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories of the 
          Department of Defense (sec. 1104)......................   281
        Inclusion of Office of Secretary of Defense among 
          components of the Department of Defense covered by 
          direct hire authority for financial management experts 
          (sec. 1105)............................................   282
        Authority to employ civilian faculty members at the Joint 
          Special Operations University (sec. 1106)..............   282
    Subtitle B--Government-Wide Matters..........................   282
        Alcohol testing of civil service mariners of the Military 
          Sealift Command assigned to vessels (sec. 1121)........   282
        Expedited hiring authority for college graduates and post 
          secondary students (sec. 1122).........................   282
        Increase in maximum amount of voluntary separation 
          incentive pay authorized for civilian employees (sec. 
          1123)..................................................   282
        One-year extension of temporary authority to grant 
          allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian 
          personnel on official duty in a combat zone (sec. 1124)   283
        One-year extension of authority to waive annual 
          limitation on premium pay and aggregate limitation on 
          pay for Federal civilian employees working overseas 
          (sec. 1125)............................................   283
    Items of Special Interest....................................   283
        Competitive salary and benefits for science, technology, 
          engineering, and mathematics professionals.............   283
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS...................   285
    Subtitle A--Assistance and Training..........................   285
        Clarification of authority for use of advisors and 
          trainers for training of personnel of foreign 
          ministries with security missions under defense 
          institution capacity building authorities (sec. 1201)..   285
        Modification to Department of Defense State Partnership 
          Program (sec. 1202)....................................   285
        Expansion of Regional Defense Combating Terrorism 
          Fellowship Program to include irregular warfare (sec. 
          1203)..................................................   285
        Extension and modification of authority to support border 
          security operations of certain foreign countries (sec. 
          1204)..................................................   286
        Legal and policy review of advise, assist, and accompany 
          missions (sec. 1205)...................................   286
        Technical corrections relating to defense security 
          cooperation statutory reorganization (sec. 1206).......   286
        Naval Small Craft Instruction and Technical Training 
          School (sec. 1207).....................................   286
    Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan.....   287
        Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1211).............   287
        Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement 
          of certain coalition nations for support provided to 
          United States military operations (sec. 1212)..........   288
        Extension of authority to transfer defense articles and 
          provide defense services to the military and security 
          forces of Afghanistan (sec. 1213)......................   288
        Modification of reporting requirements for special 
          immigrant visas for Afghan allies program (sec. 1214)..   289
    Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Syria, Iraq, And Iran........   289
        Extension of authority to provide assistance to counter 
          the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (sec. 1221)........   289
        Extension and modification of authority to provide 
          assistance to the vetted Syrian opposition (sec. 1222).   290
        Extension and modification of authority to support 
          operations and activities of the Office of Security 
          Cooperation in Iraq (sec. 1223)........................   291
        Syria Study Group (sec. 1224)............................   292
        Modification of annual report on military power of Iran 
          (sec. 1225)............................................   292
    Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian 
      Federation.................................................   292
        Extension of limitation on military cooperation between 
          the United States and the Russian Federation (sec. 
          1231)..................................................   292
        Limitation on availability of funds relating to 
          sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea (sec. 
          1232)..................................................   292
        Extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec. 
          1233)..................................................   293
        Sense of Senate on relocation of Joint Intelligence 
          Analysis Complex (sec. 1234)...........................   294
        Sense of Senate on enhancing deterrence against Russian 
          aggression in Europe (sec. 1235).......................   294
        Technical amendments related to NATO Support and 
          Procurement Organization and related NATO agreements 
          (sec. 1236)............................................   295
        Report on security cooperation between the Russian 
          Federation and Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (sec. 
          1237)..................................................   295
        Sense of Senate on countering Russian malign influence 
          (sec. 1238)............................................   295
    Subtitle E--Matters Relating to the Indo-Pacific Region......   296
        Redesignation, expansion, and extension of Southeast Asia 
          Maritime Security Initiative (sec. 1241)...............   296
        Modification of annual report on military and security 
          developments involving the People's Republic of China 
          (sec. 1242)............................................   297
        Sense of Senate on Taiwan (sec. 1243)....................   298
        Redesignation and modification of sense of Congress and 
          initiative for the Indo-Asia-Pacific region (sec. 1244)   298
        Prohibition on participation of the People's Republic of 
          China in Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercises 
          (sec. 1245)............................................   298
        Assessment of and report on geopolitical conditions in 
          the Indo-Pacific region (sec. 1246)....................   298
        Sense of Senate on United States-India defense 
          relationship (sec. 1247)...............................   299
        Sense of Senate on strategic importance of maintaining 
          commitments under Compacts of Free Association (sec. 
          1248)..................................................   299
        Sense of the Senate on United States military forces on 
          the Korean Peninsula (sec. 1249).......................   299
    Subtitle F--Reports..........................................   300
        Report on military and coercive activities of the 
          People's Republic of China in the South China Sea (sec. 
          1251)..................................................   300
        Report on terrorist use of human shields (sec. 1252).....   300
        Report on Arctic strategies (sec. 1253)..................   300
        Report on permanent stationing of a United States Army 
          brigade combat team in the Republic of Poland (sec. 
          1254)..................................................   301
        Reports on nuclear capabilities of the Democratic 
          People's Republic of Korea (sec. 1255).................   301
        Report on United States military training opportunities 
          with allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region 
          (sec. 1256)............................................   301
    Subtitle G--Others Matters...................................   302
        Modification of authorities relating to acquisition and 
          cross-servicing agreements (sec. 1261).................   302
        Extension of authority for transfer of amounts for Global 
          Engagement Center (sec. 1262)..........................   302
        Sense of Senate on purchase by Turkey of S-400 air 
          defense system (sec. 1263).............................   303
        Department of Defense support for stabilization 
          activities in national security interest of the United 
          States (sec. 1264).....................................   304
        Enhancement of U.S.-Israel defense cooperation (sec. 
          1265)..................................................   304
        Certifications regarding actions by Saudi Arabia in Yemen 
          (sec. 1266)............................................   305
        Sense of the Senate on support for G5 Sahel Joint Force 
          countries (sec. 1267)..................................   305
        Sense of Congress on broadening and expanding strategic 
          partnerships and allies (sec. 1268)....................   305
        Removal of Turkey from the F-35 program (sec. 1269)......   305
        Increase in minimum amount of obligations from the 
          Special Defense Acquisition Fund for precision guided 
          munitions (sec. 1270)..................................   306
    Items of Special Interest....................................   306
        Advise and assist efforts in Afghanistan.................   306
        Clarification of authority to waive certain expenses for 
          activities of regional centers for security studies....   307
        Defense Institute of International Legal Studies.........   307
        Human rights in Burma....................................   308
        Matters relating to Kosovo...............................   309
        Notifications for sensitive military operations..........   310
        Report on U.S. assistance to the Lebanese Security Forces   311
        Report on WRSA-I Stockpile Quantity Review...............   312
        Role of Turkey in the F-35 supply chain..................   312
        United States-Mexico military cooperation................   313
        United States policy and strategy in the Western Balkans.   314
        U.S. Africa Command......................................   315
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION.........................   317
        Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction funds (sec. 
          1301)..................................................   317
        Funding allocations (sec. 1302)..........................   317
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   319
    Subtitle A--Military Programs................................   319
        Working capital funds (sec. 1401)........................   319
        Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec. 
          1402)..................................................   319
        Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
          wide (sec. 1403).......................................   319
        Defense Inspector General (sec. 1404)....................   319
        Defense Health Program (sec. 1405).......................   319
    Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile.......................   319
        Consolidation of reporting requirements under the 
          Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (sec. 
          1411)..................................................   319
    Subtitle C--Armed Forces Retirement Home.....................   319
        Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces 
          Retirement Home (sec. 1421)............................   319
        Expansion of eligibility for residence at the Armed 
          Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1422).....................   320
        Oversight of health care provided to residents of the 
          Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1423)...............   320
        Modification of authority on acceptance of gifts for the 
          Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1424)...............   320
        Relief for residents of the Armed Forces Retirement Home 
          impacted by increase in fees (sec. 1425)...............   320
        Limitation on applicability of fee increase for residents 
          of the Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1426)........   321
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   321
        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. 1431)......................   321
        Economical and efficient operation of working capital 
          fund activities (sec. 1432)............................   321
    Items of Special Interest....................................   321
        Assessment on material shortfalls in United States Forces 
          Korea for chemical, biological, radiological, and 
          nuclear defenses.......................................   321
        Fiscal stability of the National Defense Stockpile.......   322
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS 
  CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.........................................   323
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Additional Appropriations.......   323
        Purpose (sec. 1501)......................................   323
        Overseas contingency operations (sec. 1502)..............   323
        Procurement (sec. 1503)..................................   323
        Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 1504)..   323
        Operation and maintenance (sec. 1505)....................   323
        Military personnel (sec. 1506)...........................   323
        Working capital funds (sec. 1507)........................   323
        Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
          wide (sec. 1508).......................................   323
        Defense Inspector General (sec. 1509)....................   324
        Defense Health Program (sec. 1510).......................   324
    Subtitle B--Financial Matters................................   324
        Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1521).......   324
        Special transfer authority (sec. 1522)...................   324
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   324
        Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Organization (sec. 1531)..   324
    Budget Items.................................................   324
        Tomahawk.................................................   324
        Ammunition less than $5 million..........................   325
        JASSM-ER.................................................   325
    Items of Special Interest....................................   325
        Cargo inspections to counter Vehicle Borne Improvised 
          Explosive Device (IED) threats.........................   325
TITLE XVI--STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, CYBER, AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS...   327
    Subtitle A--Space Activities.................................   327
        Modifications to Space Rapid Capabilities Office (sec. 
          1601)..................................................   327
        Space warfighting policy and review of space capabilities 
          (sec. 1602)............................................   327
        Report on enhancements to the Global Positioning System 
          Operational Control Segment (sec. 1603)................   327
        Streamline of commercial space launch operations (sec. 
          1604)..................................................   328
        Reusable launch vehicles (sec. 1605).....................   328
        Review of and report on activities of International Space 
          Station (sec. 1606)....................................   328
    Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related 
      Activities.................................................   329
        Framework on governance, mission management, resourcing, 
          and effective oversight of Department of Defense combat 
          support agencies that are also elements of the 
          intelligence community (sec. 1611).....................   329
    Subtitle C--Cyberspace--Related Matters......................   329
        Part I--Cyberspace Generally.............................   329
            Policy of the United States on cyberspace, 
              cybersecurity, cyber warfare, and cyber deterrence 
              (sec. 1621)........................................   329
            Affirming the authority of the Secretary of Defense 
              to conduct military activities and operations in 
              cyberspace (sec. 1622).............................   329
            Active defense and surveillance against Russian 
              Federation attacks in cyberspace (sec. 1623).......   330
            Reorganization and consolidation of certain cyber 
              provisions (sec. 1624).............................   331
            Designation of official for matters relating to 
              integrating cybersecurity and industrial control 
              systems within the Department of Defense (sec. 
              1625)..............................................   332
            Assistance for small manufacturers in the defense 
              industrial supply chain on matters relating to 
              cybersecurity (sec. 1626)..........................   332
            Modification of acquisition authority of the 
              Commander of United States Cyber Command (sec. 
              1627)..............................................   333
            Email and Internet website security and 
              authentication (sec. 1628).........................   333
            Matters pertaining to the Sharkseer cybersecurity 
              programs (sec. 1629)...............................   333
            Pilot program on modeling and simulation in support 
              of military homeland defense operations in 
              connection with cyber attacks on critical 
              infrastructure (sec. 1630).........................   334
            Security product integration framework (sec. 1631)...   335
            Report on enhancement of software security for 
              critical systems (sec. 1632).......................   336
            Comply to connect and cybersecurity scorecard (sec. 
              1633)..............................................   337
            Cyberspace Solarium Commission (sec. 1634)...........   338
            Program to establish cyber institutes at institutions 
              of higher learning (sec. 1635).....................   339
            Establishment of Cybersecurity for Defense Industrial 
              Base Manufacturing Activity (sec. 1636)............   339
        Part II--Mitigation of Risks Posed by Providers of 
          Information Technology with Obligations to Foreign 
          Governments............................................   339
            Definitions (sec. 1637)..............................   339
            Identification of countries of concern regarding 
              cybersecurity (sec. 1638)..........................   340
            Mitigation of risks to national security posed by 
              providers of information technology products and 
              services who have obligations to foreign 
              governments (sec. 1639)............................   340
            Establishment of registry of disclosures (sec. 1640).   340
    Subtitle D--Nuclear Forces...................................   341
        Oversight and management of the command, control, and 
          communications system for the national leadership of 
          the United States (sec. 1641)..........................   341
        Modification to requirement for conventional long-range 
          standoff weapon (sec. 1642)............................   341
        Exchange program for nuclear weapons program employees 
          (sec. 1643)............................................   341
        Procurement authority for certain parts of 
          intercontinental ballistic missile fuzes (sec. 1644)...   342
        Plan to train officers in nuclear command, control, and 
          communications (sec. 1645).............................   342
        Plan for alignment of acquisition of warhead life 
          extension programs and delivery vehicles for such 
          warheads (sec. 1646)...................................   343
        Extension of annual report on plan for the nuclear 
          weapons stockpile, nuclear weapons complex, nuclear 
          weapons delivery systems, and nuclear weapons command 
          and control system (sec. 1647).........................   343
        Prohibition on use of funds for activities to modify 
          United States aircraft to implement Open Skies Treaty 
          (sec. 1648)............................................   344
        Sense of Senate on Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1649)....   344
    Subtitle E--Missile Defense Programs.........................   344
        Extension of prohibition relating to missile defense 
          information and systems (sec. 1651)....................   344
        Multiyear procurement authority for Standard Missile-3 IB 
          guided missiles (sec. 1652)............................   344
        Extension of requirement for reports on unfunded 
          priorities of Missile Defense Agency (sec. 1653).......   345
        Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli 
          cooperative missile defense program co-development and 
          co-production (sec. 1654)..............................   345
        Metrics for evaluating effectiveness of integrated 
          Ballistic Missile Defense System against operationally 
          realistic ballistic missile attacks (sec. 1655)........   346
        Modification of requirement relating to transition of 
          ballistic missile defense programs to military 
          departments (sec. 1656)................................   347
        Sense of the Senate on acceleration of missile defense 
          capabilities (sec. 1657)...............................   347
        Integrated air and missile defense for evolving theater 
          missile threats (sec. 1658)............................   348
        Acceleration of hypersonic missile defense program (sec. 
          1659)..................................................   348
        Sense of the Senate on allied partnerships for missile 
          defense (sec. 1660)....................................   348
        Sense of the Senate on results of tests carried out by 
          Missile Defense Agency (sec. 1660A)....................   348
        Sense of the Senate on discrimination for missile defense 
          (sec. 1660B)...........................................   348
        Development and deployment of persistent space-based 
          sensor architecture (sec. 1660C).......................   349
        Modification of requirement to develop a space-based 
          ballistic missile intercept layer (sec. 1660D).........   349
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   349
        Assessment of the electronic warfare capabilities of 
          Russia and China (sec. 1661)...........................   349
        Budget exhibit on support provided to entities outside 
          Department of Defense (sec. 1662)......................   349
        Development of Electromagnetic Battle Management 
          capability for joint electromagnetic operations (sec. 
          1663)..................................................   350
    Budget Items.................................................   350
        Army Cyber Center of Excellence..........................   350
        Wargaming and simulator systems..........................   350
        Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.........................   351
        Space Rapid Capabilities Office..........................   351
        Long Range Standoff Weapon...............................   351
        Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared.............   352
        Joint Space Operations Center Mission System.............   352
        Hypersonic missile defense...............................   352
        Exploiting commercial technology for synthetic aperture 
          radar imaging and automated exploitation...............   352
        United States Forces Korea Joint Emergent Operational 
          Need...................................................   353
        Midcourse ballistic missile defense......................   354
        Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications   354
        Sea-based X-band Radar...................................   354
        Ballistic missile defense targets........................   355
        Boost phase intercept laser scaling......................   355
        Quartermaster Pathfinder.................................   355
        Improved homeland defense interceptors...................   355
        Midcourse segment test for ballistic missile defense.....   356
        Missile Defense Tracking System..........................   356
    Items of Special Interest....................................   356
        Air Force nuclear acquisition programs...................   356
        Airborne tracking and targeting system...................   357
        Assessment of and plan for experimentation with Iron Dome 
          for short-range air defense............................   357
        Common Minuteman III maintenance vehicle.................   358
        Comptroller General review of Department of Defense cyber 
          classification.........................................   358
        Comptroller General review of Department of Defense cyber 
          hygiene................................................   358
        Comptroller General review of geographic combatant 
          command integration in nuclear planning and operations.   359
        Conventional Prompt Strike early limited operational 
          capability.............................................   360
        Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Technology.............   360
        Cyber attacks by the Russian Federation and People's 
          Republic of China on Department of Defense affiliates..   361
        Defense options for Guam.................................   361
        Department of Defense efforts to cooperate with 
          Department of Homeland Security Fusion Centers.........   361
        Digital High Frequency Global Communications System......   362
        Diversified access to space with Federal Aviation 
          Administration-licensed spaceports.....................   362
        Early Warning Radar upgrades.............................   364
        Importance of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program to United 
          States strategic deterrence............................   365
        Laser communications.....................................   365
        Launch vehicle reusability...............................   365
        Layered ballistic missile defense........................   366
        Live fire training on missiles nearing demilitarization..   366
        Long-term plan for weapons storage facilities............   366
        Mapping of Department of Defense base stations...........   367
        Matters related to Department of Defense cyber ranges....   367
        Microsegmentation........................................   368
        Modular array for the direct distribution of integrated 
          energy on small satellites.............................   369
        Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Program 
          Executive Office staffing..............................   369
        On-orbit satellite servicing technology..................   369
        Portable satellite data receiver suites for deployed 
          warfighters............................................   370
        Review of connected devices on military installations....   370
        Space Rapid Capabilities Office..........................   370
        Transition of the Strategic Automatic Control and 
          Communications System to the Navy Nova Communications 
          System.................................................   371
        United States-North Korea nuclear and missile threat 
          reduction..............................................   371
TITLE XVII--COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES.   373
        Short title (sec. 1701)..................................   373
        Sense of Congress (sec. 1702)............................   373
        Definitions (sec. 1703)..................................   373
        Acceptance of written notices (sec. 1704)................   373
        Inclusion of partnership and side agreements in notice 
          (sec. 1705)............................................   374
        Declarations for certain covered transactions (sec. 1706)   374
        Stipulations regarding transactions (sec. 1707)..........   374
        Authority for unilateral initiation of reviews (sec. 
          1708)..................................................   374
        Timing for reviews and investigations (sec. 1709)........   374
        Monitoring of non-notified and non-declared transactions 
          (sec. 1710)............................................   374
        Submission of certifications to Congress (sec. 1711).....   375
        Analysis by Director of National Intelligence (sec. 1712)   375
        Information sharing (sec. 1713)..........................   375
        Action by the President (sec. 1714)......................   375
        Judicial review (sec. 1715)..............................   375
        Membership and staff of Committee (sec. 1716)............   375
        Actions by the Committee to address national security 
          risks (sec. 1717)......................................   376
        Modification of annual report and other reporting 
          requirements (sec. 1718)...............................   376
        Certification of notices and information (sec. 1719).....   376
        Implementation plans (sec. 1720).........................   376
        Assessment of need for additional resources for Committee 
          (sec. 1721)............................................   376
        Funding (sec. 1722)......................................   376
        Centralization of certain Committee functions (sec. 1723)   377
        Conforming amendments (sec. 1724)........................   377
        Requirements to identify and control the export of 
          emerging and foundational technologies (sec. 1725).....   377
        Export control enforcement authority (sec. 1726).........   377
        Prohibition on modification of civil penalties under 
          export control and sanctions laws (sec. 1727)..........   377
        Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security 
          (sec. 1728)............................................   377
        Limitation on cancellation of designation of Secretary of 
          the Air Force as Department of Defense Executive Agent 
          for a certain Defense Production Act program (sec. 
          1729)..................................................   378
        Review of and report on certain defense technologies 
          critical to the United States maintaining superior 
          military capabilities (sec. 1730)......................   378
        Briefing on information from transactions reviewed by 
          Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States 
          relating to foreign efforts to influence democratic 
          institutions and processes (sec. 1731).................   378
        Effective date (sec. 1732)...............................   378
        Severability (sec. 1733).................................   378
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.................   379
        Summary and explanation of funding tables................   379
        Short title (sec. 2001)..................................   379
        Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
          specified by law (sec. 2002)...........................   379
        Effective date (sec. 2003)...............................   379
TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION............................   381
        Summary..................................................   381
        Authorized Army construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2101)...................................   381
        Family housing (sec. 2102)...............................   381
        Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2103)........   381
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2104)...................................   381
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2016 
          project (sec. 2105)....................................   382
TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...........................   383
        Summary..................................................   383
        Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2201)...................................   383
        Family housing (sec. 2202)...............................   383
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)   383
        Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........   383
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.....................   385
        Summary..................................................   385
        Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2301)...................................   385
        Family housing (sec. 2302)...............................   385
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)   385
        Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)...   385
        Modification of authority to carry out certain phased 
          project authorized in fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017 
          (sec. 2305)............................................   386
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2017 project (sec. 2306)..........................   386
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2018 project (sec. 2307)..........................   386
        Additional authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
          2019 projects (sec. 2308)..............................   386
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...............   387
        Summary..................................................   387
        Authorized defense agencies construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2401).......................   387
        Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program 
          (sec. 2402)............................................   387
        Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec. 
          2403)..................................................   387
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 
          projects (sec. 2404)...................................   387
        Authorization of certain fiscal year 2018 project (sec. 
          2405)..................................................   388
TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS................................   389
        Summary..................................................   389
    Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security 
      Investment Program.........................................   389
        Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2501)...................................   389
        Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........   389
    Subtitle B--Host Country In-Kind Contributions...............   389
        Republic of Korea funded construction projects (sec. 
          2511)..................................................   389
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES..................   391
        Summary..................................................   391
    Subtitle A--Project Authorizations and Authorization of 
      Appropriations.............................................   391
        Authorized Army National Guard construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2601).......................   391
        Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2602)...................................   391
        Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve 
          construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2603).   391
        Authorized Air National Guard construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2604).......................   391
        Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2605).......................   392
        Authorization of appropriations, National Guard and 
          Reserve (sec. 2606)....................................   392
    Subtitle B--Other Matters....................................   392
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2016 project (sec. 2611)..........................   392
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2018 project (sec. 2612)..........................   392
        Additional authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
          2019 project (sec. 2613)...............................   392
TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES.............   393
        Summary and explanation of tables........................   393
        Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and 
          closure activities funded through Department of Defense 
          Base Closure Account (sec. 2701).......................   393
        Prohibition on conducting additional base realignment and 
          closure (BRAC) round (sec. 2702).......................   393
    Items of Special Interest....................................   393
        Aligning base realignment and closure goals with 
          infrastructure.........................................   393
TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS.......   395
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   395
        Additional authority to obtain architectural and 
          engineering services and construction design for 
          defense laboratory modernization pilot program (sec. 
          2801)..................................................   395
        Modification of contract authority for acquisition, 
          construction, or furnishing of test facilities and 
          equipment (sec. 2802)..................................   395
        Extension of temporary, limited authority to use 
          operation and maintenance funds for construction 
          projects in certain areas outside the United States 
          (sec. 2803)............................................   396
        Unspecified minor military construction projects related 
          to revitalization and recapitalization of Defense 
          Industrial Base Facilities (sec. 2804).................   396
        Congressional oversight of projects carried out pursuant 
          to laws other than Military Construction Authorization 
          Acts (sec. 2805).......................................   396
    Subtitle B--Project Management and Oversight Reforms.........   396
        Updates and modifications to Department of Defense Form 
          1391, Unified Facilities Criteria, and military 
          installation master plans (sec. 2811)..................   396
        Work in Process Curve charts and outlay tables for 
          military construction projects (sec. 2812).............   397
    Subtitle C--Land Conveyances.................................   397
        Land exchange, Air Force Plant 44, Tucson, Arizona (sec. 
          2821)..................................................   397
        Land conveyance, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida (sec. 
          2822)..................................................   397
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   397
        Commemoration of Freedman's Village (sec. 2831)..........   397
        Strategic plan to improve capability of Department of 
          Defense training ranges and installations (sec. 2832)..   397
        Native American Indian lands environmental mitigation 
          program (sec. 2833)....................................   397
        Defense community infrastructure pilot program (sec. 
          2834)..................................................   398
        Representation of installation interests in negotiations 
          and proceedings with carriers and other public 
          utilities (sec. 2835)..................................   398
        White Sands Missile Range land enhancements (sec. 2836)..   398
        Authority to transfer funds for construction of Indian 
          River Bridge (sec. 2837)...............................   398
    Items of Special Interest....................................   398
        Assessment of military structures in permafrost areas....   398
        Encouraging the use of existing authorities for 
          construction of future National Guard Readiness Center.   399
        Excess capacity estimates................................   399
        Federal land transfer for South Carolina National Guard..   400
        Incremental funding of military construction projects....   400
        Installation and facilities physical security gaps.......   401
        National Maritime Intelligence Center Parking............   401
        Process for prioritizing funding and identifying 
          facilities for demolition..............................   402
        Review of Army Corps of Engineers Centers of 
          Standardization........................................   402
        Standoff weapons facility project at Andersen Air Force 
          Base...................................................   403
TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION   405
        Summary..................................................   405
        Authorized Army construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2901)...................................   405
        Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2902)...................................   405
        Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2903)...................................   405
        Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2904).......................   405
        Authorization of appropriations (sec. 2905)..............   405
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS 
  AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.......................................   407
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS......   407
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........   407
        National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101).....   407
        Defense environmental cleanup (sec. 3102)................   407
        Other defense activities (sec. 3103).....................   407
        Nuclear energy (sec. 3104)...............................   407
  Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
    Limitations..................................................   407
        Clarification of roles and authorities of National 
          Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3111)............   407
        National Nuclear Security Administration Personnel System 
          (sec. 3112)............................................   409
        Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (sec. 3113)..   409
        Extension of enhanced procurement authority to manage 
          supply chain risk (sec. 3114)..........................   410
        Pilot program on conduct by Department of Energy of 
          background reviews for access by certain individuals to 
          national security laboratories (sec. 3115).............   410
        Extension of authority for acceptance of contributions 
          for acceleration of removal or security of fissile 
          materials, radiological materials, and related 
          equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide (sec. 3116)....   410
        Modification of limitation on development of low-yield 
          nuclear weapons (sec. 3117)............................   411
        Prohibition on use of funds for terminating activities at 
          MOX facility (sec. 3118)...............................   411
    Subtitle C--Plans and Reports................................   411
        Modifications to cost-benefit analyses for competition of 
          management and operating contracts (sec. 3121).........   411
        Review of defense environmental cleanup activities (sec. 
          3122)..................................................   412
        Survey of workforce of national security laboratories and 
          nuclear weapons production facilities (sec. 3123)......   412
        Elimination of certain reports (sec. 3124)...............   412
        Implementation of Nuclear Posture Review by National 
          Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3125)............   412
    Budget Items.................................................   412
        W76-2....................................................   412
        Defense nuclear waste disposal...........................   413
    Items of Special Interest....................................   413
        Comptroller General review of domestic uranium industrial 
          base...................................................   413
        Comptroller General review of Mixed Oxide Fuel 
          Fabrication Facility...................................   414
        Comptroller General review of strategic radiation-
          hardened microelectronics..............................   414
        Independent review of Engineering Assessment of plutonium 
          pit production.........................................   415
        Nuclear smuggling detection in Iraq......................   416
        Repackaging of Transuranic Waste Drums at the Idaho 
          National Laboratory....................................   416
        Review of National Nuclear Security Administration 
          regulation.............................................   416
        Roadmap for National Nuclear Security Administration 
          production capability improvements.....................   417
        Status of Russian nuclear security upgrades..............   418
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD.............   419
        Authorization (sec. 3201)................................   419
Title XXXV--Maritime Administration..............................   421
        Maritime Administration (sec. 3501)......................   421
        Permanent authority of Secretary of Transportation to 
          issue vessel war risk insurance (sec. 3502)............   421
DIVISION D--FUNDING TABLES.......................................   423
        Authorization of amounts in funding tables (sec. 4001)...   423
TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT...........................................   435
        Procurement (sec. 4101)..................................   436
        Procurement for overseas contingency operations (sec. 
          4102)..................................................   478
TITLE XLII--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION..........   491
        Research, development, test, and evaluation (sec. 4201)..   492
        Research, development, test, and evaluation for overseas 
          contingency operations (sec. 4202).....................   533
TITLE XLIII--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE...........................   537
        Operation and maintenance (sec. 4301)....................   538
        Operation and maintenance for overseas contingency 
          operations (sec. 4302).................................   556
TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL...................................   567
        Military personnel (sec. 4401)...........................   568
        Military personnel for overseas contingency operations 
          (sec. 4402)............................................   569
TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   571
        Other authorizations (sec. 4501).........................   572
        Other authorizations for overseas contingency operations 
          (sec. 4502)............................................   576
TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION................................   579
        Military construction (sec. 4601)........................   580
        Military construction for overseas contingency operations 
          (sec. 4602)............................................   600
TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS.....   603
        Department of Energy national security programs (sec. 
          4701)..................................................   604
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS.........................................   616
        Departmental Recommendations.............................   616
        Committee Action.........................................   616
        Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate................   620
        Regulatory Impact........................................   620
        Changes in Existing Law..................................   620

                                                      Calendar No. 439
115th Congress     }                                     {     Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session        }                                     {     115-262

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

 
     TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 FOR MILITARY 
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, 
  TO MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                  June 5, 2018.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 2987]

    The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an 
original bill to authorize appropriations for the fiscal year 
2019 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 2019;
          (2) Authorize the personnel end strengths for each 
        military active duty component of the Armed Forces for 
        fiscal year 2019;
          (3) Authorize the personnel end strengths for the 
        Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of 
        the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2019;
          (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 2019; and
          (7) Authorize appropriations for national security 
        programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
        2019.

                           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 57 
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 voted 
overwhelmingly, 25-2, to advance this important legislation to 
the Senate floor.
    The committee takes seriously its obligation to our men and 
women in uniform and their families. Their service represents 
the best of our country, and this committee and the Congress 
honor their sacrifice.
    The committee markup of the NDAA, which is this year named 
the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2019, supports a total of $716 billion for national 
defense. The committee believes this authorization is necessary 
to help the U.S. military implement the National Defense 
Strategy (NDS) as it restores readiness, rebuilds capacity, and 
modernizes the force.
    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, increasing 
        operation and maintenance funding, and aligning end 
        strength to NDS requirements.
           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 the civilians 
        and contractors who support our Armed Forces through 
        fair pay and policies, including reform of the officer 
        personnel management system.
           Continues oversight and reform of the 
        acquisition system to ensure that our men and women in 
        uniform have the equipment they need to succeed in 
        future contested environments and drives innovation by 
        allocating funds for advanced technology development 
        and next-generation capabilities to ensure America's 
        military dominance.
           Reforms the DOD to effectively confront the 
        challenges outlined in the NDS and emerging threats in 
        the information domain.
           Advances our ability to protect our allies, 
        partners, and friends.
           Enhances the capability of the U.S. Armed 
        Forces along with the security forces of allied and 
        partner nations to combat ISIS, Al-Qaida, and other 
        violent extremist organizations while ensuring there is 
        a strategy for success.
           Supports implementation of the Nuclear 
        Posture Review through modernization of our nuclear 
        deterrent and reforms to ensure the safety, security, 
        and reliability of our nuclear stockpile, delivery 
        systems, and infrastructure.
           Terminates troubled and redundant programs 
        and activities, identifies efficiencies, and reduces 
        unnecessary defense expenditures not in line with the 
        NDS.
           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.

Preamble to the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for 
        Fiscal Year 2019

    The array of national security threats facing the United 
States is more complex and diverse than at any time since World 
War II. The strategic environment has not been this competitive 
since the Cold War. Simply put, America no longer enjoys the 
comparative edge it once had over its competitors and 
adversaries.
    To remain successful, America must maintain its military 
advantage, counter potential adversaries, and defend the 
international order that has protected and advanced the 
security, prosperity, and liberty of U.S. citizens and our 
allies and partners. This requires a strategic framework that 
establishes clear priorities and helps make tough choices.
    Believing that the strategy development process in the 
Department of Defense (DOD) needed to be reinvigorated, the 
Congress acted in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to replace the 
legislative mandate for the Quadrennial Defense Review with the 
framework for a more focused and flexible National Defense 
Strategy (NDS). The legislation included a clearly defined set 
of expectations for what the strategy should address, including 
the current and anticipated strategic environment, 
prioritization among threats and missions, the roles and 
missions of the Armed Forces, force planning constructs and 
scenarios, force posture and readiness, and anticipated major 
investments required to execute the strategy. The desire to 
facilitate a more strategic approach to national defense also 
contributed to the Congress' willingness to forge a bipartisan 
budget agreement that increased defense and non-defense 
spending and provided a modicum of fiscal predictability 
through the end of next year.
    The committee applauds Secretary of Defense James Mattis 
and the senior leadership of the Department for their efforts 
in crafting the National Defense Strategy that was delivered to 
the Congress earlier this year. The document prioritizes the 
challenges our nation faces and points toward potentially 
significant changes to reshape the joint force and business of 
the DOD. At the same time, much of the hardest work remains to 
translate the NDS into detailed policy guidance to realign 
defense programs, readiness, and posture in accordance with the 
strategy. This responsibility rests equally with the executive 
and legislative branches.
    The committee is doing its part to meet its 
responsibilities through the National Defense Authorization Act 
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2019. Informed by the strategy, as well 
as the administration's fiscal year 2019 budget request, the 
NDAA aligns investments, requirements, structures, policies, 
and authorizations with the new strategic orientation 
articulated in the NDS.
    The NDAA supports the latest budget agreement of $715.9 
billion in fiscal year 2019 for national defense. It authorizes 
a base defense budget of $639.2 billion for the Department of 
Defense and the national security programs of the Department of 
Energy. The focus of this funding will be building a joint 
force that is ready, equipped, and capable of maintaining 
military overmatch against potential adversaries. The NDAA also 
authorizes $68.5 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations.
    While the recent 2-year budget deal is a helpful step in 
the right direction, a higher funding topline alone will not 
sufficiently address the challenges we face. Even with adequate 
resources, we must make difficult choices about roles and 
missions, force development, resource allocation, and 
investment priorities.
    To that end, the National Defense Authorization Act 
advances four primary themes:
    (1) First, the NDAA adjusts the budget request to align 
resources in a manner consistent with the priorities and 
principles of the NDS. After years of warning from senior 
defense leaders, the NDS addresses the degrading state of U.S. 
military capabilities vis-a-vis potential competitors. While 
there are many contributing factors--unstable budgets, 
sustained high operational tempo, as well as adversaries' 
increased investments in military capabilities--the committee 
believes that reversing this trend should be a high priority 
for the Department. To encourage these efforts, the NDAA 
recommends re-prioritizing funds for each of the Services 
toward requirements that directly support the NDS.
    For example, the NDAA makes significant investments in 
research and development (R&D) to re-establish a credible 
combat advantage. The legislation increases R&D spending by 
$1.2 billion, the majority of which is for science and 
technology spending with an emphasis on high priority emerging 
technologies like hypersonics, artificial intelligence, space, 
cyber, and directed energy. The NDAA boosts funding for 
promising new technologies and concepts such as distributed, 
low-cost, autonomous, and attritable systems in every domain--
on land, in the air, on and under the sea, and in space and 
cyberspace. The NDAA also accelerates programs that enable 
operations in contested environments against peer competitors, 
among other NDS priorities, including accelerating the delivery 
of fixed-site cruise missile defense, increasing procurement of 
advanced munitions, and providing additional money for Arleigh 
Burke-class destroyers and Virginia-class submarines.
    (2) Second, the NDAA provides one overarching reporting 
requirement to the Secretary of Defense: a list of detailed and 
specific questions regarding the roles, missions, and 
requirements of the military Services that the committee 
believes are raised by the NDS. The NDAA requires the Secretary 
to re-evaluate the highest priority missions for the DOD, the 
roles of the joint force in the performance of these missions, 
and the capabilities required to complete these missions. More 
specifically, the committee wants the Secretary to update the 
roles and missions of the military Services and to reassess how 
the NDS impacts end strength requirements, how the military 
will conduct the counterterrorism mission at a more sustainable 
cost to military readiness and resources, and how the focus on 
competing against peer adversaries and operating in contested 
environments impacts capability requirements and investments 
throughout the joint force. The committee believes that serious 
answers to these and other strategic questions will improve the 
Congress's ability to perform oversight of the DOD's future 
program and budget requests.
    (3) Third, the NDAA includes reforms to the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense to support effective implementation of the 
NDS. The committee believes organizational change will be key 
to addressing systemic problems and positioning the Department 
to confront the challenges outlined in the NDS.
    The ultimate success of the NDS will depend on 
implementation guided by strong civilian leadership determined 
to make the difficult choices required to align policies, 
authorities, organizations, requirements, and investments and 
informed by a realistic assessment of available resources. To 
help answer some of these big questions, the NDAA creates a new 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, 
Assessments, Readiness, and Capabilities. By combining these 
strategically-oriented tasks in one office, the committee seeks 
to align the critical functions necessary to exert strong 
civilian leadership in the development of defense strategy and 
its translation into detailed policy to guide investments in 
necessary capabilities, readiness, and posture for the future 
joint force. The NDAA would re-designate the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Personnel and Readiness as the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Personnel and clarify its role as the Department's 
Chief Human Capital Officer.
    The NDAA also furthers the reform of the Department's 
strategy development process that began with the statutory 
requirement for the NDS. It clarifies the three strategic 
guidance documents that support and implement the NDS (the 
Defense Planning Guidance, the Contingency Planning Guidance or 
Guidance for the Employment of the Force, and the Global 
Defense Posture Report), describes the elements to be included 
in each document, and requires the Secretary of Defense to 
submit each document to Congress. These documents set forth the 
Secretary's policy guidance as to what the Department should 
buy for the joint force, how the joint force is to be used, and 
where the joint force is to be postured around the world in 
order to execute the NDS. Receiving this strategic guidance is 
essential to congressional oversight efforts.
    (4) Finally, the NDAA modernizes officer personnel 
management to bolster the effectiveness, recruitment, and 
retention of the all-volunteer force. The NDS acknowledges that 
the current joint force must change to meet the threat of 
renewed great power competition, calling for a ``broad 
revision'' of talent management principles among the Services 
to increase the lethality and adaptability of the force. The 
38-year-old Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (Public 
Law 96-513) requires all military Services to manage their 
officer corps in the same general manner within specific 
constraints. By reforming this system, the NDAA will provide 
for flexibility in the careers of commissioned officers and 
better serve the demands of the modern force.
    After the end of the Cold War, the United States enjoyed a 
robust comparative military advantage over other nations. 
However, through significant investment and military 
modernization, near-peer competitors eventually eroded 
America's military superiority. Meanwhile, decisions and 
policies we pursued--and those we did not--had consequences for 
our military: commitment to persistent counterterrorism 
operations, inadequate funding and budget uncertainty, and 
misplaced priorities and acquisition failures. Now, Russia and 
China present significant military challenges and could 
credibly threaten the security and prosperity of our country.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 
will help the United States change course. It will recalibrate 
and refocus our efforts on readiness restoration, capabilities 
modernization, and concept development--all aimed at 
reasserting a quantitative and qualitative military advantage 
over potential adversaries. The recent National Defense 
Strategy provides a framework to address these challenges, and 
the NDAA builds on the changes outlined in the NDS while 
providing the DOD with the resources and authorities it needs 
to play its part in the national effort to restore American 
power in the new era of competition.

     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 2019 was $707.9 
billion. Of this amount, $617.1 billion was requested for base 
Department of Defense (DOD) programs, $21.8 billion was 
requested for national security programs in the Department of 
Energy (DOE), and $69.0 billion was requested for Overseas 
Contingency Operations (OCO).
    The committee recommends an overall discretionary 
authorization of $707.9 billion in fiscal year 2019, including 
$617.6 billion for base DOD programs, $21.7 billion for 
national security programs in the DOE, and $68.5 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 2019 defense 
programs. The first table summarizes the committee's 
recommended discretionary authorizations by appropriation 
account for fiscal year 2019 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

Deployment by the Army of an interim cruise missile defense capability 
        (sec. 111)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Army to consider alternate short-term options to fill its 
cruise missile defense gap with existing systems and accelerate 
the Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) system 
independently of Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle 
Command System (IBCS) deployment, leveraging entities such as 
the Defense Digital Service or the Defense Innovation Unit 
Experimental and report the determination of that short-term 
option to the congressional defense committees no later than 90 
days after the enactment of this act. The committee recognizes 
the Army's commitment to missile defense, as shown through the 
recently employed cross-functional team dedicated to missile 
defense, and commends the Army's dedication to the mission, as 
demonstrated through the increased funding allocation to the 
Maneuver-Short-Range Air Defense program in the fiscal year 
2019 budget request. However, the committee is deeply concerned 
about the paucity of land-based cruise missile defense 
capabilities and the Army's corresponding inability to 
adequately protect the joint force's fixed site systems, such 
as airfields and logistical depots. Integrated air and missile 
defense is critical for joint operations, but assets are not 
currently ready to counter an adversary's potential complex, 
integrated attack, thus leaving critical assets vulnerable. 
Furthermore, current air and missile defense forces fall 
dangerously short of being an effective and foundational 
defense for the kind of conflict outlined by the National 
Defense Strategy. While adversary air and missile threats 
become more capable, more complex, more powerful, and more 
numerous, U.S. air and missile defense capabilities have 
regressed. Specifically, the IBCS and IFPC systems have 
struggled to make real progress in a reasonable amount of time.
    The IFPC system has experienced significant delays while 
employing a risky acquisition strategy. By attempting to 
leverage the IBCS system for IFPC, the Army exposes itself to 
additional delays if certain testing milestones are not 
achieved on time. Furthermore, the IBCS system is already 
delayed 7 years and has expended about $1.0 billion to date. 
The committee is not confident that the Army will successfully 
deliver an IBCS system on its current timeline due to the 
previous and recurring schedule delays. Any further delays will 
jeopardize timelines for delivery of integrated capabilities. 
Furthermore, the Government Accountability Office has stated 
that the IFPC Increment 2-1 Block 1 Program has struggled with 
integration of all four components--the Sentinel radar, the 
AIM-9X interceptor, the IBCS fire control, and the multi-
mission launcher. While the committee appreciates the Army's 
dedication to innovation within the IBCS framework, the Army is 
overextended in its IBCS effort and is therefore slowing the 
development and deployment of IFPC.
    As outlined by the National Defense Strategy, cruise 
missile defense is a critical capability to defend against 
Russian and Chinese threats. Without this capability, the 
committee is concerned the U.S. Army will fail to successfully 
perform its mission to protect the joint force.

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs

Multiyear procurement authority for F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G 
        aircraft program (sec. 121)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Department of Defense authority to enter into multiyear 
procurement for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft for up to 3 
years.

Multiyear procurement authority for E-2D Advanced Hawkeye (AHE) 
        aircraft program (sec. 122)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide to 
the Department of Defense authority to enter into multiyear 
procurement for E-2D aircraft for up to 5 years.

Extension of limitation on use of sole-source shipbuilding contracts 
        for certain vessels (sec. 123)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend to 
include fiscal year 2019 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 or 
Expeditionary Fast Transports (EPFs), 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 10th EPF, and the Navy planned to shut down 
the production line.
    Without an authorization or request in the President's 
Budget, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-235) included procurement of an 11th 
EPF at a cost of $200.0 million. Two more EPFs, the 12th and 
13th, were added at a cost of $225.0 million each in the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-113) and Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-141) respectively, 
without an authorization or request in the President's Budget. 
The fiscal year 2015 and 2016 EPFs were awarded to a single 
shipbuilder, with no competition, using a sole source contract.

Prohibition on availability of funds for Navy port waterborne security 
        barriers (sec. 124)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
funds from being used to procure new Navy port waterborne 
security barriers unless the Secretary of the Navy submits a 
waiver to the congressional defense committees.
    The committee notes that the former Commander of Navy 
Installations Command, Vice Admiral Dixon Smith, testified 
before the committee on April 5, 2016, that current Navy 
maritime security barriers do ``not meet the requirement for 
high-speed boats that could be used for a terrorist attack.''
    Furthermore, the committee is aware of significant 
performance shortfalls of the current maritime security 
barriers that continue to result in unacceptable anti-terrorism 
and force protection gaps in at least one location.
    The committee understands that the Navy is testing other 
Navy port waterborne security barriers, and Admiral Smith 
testified that these barriers will better be able to stop 
vessels. The committee further understands that these barriers 
may provide improved protection against low profile surface 
threats, capacity to withstand multiple coordinated attacks, 
and ability to endure environmental extremes.
    The committee also notes that in a May 2016 report to the 
Congress, 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.'' A 
business case analysis described in this report showed a 
significant decrease in sustainment costs for a new 
commercially available system.
    The committee is concerned that the Navy has not set 
requirements, requested funding, or released a request for 
proposals to procure new Navy port waterborne security 
barriers.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Navy to expeditiously 
set requirements, request funding, and release a request for 
proposals with full and open competition for new Navy port 
waterborne security barriers.

Multiyear procurement authority for Standard Missile-6 (sec. 125)

    The committee recommends a provision authorizing the 
Secretary of the Navy to enter into multiyear contracts 
beginning in fiscal year 2019 for the procurement of 625 
Standard Missile-6 guided missiles pending the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation confirmation of the Secretary 
of the Navy's preliminary findings as required in subsection a 
of section 2306b of title 10, United States Code.

Limitation on availability of funds for the Littoral Combat Ship (sec. 
        126)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
funds from being used to exceed the total procurement quantity 
listed in revision five of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) 
acquisition strategy unless the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment submits to the congressional 
defense committees a certification.
    The committee notes the Navy force structure assessment 
requirement and LCS acquisition strategy total procurement 
quantity of 32 LCS was met in fiscal year 2018. The committee 
further notes that in testimony before the Committee on Armed 
Services of the Senate on April 17, 2018, the joint statement 
of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Systems and 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and 
Acquisition stated, ``The [budget request] includes one LCS in 
[fiscal year] 2019 to sustain the viability of the industrial 
base until the FFG(X) award in [fiscal year] 2020.''
    Accordingly, the committee believes that before further LCS 
procurement, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Sustainment should certify that such procurement: (1) Is in the 
national security interests of the United States; (2) Will not 
result in exceeding the low rate initial production quantity 
approved in the LCS acquisition strategy in effect at the time 
of the certification; and (3) Is necessary to maintain a full 
and open competition for the guided missile frigate (FFG(X)) 
with a single source award in fiscal year 2020.

Nuclear refueling of aircraft carriers (sec. 127)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the procurement of naval nuclear reactor power units and 
associated reactor components for the nuclear refueling of the 
following aircraft carriers: USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74), USS 
Harry S. Truman (CVN-75), USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76), and USS 
George H.W. Bush (CVN-77).
    The committee notes that the procurement lead time for some 
nuclear components required to conduct a nuclear refueling 
precedes the authorization for the associated aircraft carrier 
refueling by several years.
    Accordingly, pursuant to section 7314a of title 10, United 
States Code, as added by section 1014 of this Act, in order to 
maintain appropriate oversight of program execution of the 
nuclear refueling of aircraft carriers, the committee 
recommends the authorizations contained in this provision.

Limitation on funding for Amphibious Assault Vehicle Product 
        Improvement Program (sec. 128)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit 
twenty-five percent of funds authorized for Amphibious Assault 
Vehicles product improvement program (AAV PIP) from being 
obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense provides 
the required report identified in the section titled Report on 
the Highest-priority roles and missions of the Department of 
Defense and the Armed Forces.

                     Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement of E-8 JSTARS 
        aircraft (sec. 141)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the availability of funds to retire, or prepare to retire, any 
E-8 Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) 
aircraft.
    As part of its fiscal year 2019 budget request, the Air 
Force is seeking to cancel the JSTARS recapitalization program 
and retire three existing JSTARS aircraft. The Air Force's 
rational is that current assessments demonstrate a 
recapitalized JSTARS aircraft will not be survivable in a 
highly contested environment during conflict. In its place, the 
Air Force is seeking to invest in a portfolio of new ideas and 
emerging capabilities to fulfill the Ground Moving Target 
Indicator (GMTI) mission.
    The committee agrees with the National Defense Strategy on 
the need to focus on peer adversaries and is supportive of the 
Air Force's efforts to move to an Advanced Battle Management 
System. However, the committee is concerned with the Air 
Force's plan to divest current capability before its 
replacement technology is developed and operational. While the 
Air Force's plan for 2030 and beyond is aspirational with no 
guarantee of success, it is willing to make decisive, 
irreversible decisions about the retirement of current 
capabilities. The committee is concerned that this dynamic 
creates the potential, if not the likelihood, of extended 
capability gaps should the Air Force's ambitious plan not meet 
reality, either in time or feasibility.
    The committee believes the Air Force must ensure a robust 
capability to execute the GMTI and airborne battle management 
missions throughout the transition to its planned Advance 
Battle Management System.

B-52H aircraft system modernization report (sec. 142)

    The committee recommends a provision requiring a long-term 
modernization plan for the B-52H aircraft due 180 days after 
the enactment of this Act.
    The Air Force has stated it intends to keep the B-52H 
flying through 2040, at which time the newest aircraft, having 
left the assembly line in 1962, will be 78 years old. The 
committee recognizes the value of the B-52 and is supportive of 
the Department of Defense's efforts to continue to employ its 
unique capabilities for the foreseeable future.
    However, the committee is cognizant that, given the age of 
the B-52, any modernization effort must consider the whole 
system. For example, because the radar is integrated into the 
electronic warfare system, the radar cannot simply be 
modernized without taking into account the characteristics of 
the future electronic warfare system. The committee believes it 
is imperative that the Air Force take a holistic approach to 
the modernization of the B-52 to ensure its continued relevance 
and effectiveness.

Repeal of funding restriction for EC-130H Compass Call Recapitalization 
        Program and review of program acceleration opportunities (sec. 
        143)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
Section 131 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328; 13 Stat. 2037) and 
require the Secretary of the Air Force to provide periodic 
reports to the congressional defense committees on the status 
of the EC-130H Compass Call recapitalization program.

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

Multiyear procurement authority for C-130J aircraft program (sec. 151)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Department of Defense authority to enter into multiyear 
procurement for C-130J aircraft for up to 5 years.

Quarterly updates on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program (sec. 152)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to 
provide the congressional defense committees quarterly updates 
on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program.
    The committee notes the F-35 program is facing an 
inflection point in its lifecycle. The committee is encouraged 
that the program is at long last on the cusp of completing the 
System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase but continues 
to have a number of concerns. The sustainment, modification, 
and modernization of the F-35s will be a continuous challenge 
for the Department of Defense (DOD) for decades to come. The 
committee believes if the right foundation is not established 
today, prior to a steep ramp in production, the viability of 
the program will be put into doubt, depriving our warfighters 
of urgently-needed capabilities necessary to deter and, if 
necessary, defeat any adversary.
    The F-35 sustainment enterprise is struggling to provide 
the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps an affordable strategy 
that meets their operational needs. As the number of fielded 
aircraft nearly triples in the next 3 years, the challenge will 
grow exponentially. The committee is particularly concerned by 
the Not Mission Capable-Supply (NMC-S) rates of the F-35. In 
part, the high NMC-S rates are due to a lack of adequate repair 
capacity. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) published 
a report on October 26, 2017, titled ``F-35 Aircraft 
Sustainment: DoD Needs to Address Challenges Affecting 
Readiness and Cost Transparency'' (GAO-18-75), that stated the 
DOD ``does not have enough capacity to repair F-35 aircraft 
parts because the establishment of repair capabilities at the 
military depots is 6 years behind schedule.'' The report goes 
on to say, ``Program officials in part attributed these delays 
to the military services not providing enough funding for depot 
requirements; however, service officials told [the GAO] the 
program office did not clearly identify some depot requirements 
in a timely manner necessary for the services to fund those 
requirements.''
    The GAO cited five key challenges facing the Department: 
(1) Limited repair capacity at depots; (2) Spare parts 
shortages; (3) Undefined technical data needs; (4) Unfunded 
intermediate-level maintenance capabilities; and (5) Delays in 
the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) development 
and uncertain funding.
    While production of aircraft has begun to rapidly increase, 
development of the baseline Block 3F configuration has 
continued. There are over 250 aircraft now delivered and 
fielded, despite the fact that Initial Operational Test and 
Evaluation (IOT&E) will not even begin until the fall of 2018. 
The committee notes the continued costs associated with the 
concurrency of development and production. In June 2017, the 
Joint Program Office (JPO) estimated the cost to upgrade the 
fielded fleet of 266 aircraft to the Block 3F System 
Development and Demonstration standard at $1.6 billion. In 
January 2018, the JPO estimated the cost to upgrade the older 
Lot 2-8 aircraft to Block 4 will be approximately $16.0 million 
per aircraft and the newer Lot 9-10 aircraft will be 
approximately $13.0 million.
    The committee is concerned by the enormous retrofit costs 
required to provide the warfighters the capabilities they need 
from the F-35. The committee supports upgrading as many F-35s 
as possible to the most advanced configuration in order to, 
most importantly, provide the best capability to the warfighter 
but also to reduce the complication of maintaining and 
sustaining multiple configurations of three different aircraft. 
Elsewhere in this bill, the committee provides additional 
funding for the modifications of F-35 aircraft. However, the 
committee is concerned the modification costs and lack of 
industrial capacity for parts will limit the Department's 
ability to achieve a rationalized and maximally capable F-35 
fleet.
    Despite the clear and obvious issues, the committee is not 
convinced the program office or Services are adequately 
addressing the problems, including providing adequate funding 
for spare parts and to stand up depot component repair 
capabilities and purchase the necessary lay-in material, both 
of which are years behind schedule.
    The committee urges the Services to urgently prioritize 
funding spare parts and depot repair capability. Elsewhere in 
this legislation, the committee recommends funding increases to 
accelerate procurement of spare parts and the establishment of 
depot component repair capability.
    At the same time, the sustainment enterprise is struggling 
to keep up with the number of fielded aircraft and modification 
costs continue to rise, the JPO is about to embark on the Block 
4 modernization program, known as Continuous Capability 
Development and Delivery (C2D2). An enormously expensive and 
complicated effort in its own right, C2D2 seeks to rapidly 
field advanced capabilities to the warfighter under an agile 
software development construct. While supportive of moving to a 
more agile and rapid capability fielding cycle, the committee 
remains concerned with the ability of the Department to execute 
in an affordable and efficient manner on a program as large and 
complicated as the F-35.
    The committee has been encouraged by the renewed commitment 
to transparency and communication with the Congress and looks 
forward to continuing to work together to ensure the success of 
the F-35 program. In order to facilitate this collaboration, 
the committee believes it prudent for the Congress to be 
regularly updated on the status and direction of this vital 
program.

Authority to procure additional polar-class icebreakers (sec. 153)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) by striking subsections 
(a) and (b), as well as providing authority to enter into a 
contract or contracts for up to six polar-class icebreakers.

                              Budget Items

                                  Army

Interim cruise missile defense capability for the Army

    The budget request for the Army included $145.6 million in 
line number 3 of Missile Procurement, Army (MPA), for the 
Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) Increment 2-
Intercept weapon system.
    The committee believes this is insufficient to deliver the 
critical need for cruise missile defenses of fixed assets and 
to ensure any delays that emanate from the IFPC weapon system 
or the Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command 
System.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $500.0 
million in line number 3 of MPA for procurement of an interim 
cruise missile defense capability for the Army, which equates 
to about two batteries for such a capability.

Army Tactical Missile System

    The budget request included $221.7 million in line number 
16 in Missile Procurement, Army (MPA), for Army Tactical 
Missile System (ATACMS) modifications.
    The total request is for 402 ATACMS; however, the maximum 
capacity for ATACMS is 320.
    Therefore, committee recommends a decrease of $80.0 million 
in line number 16 in MPA to align total quantity to 320.

Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle

    The budget request included of $480.0 million in line 
number 2 of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (W&TCV) 
for the procurement of 131 Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicles 
(AMPV).
    The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's 
efforts to modernize and to be better prepared to execute the 
National Defense Strategy. The Army has made clear its 
modernization priorities in order to rapidly build capabilities 
needed for combined arms maneuver against a peer adversary. The 
committee understands that the AMPV program continues to work 
through performance challenges of key components.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $100.0 
million in line number 2 W&TCV for the procurement of the AMPV.

Stryker modification

    The budget request included $287.5 million in line number 4 
of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (WTCV), for 
Stryker modifications.
    The Army has requested a transfer of $149.4 from line 
number 4 to line number 5 of WTCV for Stryker upgrades.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $149.4 
million in line number 4 of WTCV.

Stryker upgrade

    The budget request included $21.9 million in line number 5 
of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (WTCV), for 
Stryker upgrades.
    The Army has requested a transfer of $149.4 from line 
number 4 to line number 5 of WTCV for Stryker upgrades.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $149.4 
million in line number 5 of WTCV.

Bradley Program (Modifications)

    The budget request included $625.0 million in line number 6 
of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (W&TCV), for the 
procurement of Bradley fighting vehicles.
    The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's 
efforts to modernize and to be better prepared to execute the 
National Defense Strategy. The Army has made clear its 
modernization priorities in order to rapidly build capabilities 
needed for combined arms maneuver against a peer adversary.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $324.0 
million in line number 6 W&TCV for the procurement of the 
Bradley.

Paladin Integrated Management

    The budget request included $351.8 million in line number 8 
of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army (WTCV), for the 
procurement of 30 Paladin Integrated Management (PIM) sets.
    The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's 
efforts to modernize and to be better prepared to execute the 
National Defense Strategy. The Army has made clear its 
modernization priorities in order to rapidly build capabilities 
needed for combined arms maneuver against a peer adversary.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $110.0 
million in line number 8 WTCV for the procurement of the PIM.

Small caliber reduction

    The budget request included $2.2 billion for Procurement of 
Ammunition, Army (PAA), of which $41.8 million was for LI 
0132E00700, CTG 5.56 mm. The committee notes the increase in 
the appropriations omnibus for fiscal year 18 and therefore a 
decrease of $6.7 million in PAA 0132E00700 due to forward 
financing.

Army ammunition reduction

    The budget request included $2.2 billion for Procurement of 
Ammunition, Army (PAA), of which $184.0 million was for LI 
8750E27501, Artillery, Fuze, Precision Guidance Kit (PGK).
    The committee is very supportive of the PGK program, its 
combat performance to date, and the Army's goal to stockpile 
PGK rounds to reach its total Army munitions requirements. 
However, given the Army's plans to replace current PGK rounds 
with anti-jam capable PGK rounds in the near future and the 
requested three-fold increase compared to fiscal year 2018, the 
requested funding increase in fiscal year 2019 could be better 
aligned for other readiness priorities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $100.0 
million in PAA to LI 8750E27501 for PGK.

Joint Light Tactical Vehicle

    The budget request included $1.32 billion in line number 6 
of Other Procurement, Army (OPA), for the procurement of 3,390 
Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV).
    The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's 
efforts to modernize and to be better prepared to execute the 
National Defense Strategy. The Army has made clear its 
modernization priorities in order to rapidly build capabilities 
needed for combined arms maneuver against a peer adversary.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $250.0 
million in line number 6 OPA for the procurement of the JLTV.

U.S. Southern Command unfunded priorities increase

    The budget request included $8.0 billion for Other 
Procurement, Army, of which $46.0 million was for line number 
71, Modification of In Service Equipment (Intelligence 
Support).
    The committee notes that United States Southern Command 
identified intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance as an 
unfunded priority.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.8 
million to line number 71, Modification of In Service Equipment 
(Intelligence Support).

Army automated data processing equipment

    The budget request included $8.0 billion in Other 
Procurement, Army (OPA), of which $201.9 million was for line 
number 112, 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 
Department of Defense elements and services. As the Army 
consolidates IT purchases and develops integrated personnel 
systems in other budget lines, the committee expects to see a 
decrease in this budget line.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 
million in OPA for line number 112, automated data processing 
equipment.

                                  Navy

F-35C Joint Strike Fighter

    The budget request included $1.1 billion in line number 3 
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of nine F-
35C aircraft.
    The committee supports the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and 
the delivery of its unique capabilities to our warfighters as 
quickly as reasonably possible. However, the committee remains 
concerned with the state of the F-35 sustainment enterprise and 
its ability to efficiently and affordably bear the rapidly 
increasing demands upon it.
    The committee believes the enterprise is behind, 
particularly in regards to spare parts and depot component 
repair capacity. If the program does not allow the sustainment 
enterprise to catch up to the currently fielded and soon to be 
fielded aircraft, maintenance will continue to fall further 
behind its needed capability and capacity and will ultimately 
reduce the number of aircraft the Department of Defense is able 
to procure, sustain, and upgrade.
    The Navy and Joint Program Office's belated appreciation 
for the need for a shipboard intermediate maintenance 
capability has further challenged the ability to effectively 
and efficiently sustain the Department of the Navy's F-35s 
going forward.
    The committee believes it is prudent to establish a solid 
sustainment base before the steep ramp of production aircraft 
overwhelms the enterprise's ability to sustain them. Elsewhere 
in this legislation, the committee seeks to increase funding 
for F-35 spares, modifications, and depot repair capability.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $121.0 
million and one aircraft in line number 3 of APN.

E-2D Advanced Hawkeye

    The budget request included $742.7 million in line number 
16 of Aviation Procurement, Navy (APN), for the procurement of 
four E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft.
    The committee recognizes the vital contributions of the E-
2D Advanced Hawkeye to present and future carrier air wing 
operations. As the airborne battle manager, the E-2D is the 
linchpin for carrier strike group concepts of operations, 
including Naval Integrated Fire Control--Counter Air.
    The committee is supportive of accelerating capabilities 
that enhance our abilities to deter and, if necessary, defeat 
any peer or near-peer adversary. The committee also recognizes 
the critical need to provide our weapons schools with the 
latest equipment to ensure the most relevant and effective 
tactics are being developed and disseminated.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $175.0 
million in line number 16 of APN for the procurement of one 
additional E-2D aircraft. This item was included on the Chief 
of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities list.

USMC OA-X light attack procurement

    The budget request included no funds in Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy (APN), for the acquisition of a fleet of 
light attack aircraft.
    The committee believes that, as the nation's middle-weight 
expeditionary force-in-readiness, the Marine Corps could 
benefit from a fleet of low-cost, light attack aircraft that 
would require minimal work to develop. These aircraft could 
conduct counterterrorism operations, perform close air support 
(CAS), and other missions in permissive and semi-permissive 
environments such as those where employing low altitude rotary-
wing CAS platforms has proven prohibitive. These aircraft would 
also help season pilots to mitigate the potential for a 
shortfall in the future. The low cost per flight hour, 
simplicity, and tailored capabilities of a light attack 
platform could also provide a significant increase in the 
amount of support provided to Marine, joint force, and allied 
ground units. It may also help provide an affordable path to a 
light attack capability for allies, partners, and friends with 
limited financial resources.
    The committee is concerned that the Marine Corps' future 
tactical aviation foundation rests almost solely on 5th 
generation fighters such as the F-35B and C variants. However, 
the bulk of Marine Corps aviation missions executed in the past 
15 years revolve around providing CAS and non-traditional 
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (NT-ISR) flights. 
While the F-35 offers unique capabilities against a peer 
competitor, the committee questions the value of using such an 
exquisite platform, with its high cost per flight hour, short 
time-on station, and low readiness rates, to perform CAS and 
NT-ISR missions in support of enduring requirements in 
Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, on the African continent and for 
other limited contingency operations. Additionally, using a 
light attack platform to meet the majority of Marine CAS and 
NT-ISR requirements reduces the wear on expensive, low-
observable aircraft and enables those aircrews to focus on 
their primary operational missions in high-end contested and 
degraded operations against potential peer adversaries.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0 
million in APN, line number 71, for a total of $100.0 million, 
for acquisition of a light attack 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.

C-40 aircraft

    The budget request included $206.0 million in line number 
18 of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of two 
C-40 aircraft.
    The committee notes that two C-40 aircraft were included in 
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-141), and therefore the requested aircraft 
are excess to need.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $206.0 
million and two aircraft in line 18 of APN.

USMC Medium-Altitude Long-Endurance Unmanned Aircraft System 
        procurement

    The budget request included no funds in Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy (APN) for the acquisition of Medium-Altitude 
Long-Endurance (MALE) Group 5 drones.
    The committee understands that the Marine Corps uses the 
RQ-21A Blackjack Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) to provide 
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) for its 
Ground Combat Element. Numerous Urgent Universal Need 
Statements from operational commanders have repeatedly pointed 
out serious shortfalls in the range, payload, survivability, 
and overall effectiveness of the RQ-21 system. The proposed 
solution to many of these shortfalls is an, as yet 
undetermined, replacement system called the Marine Air Ground 
Task Force Unmanned Expeditionary Capability (MUX) system. This 
system's Initial Operational Capability date has shifted from 
2015, as reported in the Marine Corps Aviation Plan in 2005, to 
sometime after 2026, with a Full Operational Capability 
forecasted for 2035 or later.
    The committee is concerned that the Marine Corps' lack of 
reliable capability and capacity in the UAS field leaves them 
vulnerable to enemy action and less effective at completing 
their assigned missions over the next decade or longer. The 
committee also notes that the Marine Corps is currently 
operating MQ-9 Reaper UAS under contract to support operations 
in Afghanistan. The committee believes that a MALE Group 5 type 
UAS platform offers the best combination of capabilities 
available currently to support maneuver elements on the ground. 
Such platforms are able to perform ISR, Signals Intelligence, 
Electronic Warfare, fire support and communications relay tasks 
and have proven range, survivability, and reliability 
characteristics from years of use supporting ground and special 
operations units. Procurement of a Group 5 type MALE UAS solves 
all of the capability and performance gaps of the RQ-21 and 
will help the Marine Corps to more precisely refine its 
requirements for the future MUX program. Additionally, the 
experience gained in MALE UAS operations and fire support 
execution as well as the ISR acquired by using such a system 
will help to train and educate a new generation of Marine UAS 
operators and planners, who will then be ready to transition 
smoothly to a future MUX system.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0 
million in APN, line number 72, for a total of $100.0 million, 
for acquisition of a Group 5 MALE UAS fleet.

EA-18G cognitive electronic warfare

    The budget request included $1.2 billion in line number 30 
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of 
modifications to all models of the F/A-18 aircraft.
    The committee recognizes the growing importance of 
electronic warfare and its critical role in any fight with a 
peer or near-peer adversary. The committee believes it is 
imperative the United States maintains relevant and effective 
electronic warfare capabilities. Moving forward, the ability to 
sense and react to the electromagnetic spectrum will be key to 
success in any conflict.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $13.9 
million in line number 30 of APN for Reactive Electronic Attack 
Measures technology for the EA-18G Growler. This item was 
included on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities 
list.

Adaptive Radar Countermeasure

    The budget request included $166.3 million in line number 
49 of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of 
common electronic countermeasures equipment.
    The committee understands that the survivability of U.S. 
strike fighters will clearly be essential to the success of any 
conflict with a peer or near-peer adversary.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million in line number 49 of APN for Adaptive Radar 
Countermeasure (ARC). This item was included on the Chief of 
Naval Operations' unfunded priorities list.

F-35B modifications

    The budget request included $36.6 million in line number 59 
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), F-35B STOVL Series, for 
procurement of modifications to F-35B aircraft.
    The Department of Defense continues to deal with the 
ramifications of the concurrency of development and production 
of the F-35. As the number of fielded aircraft grows while 
development is still ongoing, the costs continue to rise. 
Concurrency will continue to be a logistical and financial 
burden as the program moves on to the Block 4 modernization 
program, known as Continuous Capability Development and 
Delivery. According to recent estimates, the cost of upgrading 
aircraft up to the Block 4 configuration will be from $12.0 to 
$16.0 million per jet, adding to the already considerable 
affordability issues facing the program.
    The committee supports upgrading as many F-35s as possible 
to the most advanced configuration in order to, most 
importantly, provide the best capability to the warfighter, but 
also reduce the complication of maintaining and sustaining 
multiple configurations of three different aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $33.5 
million in line number 59 of APN for F-35B modifications.

F-35C modifications

    The budget request included $21.2 million in line number 60 
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), F-35 CV Series, for 
procurement of modifications to F-35C aircraft.
    The Department of Defense continues to deal with the 
ramifications of the concurrency of development and production 
of the F-35. As the number of fielded aircraft grows while 
development is still ongoing, the costs continue to rise. 
Concurrency will continue to be a logistical and financial 
burden as the program moves on to the Block 4 modernization 
program, known as Continuous Capability Development and 
Delivery. According to recent estimates, the cost of upgrading 
aircraft up to the Block 4 configuration will be from $12.0 to 
$16.0 million per jet, adding to the already considerable 
affordability issues facing the program.
    The committee supports upgrading as many F-35s as possible 
to the most advanced configuration in order to, most 
importantly, provide the best capability to the warfighter, but 
also reduce the complication of maintaining and sustaining 
multiple configurations of three different aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in line number 60 of APN for F-35C modifications.

F-35 spares and repair parts

    The budget request included $1.8 billion in line number 64 
of Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), for procurement of 
aircraft spares and repair parts.
    The committee remains concerned by the readiness rates of 
the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. A particularly concerning trend 
is the increase in the percentage of aircraft unable to fly 
while awaiting replacement parts due to inadequate supply 
support, known as the Not Mission Capable--Supply (NMC-S) rate. 
As the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) 
notes in the January 2018 annual report, ``Concurrency of 
production and development, lower-than-expected reliability for 
parts, inadequate fault isolation, and early program decisions 
to not adequately fund procurement of spares have contributed 
to the NMC-S rate.''
    Given this situation, which will be exacerbated as 
production ramps up steeply in the coming years, the committee 
is perplexed by the Services' combined decrease of $546.4 
million for F-35 spares between fiscal years 2020 and 2022. 
While the Department of Defense claims the cuts are due to 
``process improvements by Services to meet Departmental 
readiness efficiency goals in military spending,'' the 
committee is unaware of any such process improvements that 
would resolve a NMC-S rate that is nearly double the goal, let 
alone that would warrant cutting a half billion dollars in 
spare parts. Should such process improvements exist, the 
committee strongly urges the Services to share them, as they 
would clearly bring immense benefit to the entire Department.
    The committee believes the F-35 program urgently needs to 
increase the supply of spare parts.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0 
million for F-35B spares and repair parts and $20.0 million F-
35C spares and repair parts for a total increase of $50.0 
million in line number 64 of APN for aircraft spares and repair 
parts.

Sidewinder

    The budget request included $77.9 million in line number 5 
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for the Sidewinder missile.
    The committee notes that after several years of assuming 
risk in the procurement of munitions, the current level of 
munitions inventory is low. In an attempt to address this, the 
Department of Defense has requested many munitions be funded at 
the maximum production capacity. However, there are several 
munitions that are not funded at maximum capacity within the 
budget request.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $45.0 
million in line number 5 of WPN for an additional 58 missiles. 
This increases procurement to the maximum capacity for 
Sidewinder. This was on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded 
priorities list.

Long range anti-ship missile

    The budget request included $81.2 million in line number 17 
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for the long range anti-
ship missile.
    The committee notes that after several years of assuming 
risk in the procurement of munitions, the current level of 
munitions inventory is low. In an attempt to address this, the 
Department of Defense has requested many munitions be funded at 
the maximum production capacity. However, there are several 
munitions that are not funded at maximum capacity within the 
budget request. The long range anti-ship missile is a highly-
capable system that is critical for the warfight.
    The committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in 
line number 17 of WPN for an additional 10 missiles. This 
increases procurement to the maximum capacity for the long 
range anti-ship missile. This was on the Chief of Naval 
Operations' unfunded priorities list.

Harpoon block II

    The budget request included $14.8 million in line number 20 
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for the Harpoon missile.
    The committee notes that after several years of assuming 
risk in the procurement of munitions the current level of 
munitions inventory is low. In an attempt to address this, the 
Department of Defense has requested many munitions be funded at 
the maximum production capacity. However, there are several 
munitions that are not funded at maximum capacity within the 
budget request.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in 
line number 20 of WPN for an additional 48 missiles. This 
increases procurement to the maximum capacity for the Harpoon 
block II and accelerates meeting total requirement in fiscal 
year 2020 instead of 2021. This was on the Chief of Naval 
Operations' unfunded priorities list.

Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile

    The budget request included $188.0 million in line number 
21 in Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for Harm Mods.
    The committee notes that the Navy is currently in full rate 
production for the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile 
(AARGM) and requested to purchase 257 missiles in fiscal year 
2019. The committee also notes that the Director of Operational 
Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) recently stated that the AARGM 
Block I was ``not adequate to support an evaluation of 
operational effectiveness or survivability.'' Furthermore, 
DOT&E stated that the AARGM Block I ``provides limited 
employment capability against advanced threat surface-to-air 
radar systems.'' Given the directive by new National Defense 
Strategy to prioritize competition against near-peer 
adversaries, the committee believes that the Navy must re-
evaluate the AARGM program of record. The committee believes 
the Navy should seek a solution that will be operationally 
effective against advanced threats surface-to-air radar systems 
and deprioritize investments on programs that are not.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $113.9 
million in line number 21 in WPN, which reduces the quantity by 
200 missiles.

MK48 torpedoes

    The budget request included $92.6 million in line number 27 
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for the MK-48 torpedo.
    The committee notes that after several years of assuming 
risk in the procurement of munitions, the current level of 
munitions inventory is low. In an attempt to address this, the 
Department of Defense has requested many munitions be funded at 
the maximum production capacity. However, there are several 
munitions that are not funded at maximum capacity within the 
budget request.
    The committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million in 
line number 27 of WPN for an additional five torpedoes. This 
increases procurement to the maximum capacity for the MK-48. 
This was on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities 
list.

LCS module weapons

    The budget request included $11.4 million in line number 39 
of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN), for procurement of Littoral 
Combat Ship module weapons, including 90 Longbow Hellfire 
missiles.
    The committee notes the Navy, which has procured 134 
Longbow Hellfire Missiles for the surface-to-surface missile 
module (SSMM) program in previous years, plans to complete 
developmental testing, initial operational test and evaluation, 
and declare initial operational capability in fiscal year 2019.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $6.0 
million to reduce missile quantities until operational testing 
is completed.

Advanced low-cost munitions ordnance

    The budget request included $33.6 million in line number 10 
of Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps (PANMC), of 
which $19.5 million was for the procurement of the advanced 
low-cost munitions ordnance (ALAMO) rounds.
    The committee believes the request to purchase 1,500 rounds 
is ahead of need as testing has not been complete.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $13.0 
million in line number 10 of PANMC to reduce the procurement of 
ALAMO by 1,000 rounds. The remaining 500 rounds should be used 
to complete operational testing.

Virginia-class submarine advance procurement

    The budget request included $2.8 billion in line number 5 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Virginia-class 
submarine advance procurement.
    The committee recommends an additional $250.0 million for 
the Secretary of the Navy to use for: (1) Economic order 
quantity for the fiscal year 2019 through 2023 multiyear 
Virginia-class submarine procurement, which may include the 
addition of a third submarine in both fiscal years 2022 and 
2023; or (2) To expand second and third tier contractors in the 
submarine industrial base to support planned increased 
production requirements.
    If the Secretary pursues option (2), consistent with the 
statement of managers accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), 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 additional submarines, 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.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $250.0 
million in line number 5 of SCN for Virginia-class submarine 
advance procurement.

DDG-1000

    The budget request included $271.0 million in line number 8 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement of 
the DDG-1000 program.
    The committee notes these funds are requested as subsequent 
year full funding. The committee is unaware of incremental 
funding authority for this program in fiscal year 2019.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $271.0 
million in line number 8 of SCN and transfer of these funds to 
line number 28 for completion of the prior year shipbuilding 
program.

Arleigh Burke-class destroyers

    The budget request included $5.3 billion in line number 9 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Arleigh Burke-
class destroyer procurement.
    The committee notes the budget request includes procurement 
of three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, which is one 
additional destroyer in fiscal year 2019 as compared to last 
year's request. The committee further notes the unit costs of 
the fiscal year 2019 destroyers slightly increased. The 
committee believes a higher procurement rate should decrease 
unit costs.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $27.5 
million in line number 9 of SCN.

Arleigh Burke-class destroyer advance procurement

    The budget request included $391.9 million in line number 
10 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for Arleigh 
Burke-class destroyer advance procurement.
    The committee notes the Navy future years defense program 
includes procurement of two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in 
fiscal year 2020, which would be procured using a multiyear 
procurement contract. The committee understands that advance 
procurement of long lead time material could reduce component 
costs and enable optimal ship construction intervals.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $250.0 
million in line number 10 of SCN.

Littoral Combat Ship

    The budget request included $749.2 million in line number 
11 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement 
of one Littoral Combat Ship (LCS).
    The committee notes the one LCS requested in fiscal year 
2019 is the last ship of the class. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends adjusting the plans and other cost categories to 
align with the end of production.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $70.0 
million in line number 11 of SCN. Additionally, the committee 
requests the Secretary of the Navy establish a separate SCN 
line number for the Frigate (FFG(X)) in the fiscal year 2020 
budget request.

LPD-class amphibious transport ship advance procurement

    The budget request included no funding in line number 12 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for procurement or 
advance procurement of LPD-class amphibious transport ships.
    The committee notes the Navy has identified LPD-30, which 
was authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 2018, as the 
first Flight II LPD. The committee believes sufficient design 
maturity and cost estimate precision have been achieved to 
award a multiyear procurement contract for Flight II LPD-class 
ships, which will be procured in fiscal years 2020 through 
2024.
    The committee further notes that the Secretary of the Navy 
and Commandant of the Marine Corps testified on April 19, 2018, 
before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate that they 
support the addition of the Vertical Launch System to Flight II 
LPD-class ships. The committee believes this increased 
capability merits serious consideration, including the 
applicable concepts of operation, requirements, and ship design 
changes.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $650.0 
million in line number 12 of SCN for advance procurement for 
Flight II LPD-class ships, which the Secretary of the Navy may 
use for: (1) Economic order quantity procurement associated 
with a multiyear procurement contract or contracts awarded 
pursuant to section 2306b of title 10, United States Code; and/
or (2) Advance procurement of the amphibious transport ship 
designated LPD-31.

Outfitting

    The budget request included $634.0 million in line number 
21 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for outfitting.
    Based on planned delivery dates, the committee notes post-
delivery funding is early to need for CVN-79, DDG-1002, and 
SSN-793. The committee also notes unjustified outfitting cost 
growth for LCS-11, LCS-13, LCS-14, LCS-15, LCS-16, LCS-17, LCS-
18, LCS-19, LCS-20, LCS-22, DDG-119, and DDG-121.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $72.0 
million in line number 21 of SCN.

Service craft

    The budget request included $72.1 million in line number 23 
of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for service craft.
    The committee understands the current Navy Surface Warfare 
Officer (SWO) candidate training curriculum is comprised of 
primarily classroom and simulator training methods. The 
committee believes SWO candidates lack sufficient at-sea 
training before reporting to their first ships. The committee 
is concerned that the lack of practical at-sea experience 
before reporting to their first ships may result in SWOs having 
gaps in their foundational safety, seamanship, and navigation 
knowledge, skills, and experience. The committee has previously 
encouraged the Navy to utilize Navy Yard Patrol (YP) craft for 
SWO candidate training in the Senate report accompanying S. 
2943 (S. Rept. 114-255) of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). Additionally, 
the 2017 Comprehensive Review of Surface Force Incidents 
directed an evaluation of the use of YP craft in all officer 
accession programs, including the feasibility of expanding YP 
craft use.
    Since at least 1975, YP craft have been used by the Navy to 
train naval officer candidates. Currently, the Navy maintains 
24 YP craft, based in Annapolis, Maryland, to provide 
realistic, at-sea training in basic to advanced navigation and 
seamanship. Of these 24 craft, Navy officials have stated six 
YP 676 class craft are slated for near-term disposal, 12 YP 676 
class craft are only able to conduct local operations, and six 
YP 703 class craft can conduct out-of-area training with a 
range of 1,680 nautical miles and 40 personnel embarked.
    The Navy conducts annual Atlantic Patrol summer training 
cruises, known as LANTPAT, with the six YP 703 class craft, 
which provide four-week cruises for approximately 400 Naval 
Academy midshipmen and international students with port visits 
in locations such as New York, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. 
The Navy plans to expand this effort by having 80 Naval Reserve 
Officer Training Corps midshipmen take part in LANTPAT cruises 
in both 2018 and 2019. The committee understands that, if 
additional craft were available, potentially all of the 
approximately 260 NROTC midshipmen who will become SWOs could 
take part in a LANTPAT cruise. The additional craft could also 
increase LANTPAT participation of Naval Academy midshipmen, as 
well as new SWO candidate graduates of the Officer Candidate 
School.
    In order to increase LANTPAT training opportunities for SWO 
candidates from all accession sources as soon as possible, the 
committee believes that, at a minimum, the Navy should replace 
the six YP 676 class craft slated for disposal with new YP 703 
craft that incorporate modernization, training, and 
habitability improvements derived from lessons learned with 
existing YP 703 craft.
    The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to release a 
request for proposals for the detail design and construction of 
upgraded YP 703 class craft not later than fiscal year 2019, 
with an award for the first such craft not later than fiscal 
year 2020. Based on YP 703 class craft actual procurement 
costs, the committee believes the design, non-recurring 
engineering, government support, and construction costs for the 
first upgraded YP 703 class craft should not exceed $25.0 
million.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million in line number 23 of SCN.

Completion of prior year shipbuilding programs

    The budget request included $207.1 million in line number 
28 of Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for completion 
of prior year shipbuilding programs.
    The committee notes $271.0 million are requested in line 
number 8 as subsequent year full funding for the DDG-1000 
program. The committee is unaware of incremental funding 
authority for this program in fiscal year 2019.
    The committee further notes the budget request in line 
number 28 funds completion of prior year shipbuilding programs, 
including cost overruns for seven Littoral Combat Ships, three 
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, three Ship to Shore Connectors, 
CVN-78, and LHA-7.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $271.0 
million in line number 28 of SCN and the transfer of these 
funds from line number 8.

Cable ship

    The budget request included no funding in line number 29 of 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), for a cable ship.
    The committee recommends an increase of $250.0 million in 
line number 29 of SCN 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.

Other navigation equipment

    The budget request included $63.3 million in line number 4 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of other 
navigation equipment.
    The committee notes the 2017 Comprehensive Review of 
Surface Force Incidents recommended accelerating the transition 
to Electronic Chart Display and Information System--Navy 
(ECDIS-N) versions 9.4 and greater on all ships.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in line number 4 of OPN to accelerate the installation 
of ECDIS-N upgrades.

DDG-1000 class support equipment

    The budget request included $89.7 million in line number 16 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of DDG-1000 
class support equipment.
    The committee notes the fiscal year 2019 request increased 
$38.4 million above last year's planned request for fiscal year 
2019 of $51.3 million. The committee further notes the Navy 
attributes this $38.4 million increase to funding activities 
that overlap with those funded in the DDG-1000 research and 
development program element (PE 0204202N), which increased 
$40.8 million above last year's planned request for fiscal year 
2019.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $38.4 
million in line number 16 of OPN.

Items less than $5 million

    The budget request included $126.9 million in line number 
22 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of items 
less than $5.0 million.
    The committee notes this funding includes $32.9 million for 
CVN-78 in-service requirements. However, the committee lacks 
sufficient budget justification (e.g., P-3a exhibit) to support 
this request.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $25.0 
million in line number 22 of OPN and requests the Navy 
consolidate Ford-class OPN requests in a new line number.

LCS mine countermeasures mission modules

    The budget request included $124.1 million in line number 
32 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of 
Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mine countermeasures mission 
modules.
    The committee notes $19.3 million in line number 52 would 
procure Knifefish and Unmanned Influence Sweep System training 
assets for LCS mine countermeasures mission modules.
    The committee further notes $8.6 million in line number 53 
would procure a Coastal Battlefield Reconnaissance and Analysis 
airborne mine countermeasures system block one training asset 
for LCS mine countermeasures mission modules.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $27.9 
million and discontinuing use of line numbers 52 and 53 of OPN 
for procurement of systems associated with LCS mine 
countermeasures mission modules.

LCS anti-submarine warfare mission modules

    The budget request included $57.3 million in line number 33 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of Littoral 
Combat Ship (LCS) anti-submarine warfare mission modules.
    The committee recommends procuring one Escort Mission 
Module (EMM) in fiscal year 2019 and delaying procurement at a 
rate of two EMMs per year until operational testing is 
completed for both LCS variants, which is planned for fiscal 
year 2020.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $18.0 
million in line number 33 of OPN.

LCS surface warfare mission modules

    The budget request included $26.0 million in line number 34 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of Littoral 
Combat Ship (LCS) surface warfare mission modules.
    The committee notes the surface-to-surface missile module 
(SSMM) program plans to complete developmental testing, initial 
operational test and evaluation, declare initial operational 
capability (IOC), and procure 2 additional SSMMs in fiscal year 
2019.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $11.5 
million in line number 34 of OPN to limit procurement to a 
single SSMM until IOC is declared.

Surface ship torpedo defense

    The budget request included $11.3 million in line number 42 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for surface ship torpedo 
defense programs.
    The committee notes a delay in the AN/SLQ-25E contract 
award.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million in line number 42 of OPN.
    Additionally, the committee is concerned by the termination 
of the Torpedo Warning System (TWS), which addressed a critical 
capability gap. Accordingly, not later than January 1, 2019, 
the committee directs the Chief of Naval Operations to provide 
the congressional defense committees with a report on the 
specific capability gap or gaps that the TWS was rapidly 
fielded to address, the performance of the TWS in addressing 
such gap or gaps, the warfighting risk that will be accepted 
without the TWS deployed, and the Navy's plans to address the 
specific capability gap or gaps without the TWS deployed.

Cooperative Engagement Capability

    The budget request included $44.2 million in line number 48 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of 
Cooperative Engagement Capability.
    The committee notes Common Array Block pre-production unit 
schedule delays.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $6.0 
million in line number 48 of OPN.

Minesweeping system replacement

    The budget request included $35.7 million in line number 52 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of 
minesweeping replacement systems.
    The committee notes $19.3 million of this funding would 
procure Knifefish and Unmanned Influence Sweep System training 
assets for Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mine countermeasures 
mission modules.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $19.3 
million in line number 52 of OPN, transfer of these funds to 
line number 32, and discontinuing use of line number 52 for 
procurement of systems associated with LCS mine countermeasures 
mission modules.

Shallow water mine countermeasures

    The budget request included $8.6 million in line number 53 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of shallow 
water mine countermeasures systems.
    The committee notes this funding would procure a Coastal 
Battlefield Reconnaissance and Analysis airborne mine 
countermeasures system block one training asset for Littoral 
Combat Ship (LCS) mine countermeasures mission modules.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $8.6 
million in line number 53 of OPN, transfer of these funds to 
line number 32, and discontinuing use of line number 53 for 
procurement of systems associated with LCS mine countermeasures 
mission modules.

Next Generation Surface Search Radar

    The budget request included $148.4 million in line number 
71 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of items 
less than $5.0 million.
    The committee notes $58.4 million of this request would 
fund the Next Generation Surface Search Radar (NGSSR) program, 
including non-recurring engineering, procurement of 43 units, 
and installation. The committee further notes installations are 
scheduled to begin in the second quarter of fiscal year 2020.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.4 
million in line number 71 of OPN due to installation funding 
ahead of need. Additionally, while recognizing fielding NGSSR 
is a priority for the Navy, the committee is concerned by the 
cost and schedule risk posed by the concurrent nature of the 
acquisition strategy, specifically concurrent NGSSR 
engineering, testing, shipboard integration, and procurement of 
43 NGSSRs in fiscal year 2019.
    Additionally, the committee understands that NGSSR will be 
the primary navigation radar replacement. The committee 
believes the NGSSR should include the capability to record and 
retain radar data for investigative and other purposes.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to submit a report to the congressional defense committees 
not later than October 1, 2018, on the capability of surface 
navigation radars to record and retain radar data for 
investigative and other purposes. This report shall include: 
(1) The current capability and capacity of surface navigation 
radars (e.g., AN/SPS-73) to record and retain radar data; (2) 
The current methods used by the Navy to reconstruct surface 
navigation radar data for investigative and other purposes; (3) 
The planned NGSSR capability and capacity to record and retain 
radar data; and (4) Once the NGSSR is fielded, the methods 
planned to be used by the Navy to reconstruct surface 
navigation radar data for investigative and other purposes.

Cryptologic communications equipment

    The budget request included $14.2 million in line number 82 
of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for procurement of 
cryptologic communications equipment.
    The committee notes that U.S. Southern Command identified 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance as an unfunded 
priority with a specific need for increased cryptologic carry-
on collection capability.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.8 
million in line number 82 of OPN.

Sonobuoys

    The budget request included $199.0 million in line number 
88 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for the procurement of 
sonobuoys.
    The committee notes greater than expected sonobuoy 
expenditures in fiscal year 2018 resulted in the Chief of Naval 
Operations requesting procurement of additional sonobuoys as a 
fiscal year 2019 unfunded priority.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $36.0 
million in line number 88 of OPN.

Navy port waterborne security barriers

    The budget request included $175.4 million in line number 
129 of Other Procurement, Navy (OPN), for the procurement of 
physical security equipment.
    The committee notes the former Commander of Navy 
Installations Command, Vice Admiral Dixon Smith, testified 
before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate on April 
5, 2016, that current Navy maritime security barriers do ``not 
meet the requirement for high-speed boats that could be used 
for a terrorist attack.''
    Furthermore, the committee is aware of significant 
performance shortfalls of the current maritime security 
barriers that continue to result in unacceptable anti-terrorism 
and force protection gaps in at least one location.
    The committee is concerned that the Navy has not set 
requirements, requested funding, or released a request for 
proposals to procure new Navy port waterborne security 
barriers.
    Accordingly, the committee urges the Navy to expeditiously 
set requirements, request funding, and release a request for 
proposals with full and open competition for new Navy port 
waterborne security barriers.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million in line number 129 of OPN.

Amphibious Assault Vehicle Survivability Upgrade

    The budget request included $156.2 million in line number 1 
of Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for the procurement of 
Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV) Survivability Upgrade Program 
(SUP) armored vehicles.
    The committee understands that the AAV SUP will produce 
marginal improvements in the vehicle's overall survivability 
and that few of the proposed enhancements address threats the 
vehicle may face in conflict against a peer adversary. The AAV 
is a decades-old platform with legacy amphibious and combat 
capabilities that do not meet the needs of modern Marine 
amphibious forcible entry operations. Rather than continue to 
invest in a vehicle that, even in upgraded form, will not 
provide adequate maneuverability, survivability or ship-to-
shore performance the committee believes these funds would be 
better used elsewhere to support modernization initiatives 
across the force.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $78.1 
million in line number 1 of PMC.

Command post systems

    The budget request included $124.8 million in line number 
32 of Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for the procurement of 
command post systems.
    The committee notes that the majority of this budget line 
is dedicated to procuring Networking On The Move (NOTM) systems 
for air and ground platforms. The NOTM system represents one 
method to achieve long range data and voice communications, 
however it has operational performance issues and is not 
considered a Low Probability of Detection or Low Probability of 
Intercept system.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $25.0 
million in line number 32 of PMC.

Training devices

    The budget request included $52.0 million in line number 48 
of Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC), for the procurement of 
training devices.
    This budget line includes funding for training devices and 
simulators for obsolete equipment to include the Amphibious 
Assault Vehicle, Light Armored Vehicle, M16A2, M249 SAW, MP5, 
M240G, Mk-153 SMAW, and other systems.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.4 
million in line number 48 of PMC.

                               Air Force

F-35A Joint Strike Fighter

    The budget request included $4.3 billion in line number 1 
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for procurement of 
48 F-35A aircraft.
    The committee supports the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and 
delivery of its unique capabilities to our warfighters as 
quickly as reasonably possible. However, the committee remains 
concerned with the state of the F-35 sustainment enterprise and 
its ability to bear the rapidly increasing demands upon it 
efficiently and affordably. The committee believes the 
enterprise is behind, particularly in regards to spare parts 
and depot component repair capacity. If the program does not 
allow the sustainment enterprise to catch up to the currently 
fielded and soon to be fielded aircraft, sustainment capability 
will continue to fall farther and further behind its needed 
capability and capacity, which will ultimately reduce the 
number of aircraft the Department of Defense is able to 
procure, sustain, and upgrade.
    The committee believes it is prudent to establish a solid 
sustainment base before the steep ramp of production aircraft 
overwhelms the enterprise's ability to sustain them. Elsewhere 
in this legislation, the committee seeks to increase funding 
for F-35 spares, modifications, and depot repair capability.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million for depot repair capability standup and a decrease of 
$92.5 million, or one aircraft, for a total decrease of $67.5 
million in line number 1 of APAF.

OA-X light attack aircraft

    The budget request included no funds in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for the acquisition of a fleet 
of light attack aircraft.
    The recently published National Defense Strategy (NDS) 
clearly states the need to conduct operations in permissive 
environments with lower-cost platforms and concepts of 
operations than is being done currently, both to be more 
fiscally efficient and to free our more capable, multi-role 
aircraft assets to focus on rebuilding readiness and deterring 
peer competitors. The NDS additionally places a strong emphasis 
on the need to enhance partnerships with our allies throughout 
the world. The committee strongly believes that a light attack 
fleet is ideally suited to meet both of these strategic 
demands.
    The committee has been encouraged by the Air Force's moves 
towards pursuing the acquisition of a fleet of light attack 
aircraft, including a $2.4 billion wedge in the out years of 
the future years defense program. However, the committee 
believes that the Air Force continues to move slower than is 
warranted or than the speed at which senior leadership 
proclaims they want to move.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $350.0 
million in APAF, line number 18, for the acquisition of light 
attack aircraft and their associated long lead material.

KC-46A Pegasus

    The budget request included $2.6 billion in line number 4 
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for procurement of 
15 KC-46 tanker aircraft.
    The committee remains supportive of the KC-46 tanker but 
continues to be frustrated by the repeated delays to achieving 
required certification and unforeseen technical challenges that 
continue to plague the program. Over the seven years since the 
program contract was awarded in February 2011, key schedule 
dates have slipped later and later, in some cases more than 
three years. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
published a report on April 18, 2018, KC-46 Modernization: 
Program Cost is Stable, but Schedule May Be Further Delayed,'' 
which states that ``the program updated its delivery schedule 
in 2017 to allow Boeing to delay delivery of the first 18 fully 
capable aircraft from August 2017 to October 2018 / 14 months. 
A schedule risk assessment, as well as GAO's analysis, however 
projects that deliveries could slip to May 2019, 21 months from 
the original schedule, if risks are not mitigated.'' With 
military certification testing, receiver certification, and 
resolution of Category 1 discrepancies still to be completed, 
the committee remains unconvinced that there will not be 
further delays to the program.
    While attention has been focused on the delivery of the 
first aircraft, the committee notes that first delivery is 
simply the first step to bringing capability to the warfighter. 
Successful completion of full receiver aircraft certification, 
Initial Operational Test and Evaluation, delivery of the 
required assets available (to include wing air refueling pod 
sets), and a positive full rate production decision will be the 
true guideposts.
    Additionally, while the committee understands the need to 
be flexible as a program encounters delays, the committee is 
disappointed the Air Force has, on more than one occasion, 
changed the criteria the contractor needs to meet before first 
delivery. The committee expects the Air Force to hold the 
contractor to the contracted agreements, and should the 
contract be breached, pursue appropriate consideration.
    Meanwhile, production of aircraft continues apace, with 
nearly 40 aircraft in some phase of production or modification. 
As the April 18, 2018, GAO report notes, ``Based on the updated 
schedule, Boeing will be producing 49 aircraft, or about 27 
percent of the total aircraft the Air Force will buy, before 
developmental testing is complete.'' While the contractor is 
responsible for paying for any required modifications, the 
concurrency of production and development will impact 
delivering capability to the Air Force.
    Additionally, the Government Accountability Office 
identified $102.7 million of funding for KC-46 interim 
contractor support that is early to need.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $145.2 
million, or one KC-46 aircraft, and $102.7 million for interim 
contractor support for a total decrease of $247.9 million in 
line number 4 of APAF.

MQ-9

    The budget request included $221.7 million in line number 
17 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for procurement 
of 29 MQ-9 aircraft.
    The committee understands the Air Force is moving toward 
establishing an Advanced Battle Management System concept. As 
part of this effort, the Air Force intends to emplace a Ground 
Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) capability on a number of its 
MQ-9 Reaper fleet to provide GMTI in low-threat areas. The 
committee is supportive of providing more capabilities to its 
MQ-9 fleet and of executing operations in permissive 
environments in a more fiscally efficient manner.
    However, the committee is concerned that the Air Force's 
plan to use MQ-9s for GMTI missions without increasing capacity 
will overtask an already heavily utilized asset.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $120.0 
million in line 17 of APAF for six additional MQ-9 aircraft in 
order to accelerate the Air Force's Advanced Battle Management 
System.

B-52

    The budget request included $105.5 million in line number 
21 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for B-52 
modifications.
    The Air Force has requested a transfer of $14.8 million 
from this line to Research, Development, Test & Evaluation 
(RDT&E), Air Force.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $14.8 
million in line number 21 of APAF.

Long range anti-ship missile certification on the B-52

    The budget request included $105.5 million in line number 
21 in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for B-52.
    The B-52 will be certified to carry the Joint Air-to-
Surface Standoff Missile Extended Range (JASSM-ER). The long 
range anti-ship missile (LRASM) has the same physical 
configuration as the JASSM-ER. The Air Force is procuring 50 
LRASMs. Currently, the LRASM is certified to be carried on the 
B-1. However, given the Air Force plans to eventually retire 
the B-1, and the critical capability and expensive nature of 
the LRASM, the committee requires the Air Force certify the B-
52 to carry the LRASM.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in line number 21 in APAF to certify the LRASM on the 
B-52.

A-10 replacement wing program

    The budget request included $109.1 million in line number 
23 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications 
to the A-10 aircraft, including $79.2 million for the wing 
replacement program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $65.0 million in 
line number 23 of APAF for the A-10 wing replacement program.

F-35A modifications

    The budget request included $247.3 million in line number 
29 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for procurement 
of modifications to F-35A aircraft.
    The committee supports upgrading as many F-35s as possible 
to the most advanced configuration in order to, most 
importantly, provide the best capability to the warfighter, but 
also reduce the complication of maintaining and sustaining 
multiple configurations of three different aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million in line number 29 of APAF for F-35A modifications.

C-130 propulsion upgrade

    The budget request included $22.1 million in line number 50 
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications to 
the legacy C-130 and Special Mission C-130 aircraft.
    The committee notes that the budget request did not include 
any funding for the C-130H T56 Series 3.5 Engine Enhancement 
Packages (EEPs) in this or any other line.
    The committee has been encouraged by the results of the Air 
Force's testing of the T56 Series 3.5 engine upgrade and the 
resulting performance and fuel efficiency gains it brings.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $74.0 
million in line number 50 of APAF for C-130H T56 Series 3.5 
EEPs.

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System

    The budget request included $22.9 million in line number 59 
of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for modifications to 
the E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System 
(JSTARS).
    The committee understands the Air Force is seeking to 
retire three JSTARS aircraft in fiscal year 2019, forgo 
recapitalizing the JSTARS fleet, and move towards an Advanced 
Battle Management System (ABMS). The committee supports the Air 
Force's move toward establishing advanced capabilities and 
concepts of operations to enhance effectiveness in any 
potential conflict with a peer or near-peer adversary.
    However, the committee is concerned that the Air Force is 
divesting proven capability before its planned replacement is 
matured, let alone fielded. The committee is particularly 
concerned that the Air Force's plan to divest the JSTARS fleet 
by the mid-2020s will leave a significant capability gap in the 
mid- to late-2020s should implementation of ABMS be delayed or 
prove unfeasible.
    The committee believes the JSTARS aircraft remains a 
critical capability for our warfighters in the near- to mid-
term. In order to ensure its relevance and effectiveness as an 
interim capability as the Air Force transitions to an ABMS, 
JSTARS requires upgrades, including to its central computer.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million in line 59 of APAF for JSTARS central computer upgrade 
design.

F-35A spares and repair parts 

    The budget request included $956.4 million in line number 
70 of Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (APAF), for procurement 
of aircraft spares and repair parts.
    The committee remains concerned by the readiness rates of 
the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. A particularly concerning trend 
is the increase in the percentage of aircraft unable to fly 
while awaiting replacement parts due to inadequate supply 
support, known as the Not Mission Capable--Supply (NMC-S) rate. 
As the Office of the Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation (DOT&E) notes in the January 2018, DOT&E annual 
report, ``Concurrency of production and development, lower-
than-expected reliability for parts, inadequate fault 
isolation, and early program decisions to not adequately fund 
procurement of spares have contributed to the NMC-S rate.''
    Given this situation, which will be exacerbated as 
production ramps up steeply in the coming years, the committee 
is perplexed by the Services' combined decrease of $546.4 
million for F-35 spares between fiscal years 2020 and 2022. 
While the Department of Defense claims the cuts are due to 
``process improvements by Services to meet Departmental 
readiness efficiency goals in military spending,'' the 
committee is unaware of any such process improvements that 
would resolve a NMC-S rate that is nearly double the goal, let 
alone that would warrant cutting more than a half billion 
dollars in spare parts. Should such process improvements exist, 
the committee strongly urges the Services to share them, as 
they would clearly bring immense benefit to the entire 
Department.
    The committee believes the F-35 program urgently needs to 
increase the supply of spare parts. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $50.0 million in line number 70 of 
APAF for F-35A spares and repair parts.

Air Force long range anti-ship missile

    The budget request included $44.2 million in line number 3 
of Missile Procurement, Air Force (MPAF), for the long range 
anti-ship missile.
    The committee notes that, after several years of assuming 
risk in the procurement of munitions, the current level of 
munitions inventory is low. In an attempt to address this 
problem, the Department of Defense has requested funding for 
many munitions at the maximum production capacity. However, 
there are several munitions that are not funded at maximum 
capacity within the budget request. The long range anti-ship 
missile is a highly capable system that is critical for 
achieving the goals set forth in the National Defense Strategy. 
However, the Air Force budget request reduced the quantity of 
this critical munition for fiscal year 2019 from 15 to 12. The 
Air Force intends to complete the procurement of this missile 
in fiscal year 2019 terminating the program with a total 
procurement of 47 missiles. However, the total requirement of 
the long range anti-ship missile for the Air Force is 50 
missiles.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.2 
million in line number 3 of MPAF for an additional three 
missiles. This increases procurement to the maximum capacity 
for the long range anti-ship missile and achieves the Air 
Force's requirement of 50 munitions. In addition, given the 
critical nature of this missile, the committee believes that 50 
missiles is insufficient. The Air Force shall re-examine the 
total program requirement of the long range anti-ship missile 
in light of the advancing capabilities of near-peer 
adversaries.

Small Diameter Bomb II

    The budget request included $100.9 million in line number 8 
in Missile Procurement, Air Force (MPAF), for Small Diameter 
Bomb II.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $8.0 million in line 
number 8 in MPAF to realign unit price to $104,000 per weapon.

Cargo and utility vehicles

    The budget request included $42.7 million in line number 4 
for Cargo and Utility Vehicles in Other Procurement, Air Force 
(OPAF).
    As part of its strategic approach for addressing long-term 
strategic competition with China and Russia, the National 
Defense Strategy (NDS) calls for building a more lethal force, 
including investments in forward force maneuver, posture 
resilience, and resilient and agile logistics. According to the 
NDS, the objectives of these investments are to ensure that 
U.S. forces can ``deploy, survive, operate, maneuver, and 
regenerate in all domains while under attack'' and conduct 
``logistics sustainment while under persistent multi-domain 
attack.'' Meeting these objectives will require a transition 
``from large, centralized, unhardened infrastructure to 
smaller, dispersed, resilient, adaptive basing that include 
active and passive defenses'' as well as an emphasis on 
``prepositioned forward stocks and munitions, strategic 
mobility assets,'' and ``distributed logistics and 
maintenance.''
    Consistent with the priorities set forth in the National 
Defense Strategy, the committee has fully supported resiliency 
efforts such as the prepositioning of European Contingency Air 
Operations Sets Deployable Airbase Systems (DABS), which is 
part of the European Deterrence Initiative, to complement and 
enhance the theater-wide response capability of the U.S. Air 
Force in Europe.
    However, the committee is concerned that the appropriate 
level of investment in similar resiliency efforts in the Indo-
Pacific region has not materialized. U.S. force posture in the 
Indo-Pacific region remains heavily concentrated in Northeast 
Asia within range of China's advanced arsenal of ballistic and 
cruise missiles, posing a significant risk to forward-stationed 
forces, to the ability of the Joint Force to execute the 
contingency plans of the Department of Defense, and to the 
credibility of U.S. deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region.
    As a result, Admiral Harry Harris, Commander, U.S. Pacific 
Command (PACOM), identified force posture initiatives focused 
on resiliency as critical requirements in his letter to the 
committee of February 22, 2018, concerning PACOM's unfunded 
priority list and in his testimony to the committee on March 
15, 2018.
    Therefore, the committee supports the procurement of seven 
DABS in fiscal year 2019 to be prepositioned forward in the 
PACOM area of responsibility in order to support the priorities 
of the National Defense Strategy and PACOM's ``resiliency'' and 
``agile logistics'' force posture initiatives as well as to 
enhance the credible combat power of U.S. forces in the Indo-
Pacific region.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.2 
million in line number 4 for Cargo and Utility Vehicles in 
OPAF.

Security and tactical vehicles

    The budget request included $1.2 million in line number 6 
for Security and Tactical Vehicles in Other Procurement, Air 
Force (OPAF). The committee recommends an increase of $2.7 
million in line number 6 for Security and Tactical Vehicles in 
OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

Special purpose vehicles

    The budget request included $43.0 million in line number 7 
for Special Purpose Vehicles in Other Procurement, Air Force 
(OPAF). The committee recommends an increase of $10.7 million 
in line number 7 for Special Purpose Vehicles in OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

Fire fighting/crash rescue vehicles

    The budget request included $23.3 million in line number 8 
for Fire Fighting/Crash Rescue Vehicles in Other Procurement, 
Air Force (OPAF). The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 
million in line number 8 for Fire Fighting/Crash Rescue 
Vehicles in OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

Materials handling vehicles

    The budget request included $11.5 million in line number 9 
for Materials Handling Vehicles in Other Procurement, Air Force 
(OPAF). The committee recommends an increase of $19.8 million 
in line number 9 for Materials Handling Vehicles in OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

Runway snow removal and cleaning equipment

    The budget request included $37.6 million in line number 10 
for Runway Snow Removal and Cleaning Equipment in Other 
Procurement, Air Force (OPAF). The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.8 million in line number 10 for Runway Snow 
Removal and Cleaning Equipment in OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

Air Force physical security system

    The budget request included $159.3 million in line number 
29 for Air Force Physical Security System in Other Procurement, 
Air Force (OPAF). The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in line number 29 for Air Force Physical Security 
System in OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

Base maintenance and support equipment

    The budget request included $24.0 million in line number 56 
for Base Maintenance and Support Equipment in Other 
Procurement, Air Force (OPAF). The committee recommends an 
increase of $24.0 million in line number 56 for Base 
Maintenance and Support Equipment in OPAF.
    This increase would support the procurement of seven 
Deployable Airbase Systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the U.S. Pacific Command area of 
responsibility as further explained elsewhere in this report.

                              Defense Wide

Joint Service Provider

    The budget request included $107.2 million in line number 
16 of Joint Service Provider, Defense Information Systems 
Agency.
    The committee notes that the budget request represents 
significant growth from prior years, and that the Department of 
Defense has set up a Reform Management Group specifically 
focused on reducing costs in the shared services information 
technology area.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $19.5 
million in line number 16 of Joint Service Provider, Defense 
Information Systems Agency.

                       Items of Special Interest

Aircraft carrier acquisition

    The Department of Defense has been able to achieve program 
efficiencies and cost-savings by using multiyear and block buy 
contracting with many weapons programs, to include 
shipbuilding. Section 2306b of title 10, United States Code, 
sets forth criteria for requesting and evaluating multiyear 
contracting proposals. Although similar criteria for block buy 
authorities are not codified, the committee expects the 
Department to conduct rigorous analysis of proposals and 
provide that analysis to the Congress, and that the 
Department's analysis will show a sound business case with 
substantial savings from committing the government to a longer 
term contract.
    Earlier this year, the Navy issued a request for proposal 
soliciting information on a potential block buy to acquire two 
Ford-class aircraft carriers (CVN-80 and CVN-81). The committee 
will review any information that the Navy provides related to 
such an approach as consideration of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 continues.

Army M4 Carbine Forward Extended Rails

    In fiscal year 2018, the committee directed the Army to 
evaluate the need for upgrading the M4 Carbine legacy rail with 
the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) free-float extended 
rails. In response, the Army conducted a Solider Enhancement 
Program (SEP) evaluation and published the results in December 
2017. The Limited User Evaluation (LUE) demonstrated promising 
results as compared to the Army's legacy rail. While the 
committee supports the Army's modernization strategy that calls 
for developing and fielding the Next Generation Squad Automatic 
Weapon (NGSAW) before developing and fielding the Next 
Generation Soldier Weapon (NGSW), the committee remains 
concerned that the Army is not planning to make modest upgrades 
to the M4 Carbine until the NGSAW and NGSW can be fielded. The 
committee is aware that soldier demand remains high for free-
float, extended rails, and the Army has included funding for 
free-float extended rails from fiscal year 2021 through fiscal 
year 2023. The committee recommends the Army assess the cost-
effectiveness and efficiency of accelerating the free-float 
extended rail program to retrofit the M4A1 rifle as part of a 
bridging strategy until the NGSAW and NGSW is fielded.

Avoiding future work stoppages on EC-130H Compass Call Recapitalization

    The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to 
recapitalize the aging EC-130H Compass Call fleet with the EC-
37 type aircraft. The committee notes that before it can carry 
on with the transition plan, the Department of Defense must 
first comply with the related provisions in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91). While the committee notes that 
Department has submitted the certification required by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91), delays in satisfying the requirement has led to a 
work stoppage on the program lasting at least six weeks. The 
committee is concerned about the potential for further work 
stoppages should the Secretary of the Air Force fail to make a 
timely determination that the EC-37B has a high likelihood of 
meeting combatant requirements, as required by the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328). The committee encourages the Secretary of the Air Force 
to make a timely determination for this requirement to avoid 
further program delays and cost overruns.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, not more than 60 days after the determination required 
by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328) is made, to provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees on the Compass Call transition 
plan. This plan should include:
          (1) Courses of action to accelerate the 
        recapitalization of the EC-130H fleet and Baseline 4 
        development and deployment for incoming EC-37 aircraft;
                  (a) attendant timelines for each course of 
                action;
                  (b) cost estimates for each course of action; 
                and
          (2) Recommended course of action and a plan to manage 
        both fleets while supporting combatant commander 
        requirements.

B-2 modernization programs

    The committee is aware that, as noted in the Department of 
Defense's fiscal year 2018 budget request, ``modern 
communications are key enablers for the B-2 in the anti-access/
area denial battlespace and directly enhance lethality and 
force multiplication.'' The committee notes that the Department 
did not request any funding in its fiscal year 2019 budget for 
the B-2 Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Satellite 
Communications program and has not proposed an alternative 
secure communications solution to replace the current 
communications suite.
    The B-2 is currently the only stealth, long-range, 
penetrating bomber in the Air Force inventory. While the 
committee fully supports the recapitalization of the bomber 
fleet with at least 100 next-generation B-21 bombers, the 
committee is concerned about capability and capacity gaps in 
the near-to-mid-term.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees by February 28, 2019, on potential line-of-sight and 
beyond line-of-sight communications upgrades for the B-2 that 
would provide the capabilities required for the B-2 to perform 
its critical strike missions in anti-access/area denial 
environments.
    Additionally, the report should consider solutions that 
would enable automated transfer of data to the B-2 and enable 
the aircraft to operate in a networked fashion with other 
elements of the long-range strike family of systems and other 
Air Force and Joint systems. The report should provide 
estimated modernization costs and timelines, consider 
opportunities to exploit capabilities developed for other 
programs, and take into account timelines for introduction of 
future systems that will provide similar capabilities.

B-52 re-engining

    The committee recognizes the value and mission capabilities 
of the B-52 and supports platform modernization, specifically 
the effort to re-engine the fleet. The committee further 
recognizes the advances in engine performance and efficiency 
since the B-52's current TF-33 engines were fielded. 
Accordingly, the committee supports efforts to accelerate 
fielding of the B-52 engine replacement in order to maximize 
the benefits of increased efficiency over the B-52's remaining 
life.

Briefing on tactical wheeled vehicle acquisition plans

    The committee notes the decreased funding profile for the 
Army's Family of Medium Tactical Vehicle program (FMTV), the 
Palletized Load System Extended Service Program (PLS ESP), and 
the Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck Extended Service 
Program (HEMTT ESP) over the future years defense program 
(FYDP). Predictable funding helps support minimum sustaining 
rates, and it avoids production breaks. In turn, this benefits 
Army readiness and modernization plans.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to brief the committee not later than September 30, 2018, on 
the Army's procurement strategy for the FMTV program as well as 
the programs for HEMTT ESP and PLS ESP. The briefing should 
address how the proposed funding strategies are likely to 
impact the tactical wheeled vehicle industrial base, 
modernization and readiness goals, as well as surge capacity 
and future acquisition needs.

CH-53K Heavy Lift Replacement

    The Navy's MH-53E helicopter's primary mission of providing 
airborne mine countermeasures is more important than ever, as 
the Navy faces an ever increasing number of threats across the 
maritime domain today, including anti-ship mines that are 
widespread, deadly, and difficult to locate.
    Since the committee has been concerned about maintaining 
mine countermeasures capability, the committee has recommended 
legislation that has continued to delay the retirements of the 
MCM-1 mine countermeasures ships and the MH-53E helicopters 
until the Secretary of the Navy can identify a replacement 
capability and the necessary quantity of such systems that will 
meet all combatant commander mine countermeasures operational 
requirements.
    In testimony before the Seapower Subcommittee of the Senate 
Armed Services Committee in March 2018 on Navy and Marine Corps 
Aviation Programs, Vice Admiral Paul A. Grosklags, USN, stated, 
``The MH-53E will continue to perform its primary mission of 
airborne mine countermeasures as well as transport of cargo and 
personnel until it is replaced by the Littoral Combat Ship 
(LCS).''
    With a reduction in the inventory objective for LCSs 
subsequent to the Navy's announcement of the Force Structure 
Assessment recommending a 355-ship Navy, the Committee is 
concerned about a capability gap for mine countermeasures 
missions. The Committee requests the Navy submit a report not 
later than 90 days following the date of enactment of this Act 
on the feasibility and impact of recapitalizing the MH-53E 
fleet with a derivative of CH-53K that would address its use in 
airborne mine countermeasures missions and additional missions 
of conducting vertical onboard delivery and transporting 
personnel and cargo. The Committee recognizes that the CH-53K 
helicopter currently being built for the Marine Corps would be 
a logical option that might replace the capability that would 
be lost with the retirement of the Navy's MH-53E fleet.

Continued F-15 C/D fleet modernization

    The committee is aware that the U.S. Air Force is 
undertaking a review of its aircraft force mix and structure, 
including the appropriate balance between 4th and 5th 
generation aircraft in the Active-Duty and reserve force, and 
that the Air Force expects to complete that review in August 
2018. Therefore, the committee requests a briefing on the 
results of this review no later than September 1, 2018.
    The committee remains concerned that retiring entire 
fighter fleets, like the F-15C, without acquiring sufficient 
replacement aircraft, will drive the number of fighter aircraft 
below the levels required by the National Defense Strategy and 
below the floor established by Section 131 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91). Until the Air Force makes a final determination on the 
future of the F-15C/D fleet, the committee encourages the Air 
Force to continue investment in the modernization of the F-15 
C/D, including the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) 
radar, the Electronic Warning Warfare System (EWWS), and the 
Eagle Passive Active Warning and Survivability System (EPAWSS), 
which provides radar warning, geo-location, situational 
awareness, and self-protection solutions to detect and defeat 
surface and airborne threats in contested environments. The 
committee notes the Air Force has funded procurement of EPAWSS 
for its F-15E fleet and the necessary research and development 
to outfit the F-15C/D fleet.

Explosive Ordnance Disposal technology development

    The committee notes that conventional Explosive Ordnance 
Disposal (EOD) units across the military services require 
upgraded equipment and technology enhancements, particularly 
for routine inspection and search activities. The committee 
believes that conventional Joint Service EOD units may benefit 
from rapid acquisition of EOD equipment, which have high-
definition resolution and encrypted signals, among other 
upgraded capabilities. The committee understands that the 
Department of Defense canceled the Explosive Ordnance Disposal/
Low Intensity Conflict program element which formerly developed 
and delivered Joint Service EOD advanced capabilities. The 
committee understands the Combating Terrorism Technical Support 
Office (CTTSO) will absorb this mission area within the 
Improvised Defeat Device and Explosive Countermeasures subgroup 
activity.
    The committee encourages the Director of the CTTSO to 
appropriately prioritize funding toward delivering advanced 
capabilities for conventional Joint-Service EOD units.

F-35 modifications to Block 4 configuration

    To date, the committee notes neither the Air Force, the 
Navy, nor the Marine Corps has made a decision on what portion 
of the current fleet of F-35 aircraft will be brought up to a 
Block 4 configuration.
    Pursuant to section 224(b) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for FY2017 (Public Law 114-328), the 
Secretary of Defense submitted a report to the congressional 
defense committees that contained the basic elements of an 
acquisition program baseline for F-35 Follow-on Modernization 
(FOM) Block 4. Within the report, per aircraft cost estimates 
to retrofit Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) Lots 2-8 
aircraft to a Block 4 configuration are roughly $16.0 million, 
and per aircraft cost estimates to retrofit LRIP 9-10 aircraft 
to Block 4 configuration are roughly $13.0 million. With more 
than 350 F-35s already procured that could require modification 
to Block 4 and the substantial cost to modify each aircraft to 
the most advanced configuration to provide the best capability 
to the warfighter, considerable affordability issues face the 
Department.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Defense to submit a report not later than 180 days after the 
enactment of this Act, to identify which F-35 aircraft will be 
brought up to a Block 4 configuration and a timeline to 
complete modernization to Block 4.

Ford-class sustainment and product support

    The committee notes that with the delivery of the USS 
Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) in May 2017, sustainment and product 
support of this new class of aircraft carriers will be critical 
to mission effectiveness and operational availability. As the 
Ford-class program continues with testing and delivery of 
additional aircraft carriers, the committee believes life cycle 
sustainment planning must be properly funded to maintain hull, 
mechanical, electrical, and combat systems to the class' 50-
year service life.
    Accordingly, the committee is concerned that the budget 
request included no funding for maintaining Electromagnetic 
Aircraft Launch System software. The committee urges the Navy 
to plan for and appropriately fund sustainment and product 
support for Ford-class aircraft carriers, particularly systems 
critical to mission accomplishment.

Guided missile frigate (FFG(X))

    The committee applauds the Navy's decision to procure a 
guided missile frigate (FFG(X)) with increased lethality, 
survivability, and endurance to meet the requirement for Small 
Surface Combatants within the most recent Navy Force Structure 
Assessment. While maintaining the Navy's ``high/low'' mix of 
ships, the FFG(X) program greatly expands upon the capabilities 
of the Littoral Combat Ship program, returning many of the 
multi-mission warfighting attributes of Oliver Hazard Perry-
class frigates to the fleet and enabling operations in more 
contested environments.
    As the Navy refines FFG(X) concept designs with industry 
through fiscal year 2019, the committee continues to support a 
full and open competition with a single source detail design 
and construction award in fiscal year 2020. The committee also 
supports the Navy's approach to commonality with existing Navy 
platforms, such as the Mark-41 Vertical Launch System and 
Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar, to reduce acquisition and 
sustainment costs. The committee encourages the Navy not to 
trade-off warfighting capability for other considerations.

HH-60 Combat Rescue Helicopter program

    Air Force combat rescue forces and assets are among the 
most deployed in the Department of Defense, and the heroic 
efforts of Air Force combat rescue airmen and women have 
resulted in over 12,000 U.S. and allied lives saved, often 
under harrowing conditions. These demanding conditions have 
exacted a significant toll on this force, which has suffered 
significant combat losses of aircraft and personnel. The HH-60W 
Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) will replace the Air Force's 
rapidly aging HH-60G Pavehawk helicopters to continue to 
perform these critical combat search and rescue and personnel 
recovery operations. The current Air Force program of record is 
for a minimum of 112 HH-60W CRH aircraft. The committee notes 
that numerous force structure studies have documented the need 
for between 141 (USAF CSAR-X Analysis of Alternatives) and 171 
(Joint Forces Command Joint CSAR Study) aircraft to meet the 
rescue requirement demands. Therefore, the committee supports 
112 as the minimum number of HH-60W CRH aircraft to support the 
validated requirement.

Immersive virtual shipboard environment training

    The committee understands that the Navy has used game-based 
learning concepts to develop immersive virtual shipboard 
environment (IVSE) training for select watchstations aboard 
Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) since 2013. The committee further 
understands that this IVSE training may have contributed to 
faster qualifications and certification timelines, higher 
degrees of proficiency, and increased knowledge retention. The 
committee believes that other programs may be able to benefit 
from IVSE training.
    Accordingly, not later than November 1, 2018, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide to the 
congressional defense committees a report on IVSE training. 
This report shall include: (1) An assessment of IVSE training 
effectiveness compared to other training methods, including 
training benefits and lessons learned with IVSE training for 
LCS watchstations; (2) Future plans to incorporate game-based 
learning concepts and IVSE training to improve Navy and Marine 
Corps training for other naval platforms; (3) Other potential 
opportunities to incorporate game-based learning concepts and 
IVSE training to improve Navy and Marine Corps training for 
naval platforms; and (4) Any other related matters the 
Secretary deems appropriate.

Intermediary Low-Cost Tactical Extended Range Missile

    The committee is concerned that the Army and Marine Corps 
have a capability gap in rocket and missile artillery, 
specifically an inability to engage targets at long ranges. The 
current inventory of mobile surface-to-surface missiles is not 
adequate to provide timely and accurate all-weather fire 
support in a Global Positioning System-denied environment to 
the joint force at ranges between 60 and 499 kilometers. The 
committee notes that current initial operational capability for 
the Long Range Precision Fires (LRPF) program is not until 
2025. The committee encourages collaboration between the Army 
and Marine Corps in finding an intermediary solution, which 
could be procured and fielded rapidly to provide U.S. ground 
forces with the capability to engage targets beyond 200 
kilometers until LRPF is operational.

John Lewis-class fleet oiler multiyear procurement strategy

    The committee notes the fiscal year 2019 Navy shipbuilding 
plan includes seven John Lewis-class fleet oilers (T-AO) 
procured in fiscal years 2020 through 2024 at a cost of more 
than $3.6 billion. The committee further notes that the first 
ship of this class, USS John Lewis (T-AO-205), was awarded in 
fiscal year 2016 and will be delivered to the Navy in November 
2020.
    The committee believes sufficient design maturity and cost-
estimating precision have been achieved to merit consideration 
of a multiyear procurement contract for John Lewis-class fleet 
oilers in future budget requests.
    The committee also notes recent shipbuilding multiyear 
procurement contract proposals projected savings in excess of 
10 percent, as compared to annual procurement.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to 
consider a multiyear procurement strategy for John Lewis-class 
fleet oilers in future budget requests.

Light-weight polymer technologies for ammunition and small arms

    The committee continues to support the Department's efforts 
to decrease the weight of metal cartridge cases for ammunition 
in order to decrease the load burdens on the warfighter. 
Notable improvements include the potential for improved 
accuracy and consistency, increased individual mobility, 
decreased logistical resupply burdens, and reduced fuel 
consumption in operations.
    The committee is supportive of recent efforts at the Naval 
Surface Warfare Center Crane Division to test and qualify 0.50 
caliber ammunition with polymer cartridge cases, which resulted 
in greater accuracy and more consistent rates of fire.
    Notably, the committee understands that efforts to lighten 
the weight of ammunition boxes with different materials can 
decrease weight by 33 percent, and when combined with the 25 to 
35 percent weight reduction from polymer cartridge cases and 
other efforts, can reduce the weight of a 0.50 caliber 
ammunition box by roughly 75 percent.
    Additionally, the committee is encouraged by efforts to 
replace the metal of linked ammunition with polymer links, 
which can reduce weight by nine pounds per ammunition box, or 
1,000 pounds per pallet.
    Accordingly, the committee encourages the Department to 
continue and expand its efforts to explore polymer and other 
material weight reductions to other types of ammunition that 
could further reduce burdens on the warfighter.
    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.

Maneuver Short Range Air Defense to counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems

    The committee is aware of the threat that small, agile, and 
low altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) pose to military 
ground forces in the field. The committee understands that the 
Army is seeking a cross-domain, multi-dimensional solution that 
can address both the evolving UAS threat that is becoming more 
difficult to detect, identify, and defeat as well as the 
ability to provide short-range air defense against low flying 
UAS and cruise missiles for Army maneuver units.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Army to provide a 
briefing not later than September 30, 2018, identifying what 
requirements are similar to both the maneuver short-range air 
defense (MSHORAD) mission areas and the Counter-Unmanned 
Aircraft System (C-UAS) mission. Furthermore, the Army should 
identify what capabilities have been deployed, or are in 
development, that could be considered for use with Army ground 
mobile platforms to simultaneously address the C-UAS and M-
SHORAD mission areas.

Navy equipment for the Heavy Polar Icebreaker program

    The committee notes the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) published a report on April 13, 2017, titled ``Status of 
Coast Guard's Heavy Polar Icebreaker Acquisition'' (GAO-18-
385R), which noted added space, weight, and power reservations 
for Navy equipment, such as a multi-mode radar and minor 
caliber weapons, were incorporated in the Department of 
Homeland Security-approved Operational Requirements Document 
for the Heavy Polar Icebreaker (HPIB) in January 2018. The 
committee is interested in better understanding the plan for 
Navy equipment to be incorporated on HPIBs.
    Accordingly, not later than December 1, 2018, the Secretary 
of the Navy, in consultation with the Under Secretary of 
Homeland Security for Management, shall submit to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives an unclassified report, which may include a 
classified annex, containing the following: (1) A detailed 
description of Navy equipment planned to be included in HPIBs, 
including Navy-Type, Navy-Owned equipment; (2) The estimated 
space, weight, power, and cost for the equipment described in 
paragraph (1); (3) A description of Navy equipment under 
consideration to be included in HPIBs; (4) The estimated space, 
weight, power, and cost for the equipment described in 
paragraph (3); (5) An explanation of the capability of the 
equipment listed in paragraphs (1) and (3) to assist or augment 
the missions of the Combatant Commanders and the execution of 
the Department of Defense's 2016 Arctic Strategy; and (6) A 
description of how the equipment listed in paragraphs (1) and 
(3) will meet a modular open systems approach to allow for 
future mission expansion.

Navy small arms weapons training

    The committee understands that the Navy Expeditionary 
Combat Command (NECC) and the Navy Strategic Systems Program 
(SSP) have successfully demonstrated an innovative synthetic 
small arms training approach. The committee further understands 
this approach provides realistic metrics-based skills for a 
variety of individual and crew-served training courses of 
instruction. The committee believes other Navy commands could 
benefit from similar innovative synthetic small arms training 
approaches. Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the 
Navy to consider expanding innovative synthetic small arms 
training approaches beyond the NECC and Navy SSP.

Preservation of F-117 aircraft with certified combat sorties

    The committee is aware that there are currently no F-117A 
aircraft with certified combat sorties on permanent display at 
either the National Museum of the United States Air Force in 
Dayton, Ohio or the National Air and Space Museum of the 
Smithsonian Institution. Following its first flight in 1981, 
the F-117A ably served in combat during Operations Just Cause, 
Desert Storm, Allied Force, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi Freedom 
before being retired from front line service in 2007. The 
committee recognizes the F-117A's unique importance in aviation 
history as the world's first operational stealth aircraft and 
believes the Air Force should take appropriate steps to ensure 
future generations have the opportunity to experience first-
hand combat-proven F-117As.
    Therefore, the committee strongly encourages the Secretary 
of the Air Force to make the first two retiring F-117A aircraft 
with documented combat sorties available to the National Museum 
of the United States Air Force and the National Air and Space 
Museum of the Smithsonian Institution. The committee also notes 
the current presence at the National Museum of the United 
States Air Force of the existing prototype F-117 and encourages 
the Secretary of the Air Force to consider its transfer to an 
accredited affiliate of the National Museum of the United 
States Air Force or the National Air and Space Museum of the 
Smithsonian Institution.

Presidential protection

    The committee recognizes the vital importance of the 
presidential protection mission. The airborne component is 
critical to ensuring safe airspace around the President. 
However, the committee is concerned with the inefficient use of 
national assets, such as the F-22, to accomplish the 
presidential protection mission. The committee believes this 
mission could be ably accomplished by a number of assets, 
including those from the Navy and Marine Corps, thereby 
relieving the stress on our most capable assets so they can 
focus on training to rebuild readiness and deter peer 
competitors.
    The committee understands that Air Combat Command is 
pursuing different options to provide better and more efficient 
presidential support. However, the committee believes that the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should examine how to 
provide presidential support most efficiently, using all 
available Department of Defense assets.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff to reassess presidential support tasking and 
options for improving the efficiency of support with an 
emphasis on freeing the most capable aircraft assets to focus 
on training for the most stressing operational requirements, in 
line with National Defense Strategy.

Report on Air Force plan for fighter aircraft

    The committee understands that Air Combat Command is 
developing a Fighter Roadmap which will detail the Air Force's 
plans for the fighter aircraft fleet.
    The Secretary of the Air Force shall provide a report to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives on the Air Combat Command Fighter Roadmap. The 
report shall describe the Air Force's plans for the fourth-
generation fighter fleet and plans for converting fighter units 
to the F-35. To the extent feasible, the report should discuss 
the criteria to be used for future basing operations of F-35 
aircraft.

Report on Navy's current and future state of long range strike 
        capability

    The Secretary of the Navy is directed to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees not later than February 
1st, 2019 that describes the current and future state of the 
Navy's long range strike strategy. This report should include a 
comprehensive description of the Navy's plan to use all the 
various Navy munitions programs to meet operational 
requirements for land and maritime strike. The report should 
include discussion of the Next Generation Long-Range Attack 
Weapon (NGLAW), the Tomahawk and follow-on upgrades like the 
Maritime Strike Tomahawk and the Joint Multi-Effects Warhead 
System (JMEWS), Conventional Prompt Strike, Over-the-Horizon 
missile, SM-6, the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), and 
any follow-on programs. The report should include how the Navy 
strategy will impact to the missile industrial base.

Rifle Marksmanship Training

    The committee notes that the service branches utilize 
traditional M4/M16 marksman training practices in connection 
with both basic marksmanship instruction and in maintaining 
marksmanship proficiency of seasoned personnel. Current dry 
firing techniques, an essential rifle training element, require 
servicemembers to recharge their weapons after each trigger 
pull. The committee is aware that a new rifle dry fire device 
(RDFD) technology exists that simulates a live fire session. 
This technology has the ability to improve proper marksmanship 
fundamentals and weapon manipulation skills, which can lead to 
increased lethality and combat survival rates. During dry fire 
sessions RDFD replaces the lower receiver of the M4/M16, 
thereby allowing for simultaneous training with sights, lasers, 
lights, switches, and hand placement while diminishing the 
possibility of negligent discharge. Improved M4/M16 
marksmanship proficiency may be increased through RDFD, which 
in turn could lead to reduced costs associated with ammunition 
(live and blank), range time, and other expense items. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
briefing to the congressional defense committees by December 
31, 2018, regarding the feasibility of utilizing RDFD 
technology for use with the M4/M16 rifle and any next 
generation rifle platform.

San Antonio-class Flight II amphibious transport ship multiyear 
        procurement strategy

    The committee notes the fiscal year 2019 Navy shipbuilding 
plan includes four San Antonio-class Flight II amphibious 
transport ships (LPD) procured in fiscal years 2020 through 
2024 at a cost of approximately $7.0 billion. The committee 
further notes the Navy has identified LPD-30, which was 
authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 2018, as the first 
Flight II LPD.
    The committee believes sufficient design maturity and cost-
estimating precision have been achieved to merit consideration 
of a multiyear procurement contract for San Antonio-class 
Flight II amphibious transport ships, which will be procured in 
fiscal years 2020 through 2024. The committee further believes 
the Navy should maintain a procurement rate of one Flight II 
LPD per year to meet Navy requirements faster, as well as 
increase industrial base efficiency and stability.
    The committee also notes recent shipbuilding multiyear 
procurement contract proposals projected savings in excess of 
10 percent, as compared to annual procurements.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to 
utilize a multiyear procurement strategy for San Antonio-class 
Flight II amphibious transport ships in the President's Budget 
request for fiscal year 2020.

Small Unit Support Vehicle report

    The committee notes that the Small Unit Support Vehicle 
(SUSV) is the only vehicle that units can use to operate in 
deep snow conditions. The SUSV was designed to be air-droppable 
and able to operate in almost any condition. From a fleet of 
nearly 600 vehicles, there are fewer than 100 working SUSVs 
left. The SUSV is no longer a program of record, and as a 
result many SUSVs in the fleet are being cannibalized to keep a 
small number of SUSVs running.
    Recently, the U.S. Army identified requirements for a Joint 
All-Weather/All-Terrain Support Vehicle (JAASV). Furthermore, 
the House and Senate reports accompanying H.R. 2810 (H. Rpt. 
115-200) and S. 1519 (S. Rpt. 115-125) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) 
required the Department of Defense to conduct a Business Case 
Analysis to develop or procure a replacement for the SUSV. This 
analysis concluded that the replacement for the SUSV ``will 
compete for resourcing during POM 20-24, United States Army 
Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) will define the Total 
Army requirement for both the Active and Reserve components, 
and Headquarters, Department of the Army will consider pursuing 
a SUSV/JAASV using Rapid Acquisition Authorities to quickly 
procure a Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS), Non Developmental 
Item solution.''
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Department of 
Defense to conduct a Department-wide operational needs review 
for the JAASV and subsequently consider granting rapid 
acquisition authorities needed to begin quick procurement of a 
COTS solution to this capability shortfall.

Stryker A1 Production

    The committee is concerned about the Army's funding 
strategy for Stryker A1 production. The Stryker A1 
configuration includes the Double-V Hull (DVH) upgrade and 
Engineering Change Proposal 1 to provide enhanced mobility and 
power.
    The fiscal year 2019 Army budget request included $21.9 
million for Stryker upgrades to convert three flat bottom 
vehicles into the Double V Hull (DVH) A1 configuration. 
However, the committee is concerned that this does not resource 
the Stryker program sufficiently given the National Defense 
Strategy and long-term plans for the Stryker vehicle fleet. 
Therefore, the committee included a $149.0 million zero-sum 
movement of funds within the Stryker program, authorizing a 
total of $171.0 million.
    The committee understands that the Army made a decision at 
a Requirements Oversight Council meeting to upgrade the entire 
Stryker legacy fleet to the Stryker A1 configuration. This 
decision was made after the Army submitted the fiscal year 2019 
budget request. The Army has a total of 9 Stryker Brigade 
Combat Teams, and over 2,700 Stryker vehicles do not have both 
the DVH and engineering upgrades. In addition, the Army intends 
to use the Stryker A1 chassis for the Maneuver Short Range Air 
Defense capability which will likely require additional Stryker 
vehicles.
    Therefore, as the Army considers funding levels for future 
budget requests, the committee encourages the Army to provide 
the necessary resources to support the decision to modernize 
the Stryker fleet to the A1 configuration, which may include 
modernizing at least one half of a brigade per year. Finally, 
the committee urges the Army to evaluate the potential cost 
savings and schedule acceleration that could be achieved by a 
multi-year procurement strategy.

Swarm attack defense of Navy ships

    The committee recognizes the growing threat of small boat 
swarm attacks, in which an enemy seeks to overwhelm a ship's 
layered defenses by attacking in large numbers from different 
directions. The committee is concerned that some Navy vessels 
may lack sufficient self-defense capability against such 
threats. For example, as noted in the fiscal year 2017 annual 
report by the Office of the Director, Operational Test & 
Evaluation, the Expeditionary Sea Base (T-ESB) ``self-defense 
capability is limited to crew-served weapons only. The T-ESB 
was designed to operate in a non-hostile environment with low/
negligible threats to the ship. However, mine countermeasure 
operations may require the ship to operate close to littoral 
threat areas. The lack of self-defense capability renders the 
ship dependent upon other naval combatants and joint forces for 
protection in the littoral operating environment.''
    In order to ensure ships are sufficiently protected against 
swarm raids and other small boat attacks, the committee urges 
the Secretary of the Navy to ensure adequate self-defense 
capability requirements are in place for the mission sets and 
scenarios such ships may be called upon to undertake.

         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

Codification and reauthorization of Defense Research and Development 
        Rapid Innovation Program (sec. 211)
    The committee recommends a provision that would codify the 
Rapid Innovation Program and would clarify elements of the 
program, including funding levels and policy surrounding broad 
agency announcements.
    The committee notes that the Rapid Innovation Program was 
established to help increase the number of non-traditional 
vendors in technology and research and to help those innovators 
bridge the gap between basic research and commercialization. 
The program has demonstrated benefits to meeting Department of 
Defense (DOD) needs and should become a permanent facet of the 
DOD's toolkit for helping to improve acquisition of 
technologies and support U.S. small business innovators.

Procedures for rapid reaction to emerging technology (sec. 212)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe a procedure for the 
designation and development of urgently needed emerging 
technology research.
    The committee established the position of Under Secretary 
for Research and Engineering (USD (R&E)) within the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328), with the intention that this role would drive rapid 
innovation across science and technology within the Department. 
However, the committee recognizes that streamlined processes 
may need to be established to ensure that the Department is 
able to keep pace with the current speed of technological 
change. Therefore, the committee directs the USD (R&E) to 
establish a streamlined process that would allow the Department 
to identify areas of rapid technological change and indicate 
the need for immediate investment. This process could be 
similar to the Joint Urgent Operational Need process, 
established based on a similar provision in section 806 of the 
Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2003 (Public Law 107-314).

Activities on identification and development of enhanced personal 
        protective equipment against blast injury (sec. 213)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
joint activities to be conducted in fiscal years 2019 and 2020 
by the Secretary of the Army and the Director, Operational Test 
and Evaluation, in collaboration with academia, to determine 
the most effective personal equipment to protect against 
injuries caused by blasts in training and combat with $10.0 
million authorized to be available to carry out joint 
activities.
    The committee notes that the Director of the Department of 
Defense (DoD) Blast Injury Research Program Coordinating Office 
established pursuant to Section 256 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) has 
a mission to ensure that effective mechanisms exist for 
focusing and coordinating DoD blast injury research efforts and 
collaboration with research expertise outside DoD. The 
committee recommends that Secretary of the Army, in his role as 
Executive Agent for Medical Research for Prevention, 
Mitigation, and Treatment of Blast Injuries ensure that the 
Office coordinates in the execution of activities mandated and 
authorized by this section.

Human factors modeling and simulation activities (sec. 214)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Army, through the Army Research Institute or the Army Futures 
Command as determined appropriate, to establish human factors 
modeling and simulation activities. The military departments 
within the Department of Defense (DOD) seek ways to provide 
warfighters and civilians with personalized assessment, 
education, and training tools; to identify and implement 
effective ways to interface and team warfighters and civilians 
with machines; to use intelligent, adaptive augmentation to 
enhance decision-making; and to develop techniques, 
technologies, and practices to mitigate critical stressors that 
impede warfighter and civilian protection, sustainment, and 
performance.
    The committee is aware of the significant possibilities 
that human factors modeling and simulation (M&S) will provide 
to the DOD when coupled with applied research in human 
simulation informed by physics-based survivability analysis 
models. Benefits of this type of M&S include enhancing 
warfighter performance and protection as well as improving 
efficiency and effectiveness in the development and procurement 
of personal protective equipment and weapons while realizing 
significant cost savings. Human factors M&S can rapidly assess 
many variables to quickly provide insights to optimize and 
integrate warfighter-based systems, including predicting 
injury, mobility, and survivability. These vital analytics 
contribute to determining the likelihood of mission success, as 
well as ways to expand training capabilities. The integration 
of physics-based human simulation, artificial intelligence, and 
clinical knowledge into systems has the potential to rapidly 
transform mission readiness and success.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
establish activities related to human factors modeling and 
simulation to maximize the effectiveness of the warfighter in 
each service, in concert with the warfighter's respective 
equipment and weapons systems. Such activities would bring 
together academia, industry, DOD science and technology, and 
DOD Program Executive Offices to accelerate research and 
development that enhances capabilities for human performance, 
human-systems integration, and training for the warfighter.

Expansion of mission areas supported by mechanisms for expedited access 
        to technical talent and expertise at academic institutions 
        (sec. 215)

    The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 
mission areas included in the authority granted in section 217 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91) to space, infrastructure resilience, and 
photonics.
    The statute that this provision would extend gave 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. The extension to new mission areas would 
allow for more connections between universities and the 
Department of Defense in priority technologies.
    The committee originally authorized this effort because of 
its concern that the Department of Defense was not optimally 
positioned to capitalize on all cross-functional aspects of 
emerging technologies that serve multiple purposes. The 
committee continues to believe 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 the 
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 the Nation's 
universities to help address the technical, engineering, and 
management challenges facing the Department.
    In using 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 the disciplines that 
directly support the efforts of the Department of Defense.

Advanced manufacturing activities (sec. 216)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to 
jointly establish activities aimed at demonstrating advanced 
manufacturing techniques and capabilities in depot-level 
activities or military arsenal facilities. Broadly, the 
committee urges the Department to consider these activities as 
part of more holistic plans to benefit from advanced 
manufacturing within its own organizations and the commercial 
sector.
    The committee recognizes the transformative potential of 
additive manufacturing, or 3-D printing, to the industrial 
supply chain and across disciplines. The ability to use new 
materials in new ways or to develop new manufacturing processes 
has the potential to transform how the Department does business 
and significantly increase system readiness. The establishment 
of new Defense Manufacturing Innovation Institutes, including 
one focused on additive manufacturing, as well as the growing 
prevalence of 3-D printers at tactical levels indicate that the 
Department sees that potential as well.
    The committee recognizes the extensive and growing reach of 
additive manufacturing within the commercial and defense 
sectors. However, additive manufacturing could also greatly 
improve the defense industrial base's ability to respond to 
military readiness demands when original equipment 
manufacturers are unable to meet or to fabricate obsolete parts 
that are no longer manufactured. Substantial room remains 
across the force to add more capacity for this type of 
capability, both to repair out-of-date equipment and to speed 
repair in order to meet urgent operational requirements.
    Therefore, this provision would require the establishment 
of not less than three activities to demonstrate these 
techniques and capabilities. These activities would include 
efforts to develop military and quality assurance standards as 
quickly as possible and leverage current manufacturing 
institutes to conduct research in the validation of quality 
standards for additive manufactured parts. To complete these 
activities, the Department may enter into cooperative 
agreements and partnerships, based on several specific 
characteristics. Ultimately, the committee urges the Department 
to further integrate advanced manufacturing capabilities and 
capacity.

National security innovation activities (sec. 217)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to 
establish activities to develop interaction between the 
Department of Defense and the commercial technology industry 
and academia with the goal of encouraging private investment in 
specific hardware technologies of interest to future defense 
technology needs with unique national security applications 
with $150.0 million authorized to be available to carry out 
such activities.
    Under this provision, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Research and Engineering may transfer such activities to a non-
profit entity to carry out the program if the Under Secretary 
can establish that a non-profit entity with sufficient private 
sector investment and personnel with the sufficient technical 
and management expertise can attract sufficient private sector 
investment, has personnel with sufficient technical and 
management expertise, and has identified relevant technologies 
and systems for potential investment in order to carry out the 
specific activities authorized.

Partnership intermediaries for promotion of defense research and 
        education (sec. 218)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories (STRL) to 
establish partnership intermediary agreements (PIA) with not-
for-profit entities or state and local government organizations 
to enable research and technology development cooperation to 
promote innovation to support defense missions. A PIA is an 
agreement, contract, or memorandum of understanding, between 
the government and an intermediary organization, such as a 
State or local governmental agency or nonprofit entity. A 
Partnership Intermediary performs services for the government 
labs that increase the likelihood of success in the conduct of 
cooperative or joint activities with small business firms, 
institutions of higher education, and industry. The PIA 
facilitates a wide range of licensing and other technology 
transfer initiatives.
    The committee notes that military capabilities are 
supported by universities and industry in the maturation of 
technologies and production of materiel solutions. Much of the 
innovation comes from partnership with small businesses and 
universities. The commercial market driving the development of 
technologies is very dynamic. Military capability solutions are 
unique and often do not have a regular commercial market 
audience. The STRLs carry out significant basic and 
developmental research, much of it in collaboration with 
academia and the private sector. The government-funded research 
efforts to address military threats are critical to reducing 
technology development risk, and, if successful, can attract 
the necessary private sector partners and support to lead to 
manufacturing and commercialization or production of defense 
systems. However, traditional federal parameters are not 
sufficiently agile and flexible to allow military laboratories 
to respond in a timely fashion to the market-driven needs of 
its private sector partners, thus discouraging the partnerships 
that can often accelerate efforts to meet these vital military 
needs.
    The committee believes that working through and in 
collaboration with partnership intermediaries provides the 
flexible supporting mechanism to effectively and efficiently 
interact with industry and academic partners to support better 
sharing of intellectual property, technical expertise, and 
research and testing facilities between interested public and 
private sector partners.

Limitation on use of funds for Surface Navy Laser Weapon System (sec. 
        219)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit funds 
to exceed a procurement quantity of one Surface Navy Laser 
Weapon System (SNLWS), also known as the High Energy Laser and 
Integrated Optical-dazzler with Surveillance (HELIOS), per 
fiscal year, unless the Secretary of the Navy submits a report 
to the congressional defense committees.
    The committee understands that Navy officials designated 
SNLWS/HELIOS as the first rapid prototyping, experimentation 
and demonstration (RPED) project. The committee further notes 
that, on January 26, 2018, the Navy awarded a $150.0 million 
contract for SNLWS Increment 1, HELIOS systems. Under this 
contract, the contractor will develop, manufacture, and deliver 
two test units in fiscal year 2020. The committee further 
understands this contract includes options for up to 14 
additional production units, which, if exercised, would bring 
the cumulative contract value to $942.8 million.
    If the cumulative contract value is reached, expenditures 
under this program may exceed the Acquisition Category (ACAT) 
I-thresholds for research, development, test, and evaluation 
(RDT&E), including significant production. However, the 
committee has not yet received sufficient information on the 
requirements, acquisition plan, test plan, funding profile, and 
cost estimate to enable appropriate oversight.
    The committee supports accelerated acquisition approaches, 
such as RPED. However, accelerated approaches, especially those 
that may expend significant resources and enter into 
production, such as SNLWS/HELIOS, must adhere to sound 
acquisition principles. Accordingly, this provision would 
direct the Secretary of the Navy to certify how SNLWS is 
incorporating those principles prior to exceeding the 
procurement rate of one SNLWS/HELIOS per year, including: a 
requirements document, acquisition plan, test plan, funding 
profile, and cost estimate. The committee encourages the Navy 
to tailor the certification materials to the extent provided 
for by existing flexibilities in acquisition law or regulation.

Expansion of coordination requirement for support for national security 
        innovation and entrepreneurial education (sec. 220)

    The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 
list of entities with whom the Secretary of Defense, acting 
through the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering, may coordinate and partner in order to support 
national security innovation and entrepreneurial education.

Limitation on funding for Amphibious Combat Vehicle 1.2 (sec. 221)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit all 
of the funds authorized for the Amphibious Combat Vehicle 1.2 
from being obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense 
provides the required report identified in the section titled 
Report on the Highest-priority roles and missions of the 
Department of Defense and the Armed Forces.

Defense quantum information science and technology research and 
        development program (sec. 222)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
defense quantum information science and technology research and 
development program aimed at ensuring that the U.S. military is 
able to most effectively leverage the technological 
capabilities enable by quantum science and technology to meet 
future military missions. The effort would be led by the 
Undersecretary for Defense for Research and Engineering. The 
committee notes that research and development activities in 
quantum science shows the promise of: (1) Producing computers 
that will exceed the capabilities of all known traditional 
computers; (2) Enabling communication systems that enhance 
cryptography and the speed of communications; and (3) 
Developing measurement devices and sensors with heretofore 
unachievable precision and sensitivity. All of these will have 
significant impacts in the commercial sector, as well as in 
military systems.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
has been investing in research and development in quantum 
information science and technology for many years, and has 
recently begun to ramp up those investments. The committee has 
also increased funding for these efforts in this bill. Private 
industry has significantly increased their investments in 
quantum science, in an attempt to pursue commercial 
applications. The committee's provision is intended to provide 
a strategic framework for DOD activities in this area, to help 
ensure U.S. superiority in the field, especially with respect 
to national security missions and systems.
    The provision calls for coordination of quantum science 
research activities within the Department as well as 
encouraging robust interagency collaboration. For example, the 
committee notes that both the Department of Energy national 
laboratories and the Department of Commerce's National 
Institute of Standards and Technology have significant 
capability in quantum science which can contribute to DOD 
research and development efforts. It further calls for 
developing procedures for the effective transition of quantum 
science-enabled capabilities into deployed systems, and to 
support efforts to establish robust industrial and technical 
capabilities in the government and private sector, including 
facilities an infrastructure needed to sustain quantum 
research.
    To focus the research portfolio, the provision recommends 
the establishment of a set of technical challenges that are 
consistent with expert analysis of the state of quantum 
research and its ability to enable advanced military 
capabilities, such as in data analysis, cryptography, and 
sensing. Due to concerns with the diffusion of quantum science 
research knowledge and intellectual property to peer 
competitors, the provision directs the Undersecretary to 
develop classification guidance and data management strategies 
for the appropriate protection on information. The committee 
notes that the Undersecretary must strike an appropriate 
balance between protecting national security secrets, and 
ensuring that the government, industry, and academic community 
can engage in open research and innovation as is necessary to 
advance the field.

Joint directed energy test activities (sec. 223)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
coordination and enhancement of directed energy test 
activities. The committee notes that next generation directed 
energy weapon systems are being developed by the Department of 
Defense (DOD) and industry but the Nation's infrastructure for 
testing those weapon systems is antiquated and in need of 
modernization.
    The Department 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 
workload and number of directed energy demonstrations and 
exercises have increased significantly since 1975 and the 
projected workload for fiscal years 2018-2022 for HELSTF is 
large and growing, and has expanded to include high-powered 
microwave testing. Given these trends, this provision would 
require the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering to focus on management and acceleration of directed 
energy testing activities. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee 
recommends additional funding to initiate the modernization of 
directed energy infrastructure and test activities.
    The committee applauds the Air Force for proposing plans 
for joint testing activities, which could potentially focus 
government expertise and reduce duplication of effort across 
the DOD, thus supporting more rapid and cost effective testing 
and fielding of directed energy weapon systems. The committee 
believes that doing so could also allow for broad, standardized 
collection and evaluation of data to establish test references 
and support acquisition and policy decisions in a more reliable 
fashion.

Requirement for establishment of arrangements for expedited access to 
        technical talent and expertise at academic institutions to 
        support Department of Defense missions (sec. 224)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
establishment of arrangements for expedited access to talent 
and expertise at academic institutions to support Department of 
Defense missions.

Authority for Joint Directed Energy Transition Office to conduct 
        research relating to high powered microwave capabilities (sec. 
        225)

    The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 
purview of the Joint Directed Energy Transition Office to 
include research relating to high powered microwave 
capabilities.

Joint artificial intelligence research, development, and transition 
        activities (sec. 226)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD 
(R&E)) to focus and coordinate Department of Defense (DOD) 
efforts on artificial intelligence. Focus in these areas should 
encompass coordination among the Services and the development 
of a comprehensive strategy for the DOD.

                 Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters

Report on comparative capabilities of adversaries in key technology 
        areas (sec. 231)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, in coordination 
with relevant partners, to complete a report that directly 
compares United States capabilities in near-term emerging 
technology (e.g., hypersonic weapons, directed energy) and 
longer-term emerging technology (e.g., artificial intelligence, 
quantum information sciences) with that of U.S. adversaries. 
This report should include relative spending information, 
evaluations of quality and quantity of research, test 
infrastructure and workforce, evaluations of technical 
progress, timelines for operational deployment, and an 
assessment of adversary intent or willingness to use the 
specified technology.

Report on active protection systems for armored combat and tactical 
        vehicles (sec. 232)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on 
the technologies related to active protection systems for 
armored combat and tactical vehicles no later than 60 days 
after the enactment of this Act.
    The committee notes that the Army has conducted detailed 
testing of three active protection systems on the M1A2 Abrams, 
M2A3 Bradley, and STRYKER. Accordingly, the committee directs 
the Secretary of the Army to report on the effectiveness of the 
systems tested, plans for future testing, proposals for future 
development, and a timeline for fielding. The Secretary should 
include plans for how the Army will incorporate active 
protection systems into new armored combat and tactical vehicle 
designs such as Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF), Armored 
Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV), and Next Generation Combat 
Vehicle (NGCV).

Next Generation Combat Vehicle (sec. 233)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on 
the development of the Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) no 
later than 60 days after the enactment of this bill into law.
    The committee is concerned that there is insufficient 
analysis to support the requirements for the NGCV, including 
consideration of threats and terrain, and that the requirements 
may not be relevant to the National Defense Strategy (NDS). 
Furthermore, the committee views this combat vehicle as a 
replacement to the aging Bradley fighting vehicle and believes 
it should be optimized for close combat maneuver, agile 
exploitation and transport of mechanized infantry as part of an 
armored, combined arms team.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary of the 
Army to use all available acquisition authorities, to the 
fullest extent possible, to build a ground combat vehicle 
prototype with the potential to be rapidly produced and 
fielded. The committee expects the Army to exploit modern 
component technologies that can dramatically change basic 
combat vehicle design to improve lethality, protection, 
mobility, range, and sustainment. Such technologies could 
include vehicle active protection systems, reactive armor, 
composite armor, thermal signature reduction, noise reduction, 
fuel cell propulsion, opposed-piston engines, advanced 
transmissions, suspension, power generation, voltage 
management, 3rd generation forward looking infrared sights, 
integrated hostile fire detection, manned-unmanned teaming, 
automatic loaders, extended range top attack munitions, and 
cannons. The committee also encourages the Secretary to pursue 
an open system architecture to allow for future development. 
Finally, this prototype should possess sufficient power, design 
and other capabilities to enable the manned vehicle to control 
unmanned vehicles, when applicable.
    The committee directs the Secretary to fully enable the 
Army's Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering 
Center (TARDEC) to develop an NGCV prototype based on their 
work to date. To support this effort, the committee believes 
TARDEC should be granted needed funds and authorities to 
develop a separate prototyping effort. The committee would 
require the amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
year 2019 for the Department of Defense by section 201 and 
available for research, development, test, and evaluation, 
Army, PE 63645A, for NGCV, not more than 50 percent may be 
obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Army submits 
to congressional defense committees the report.

Report on the future of the defense research and engineering enterprise 
        (sec. 234)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD 
(R&E)) to conduct a review of the defense research and 
engineering enterprise.
    Section 901 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) established the position 
of USD (R&E) in order to serve as Chief Technology Officer for 
the Department of Defense and to oversee the research and 
engineering enterprise. The committee believes that this role 
should be charged with solving enterprise-wide challenges 
facing the Department of Defense and so tasks the position with 
recommending solutions for improving the enterprise's success 
in a changing environment.
    The technological world has changed significantly over the 
past decades. Commercial investment in technology has increased 
exponentially, the U.S. government's challenges with recruiting 
and retaining a qualified technical workforce have grown, the 
diffusion of technology around the world has occurred rapidly, 
and the rate at which technology within the Department of 
Defense moves from discovery to deployment in operational 
systems has plunged. Given these changes, the committee 
believes that the Department would benefit from a strategic 
review of its research and engineering enterprise, including 
the military department science and technology organizations, 
the Department of Defense laboratories, the test ranges, the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Defense 
Innovation Unit Experimental, the Strategic Capabilities 
Office, and the Small Business Innovation Research program.
    The Defense Science Board (DSB) concluded a thorough and 
insightful review of this enterprise in January 2017 and found 
that the labs continue to fulfill vital missions on behalf of 
the warfighter but that they must also adapt their mission to 
continue to serve and ready themselves for evolving needs. The 
report includes a clear dictate that ``OSD [the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense] must actively champion and support the 
labs and Congress must continue working with the Department to 
simplify the regulatory environment in which the labs 
operate.''
    The committee sees this provision as formally endorsing the 
DSB's recommendation for attention to the challenges facing the 
laboratories, but, given the expansive purview of the USD 
(R&E), recommends that the scope of this study widen. The 
committee urges the USD (R&E) to identify any current 
impediments to effectiveness and recommend, where necessary, 
legislative actions for fixes. The committee is eager to use 
this report to ensure the relevance of defense research and 
engineering in a changing world.

Modification of reports on mechanisms to provide funds to defense 
        laboratories for research and development of technologies for 
        military missions (sec. 235)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend the 
existing reporting requirement for funding provided to defense 
laboratories under existing authorities to a continuous 
requirement as opposed to an annual report. The committee 
remains committed to the use of these authorities but believes 
that the reporting will be more impactful if continuously 
collected and disseminated across a broader audience, including 
senior officials, academia, and industry.

Report on Mobile Protected Firepower and Future Vertical Lift (sec. 
        236)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on 
the requirements for Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) and 
Future Vertical Lift (FVL) no later than 60 days after the 
enactment of this Act.
    In light of the National Defense Strategy (NDS), the 
committee is concerned the Army is making significant 
investments in advance weapons systems that may not be suitable 
for a high intensity, combined arms battlefield. Therefore, the 
committee would like to understand how MPF and FVL would 
improve offensive overmatch against a peer adversary and how 
these systems could survive the effects of anti-armor and anti-
aircraft networks established within anti-access, area-denial 
defenses. In addition, if the purpose for MPF and FVL is to 
support light infantry brigades, the committee requests 
additional details of these requirements. Finally, the report 
would detail the total number of systems needed, how these 
systems will be logistically supported within light formations, 
and plans to integrate active protection systems into their 
designs.

Improvement of the Air Force supply chain (sec. 237)

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics to use nontraditional technologies, 
such as additive manufacturing, artificial intelligence, and 
other software-intensive capabilities, to increase the 
availability of aircraft and decrease backlogs for the 
production of spare parts for such aircraft. This provision 
would also allow the Assistant Secretary to advance the 
qualification and integration of additive manufacturing into 
the Air Force supply chain, reduce supply chain risk, and 
define workforce development requirements and training for 
personnel who implement and support additive manufacturing for 
the Air Force. The committee notes that the provision would 
also authorize $42.8 million as denoted in the funding tables 
accompanying this Act for such purposes.

Review of guidance on blast exposure during training (sec. 238)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to review the firing limits of heavy 
weapons during training exercises and provide a report no later 
than 180 days after enactment of this Act reviewing the 
cognitive effects of said blast exposure.

List of technologies and manufacturing capabilities critical to Armed 
        Forces (sec. 239)

    The committee recognizes that maintaining technological 
superiority is critical to U.S. military and foreign policy 
strategy. Each year, the Department of Defense spends billions 
of dollars to develop and acquire advanced technologies in 
order to maintain U.S. superiority. While the sale or transfer 
of these technologies is permitted and facilitated to allies, 
partners, and other foreign parties in order to promote U.S. 
national security, foreign policy, and economic interests, 
these technologies can also be targets for theft, espionage, 
reverse engineering, or illegal export. In an increasingly 
globalized and competition-defined world, safeguarding critical 
technologies from malfeasance and use by our adversaries or 
competitors is of strategic significance to U.S. national 
security.
    The committee is concerned that the Department has replaced 
the Militarily Critical Technologies Program with other 
processes to determine which technologies are critical and how 
they should be protected to ensure consistency with U.S. 
interests. The committee also believes that the outcomes from 
the current processes for determining critical technologies may 
be underutilized and may fail in their purpose of informing 
export decisions if not properly utilized or properly 
integrated with other stakeholder agencies.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to develop a list of militarily critical technologies and 
manufacturing capabilities. The primary emphasis of this list 
should be given to: (1) Research, development, design, and 
manufacturing expertise; (2) Research, development, design, and 
manufacturing expertise equipment and unique facilities; and 
(3) Goods and services associated with or enabled by 
sophisticated research, development, operation, application, 
manufacturing, or maintenance expertise, which are not 
possessed by countries to which exports are controlled and 
which, if exported or otherwise transferred, would permit a 
significant advance in the military capabilities of any such 
country. Upon development no later than December 31, 2019, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to use the list to 
guide Department recommendations in any interagency 
determinations on exercising export licensing, technology 
transfer, or foreign investment.

Report on requiring access to digital technical data in future 
        acquisitions of combat, combat service, and combat support 
        systems (sec. 240)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prepare and submit a report regarding 
access to digital technical data, to include that which is 
necessary to support the production of three-dimensional 
printed parts.

Competitive acquisition strategy for Bradley Fighting Vehicle 
        transmission replacement (sec. 241)

    This provision requires the Secretary of the Army to submit 
to the congressional defense committees, not later than 
February 15, 2019, a strategy to competitively procure a new 
transmission for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle family of 
vehicles, to include the Armored Multipurpose Vehicle and the 
Paladin Integrated Management artillery system. Additionally, 
no funds may be appropriated for a Bradley Fighting Vehicle 
replacement transmission until 30 days after the Secretary of 
the Army submits its strategy to the congressional defense 
committees.

Independent assessment of electronic warfare plans and programs (sec. 
        242)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with the 
scientific advisory group ``JASON'' to produce an independent 
assessment of: U.S. electronic warfare strategies, programs, 
order of battle, and doctrine and adversary strategies, 
programs, order of battle, doctrine, including recommendations 
for improvement. The committee recognizes that the United 
States has a significant comparative military disadvantage 
against our peer competitors in aspects of the electronic 
warfare mission and in the conduct of joint electro-magnetic 
spectrum operations.
    The provision would require an independent assessment of 
both U.S. and adversary electronic warfare plans and programs. 
This should include an assessment of the electronic warfare 
strategies, programs, resources and doctrine of the U.S. and 
its potential adversaries. For the U.S. it should also include 
an assessment of what capabilities non-Department of Defense 
entities, to include allies and partners, can provide. Finally 
the assessment should include recommendations for improvements.
    The provision would require that the JASON scientific 
advisory group conduct the assessment but allows for the 
Secretary to enter into an agreement with an alternate 
assessment group. The assessment shall be completed with a 
report of findings and recommendations to the congressional 
defense committees by October 1, 2019.

                              Budget Items

                                  Army

Army defense research sciences

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $276.9 
million was for PE 61102A Defense Research Sciences, Army for 
fundamental scientific knowledge related to long-term national 
security needs.
    The committee notes that basic research activities focused 
on 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5 
million, for a total of $284.4 million, in RDT&E Army, PE 
61102A, for basic research. The committee directs that these 
funds be awarded through well-established and competitive 
processes.

Army quantum information sciences

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$276.9 million was for PE 61102A Defense Research Sciences, 
Army, for fundamental scientific knowledge related to long-term 
national security needs.
    The committee notes the transformative potential of quantum 
information sciences, with potential impacts across disciplines 
as diverse as cryptography and sensing. In competition with 
near-peer adversaries, such cutting-edge technology will become 
increasingly critical.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $281.9 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
61102A, for research on quantum information sciences.

University and industry research centers

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $92.1 
million was for PE 61104A University and Industry Research 
Centers, Army.
    The committee notes that this basic research 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 to the Army. The committee is 
specifically encouraged by the efforts associated with the Army 
Research Laboratory's Open Campus initiative.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $97.1 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
61104A. The committee directs that these funds be awarded 
through well-established and competitive processes.

Sensors and electronic survivability

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $32.3 
million was for PE 62120A Defense Research Sciences, Army, for 
sensors and electronic survivability.
    The committee notes that this program accelerates the 
Army's work to enhance industrial base capabilities for 
improving weapon system performance, speed, fuel efficiency, 
and force protection. Such innovations ultimately aim to reduce 
part assemblies, decrease lifecycle costs, and enable point-of 
need part production.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $37.3 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
62120A, to support tool and material process development.

Aviation technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $64.8 
million was for PE 62211A 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $59.9 million, in RDT&E Army, PE 
62211A, in mission systems and engine and drives coordination, 
and recommends that the Army look for opportunities to increase 
collaboration and coordination with other Services and research 
programs on aviation technology.

Weapons and munitions technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $40.4 
million was for PE 62624A weapons and munitions technology.
    The Nation is being challenged to maintain dominance across 
all domains as our adversaries have continued to develop and 
advance their military capabilities that threaten the U.S. 
homeland. To address these priorities, the Army Armament 
Research, Development and Engineering Center continues to 
invest in additive manufacturing technology to rapidly design, 
prototype, and manufacture critical novel printed armaments 
components. By advancing printed electronics, energetics, and 
power sources, size and weight of munition components can be 
reduced, freeing up valuable internal space for increased 
lethality payloads, support range, and precision guidance to 
maximize weapon systems' capabilities while reducing operations 
and cost. With collaborations across the Services, the long-
term goal of this effort is to develop the ability to fully 
print munitions on a single production line in an ammunition 
plant, increasing the U.S. Armed Forces' readiness. This effort 
will also demonstrate the ability to print replacement parts, 
customizable grenades that will provide both fragmentation and 
blast, embedded electronics in clothing, and antennae on 
soldiers' helmets.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $42.9 million, in RDT&E Army, PE 
62624A, for advanced warheads technology.

Human factors engineering technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $24.1 
million was for PE 62716A human factors engineering technology.
    Human factors engineering technology seeks ways to provide 
warfighters with personalized assessment, education, and 
training tools; to identify and implement effective ways to 
interface and team warfighters with machines; to use 
intelligent, adaptive augmentation to enhance decision making; 
and to develop techniques, technologies, and practices to 
mitigate critical stressors that impede warfighter protection, 
sustainment, and performance. The committee is aware of the 
significant possibilities that human factors modeling and 
simulation will provide to the DOD when coupled with applied 
research in human simulation that utilizes physics-based 
survivability analysis models. These vital analytics contribute 
to determining the likelihood of mission success as well as 
ways to expand training capabilities. The integration of 
physics-based human simulation, artificial intelligence, and 
clinical knowledge into the Department's warfighter systems has 
the potential to rapidly transform mission readiness and 
success.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $26.6 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
62716A, for human factors engineering.

Command, Control, and Communications technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $55.0 
million was for PE 62782A Command, Control, and Communications 
technology.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to 
continue supporting the development and advancement of 
technologies that address: the increasing gaps in position, 
navigation, and timing architectural and technological 
development; Global Positioning System vulnerabilities; and 
adversary navigation warfare capabilities. However, the 
committee is concerned that the activities described within 
this program element are duplicative across the Services.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $50.0 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
62782A command, control and communications technology.

Aviation advanced technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$124.9 million was for PE 63003A aviation advanced technology.
    The committee notes that, of this amount, the total 
requested for platform design and structures system represents 
a more than doubling of this project's budget from past fiscal 
years. 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $119.9 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63003A, for platform design and structures systems.

Extended Range Cannon Artillery gun

    The budget request included $10.2 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$102.7 million was for PE 63004A Weapons and Munitions Advanced 
Technology.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million, for 
a total of $122.7 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 63004A, for the 
acceleration of the development of the Extended Range Cannon 
Artillery gun.

Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$119.7 million was for PE 63005A combat vehicle and automotive 
advanced technology.
    The committee understands that Army Tank Automotive 
Research, Development, and Engineering Center (TARDEC) spends 
hundreds of millions of dollars annually on improving the 
performance of vehicles. Fuel reduction is a critical objective 
to reduce fuel consumption and reduce the requirements for 
large convoys to deliver fuel to deployed forces. The committee 
believes that TARDEC should fund an effort to demonstrate leap-
ahead technology for fuel reduction.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $122.2 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63005A, for modular scalable powertrain.

Army Next Generation Combat Vehicle Prototype

    The budget request included $10.2 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$119.7 million was for PE 63005A Combat Vehicle and Automotive 
Advanced Technology.
    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 the Army must rapidly develop a 
prototype next generation combat vehicle to replace the aging 
Bradley fighting vehicle. The committee notes that the Army's 
Tank Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center 
(TARDEC) has done significant market surveys of the world's 
best modern component technologies, fabricated a prototype 
hull, and produced a virtual design concept. The committee 
believes that the TARDEC should be given all needed funding and 
authorities to continue this prototyping effort with technology 
developers, operational users, testers, and commercial sector 
partners.
    The committee recommends an increase of $70.0 million, for 
a total of $189.7 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 63005A, for the 
Combat Vehicle and Automotive Advanced Technology to prototype 
the next generation combat vehicle.

High performance computing modernization program

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $183.3 
million was for PE 63461A 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 increase the research 
and development budget toward the level of that appropriated in 
fiscal year 2018. 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 $7.0 billion to develop and implement 
this unique, world-class national computing asset for the DOD. 
It 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $188.3 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63461A, for high performance computing.

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation funds for minor Science and 
        Technology military construction

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $25.8 
million was for PE 63734A military engineering advanced 
technology.
    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91), the committee urged the Department of 
Defense to invest in its military construction accounts for 
science and technology facilities, as well as those used for 
test and evaluation. Unfortunately, these projects generally 
fall victim to low prioritization, despite their major value to 
the Department's mission.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million, for a total of $33.8 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63734A, for minor military construction projects for science- 
and technology-related facilities. The committee adds these 
funds in order to fund the request for Target Assembly Facility 
(92422) and Climactic Chamber Building (92344), both minor 
military construction projects with science and technology 
uses. The committee strongly encourages the Army to ensure 
coordination regarding the appropriate planning and design 
occurs so that these projects are executable.

Military engineering advanced technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $25.8 
million was for PE 63734A military engineering advanced 
technology.
    The committee notes that centrifuge-based research has 
allowed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to test small-scale 
physical models of bridges, piers, and other installations and 
resulted in engineering improvements to new facilities. 
Additional funding is justified to expand the existing 
centrifuge capacity, as this research accelerates engineering 
advances with more efficiency and at lower cost.
    Further, the committee recognizes the transformative 
potential of additive manufacturing, or 3-D printing, to the 
industrial supply chain and across disciplines. The ability to 
use new materials in new ways or to develop new manufacturing 
processes has the potential to transform how the Department 
does business and significantly increase warfighter system 
readiness.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $30.8 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63734A, for centrifuge research and additive manufacturing.

Position, navigation and timing technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $34.9 
million was for PE 63772A advanced tactical computer science 
and sensor technology.
    Near-peer adversaries, such as the Russian Federation and 
People's Republic of China, have taken note of American 
dependence on Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) technology 
and have heavily invested in navigation warfare technologies 
that can congest, degrade, jam, spoof, and eliminate Global 
Positioning Systems (GPS). Advancing assured PNT technologies 
for operation in a GPS-denied or -degraded environment are 
essential to the warfighter's ability to maintain overmatch in 
a multi-domain battlefield. This program element addresses the 
critical technological gaps that U.S. and coalition operations 
face in hostile, GPS-denied environments and will mature PNT 
situational awareness analysis tools that deliver PNT integrity 
monitoring, dissemination of time-related data, as well as 
hardware and software solutions to augment PNT for mounted and 
dismounted platforms.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $37.4 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63772A, for PNT research and development.

Command, Control, and Communication advanced technology

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $52.4 
million was for PE 63794A Command, Control, and Communication 
(C3) advanced technology.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to 
continue supporting the development and advancement of 
technologies that address: the increasing gaps in position, 
navigation, and timing architectural and technological 
development; Global Positioning System vulnerabilities; and 
adversary navigation warfare capabilities. However, the 
committee is concerned that the activities described within 
this program element are duplicative across the Services.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $47.4 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63794A.

Anti-Personnel Improved Conventional Munition

    The budget request included $10.2 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which, 
$42.0 million was for PE 63639A tank and medium caliber 
ammunition.
    The committee recommends an increase of $14.0 million, for 
a total of $56.0 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 63639A, for the 
test and evaluation of the M999 Anti-Personnel Improved 
Conventional Munition to verify its compliance with the 
Department's policy on cluster munition. This request was 
included on the Army's unfunded priorities list.

Tactical Exploitation of National Capabilities Radio Frequency 
        Exploitation-Electronic Intelligence

    The budget request included $10.2 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $35.7 
million was for PE 63766A Tactical Exploitation of National 
Capabilities Radio Frequency Exploitation (TRFE)-Electronic 
Intelligence (ELINT).
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to develop 
and experiment with prototypes that can be developed into 
suitable, survivable, and effective intelligence systems for 
support of the Army Field Artillery. The committee is aware of 
the plan to modernize the Army Field Artillery. The committee 
acknowledges that the development and fielding of Long Range 
Precision Fires (LRPF) is the Army's first priority for 
modernization. The committee, however, is concerned that Army 
Intelligence is not actively developing a capability to provide 
effective, suitable, and survivable intelligence, surveillance, 
and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities for the Field Artillery. 
This ISR must be able to detect, locate, classify, identify, 
and confirm long-range targets. This is particularly important 
for engagement by long-range cannon and rocket batteries for 
attacking enemy targets deep within enemy defensive sectors and 
support zones. In light of requirements as detailed in the 
National Defense Strategy, the Army must rapidly field 
effective, suitable, and survivable ISR capabilities to support 
the Army Field Artillery.
    The committee encourages the Secretary to exploit existing 
hardware and specialized software to support experimentation 
and testing. The Secretary should seek to transition as rapidly 
as possible to a program of record for an accelerated 
production decision.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million, for a total of $43.7 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
63766A, for TRFE-ELINT.

Indirect Fire Protection Capability

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $51.0 
million was for PE 64319A Indirect Fire Protection Capability 
Increment 2-Intercept (IFPC).
    While the Army continues to deprioritize IFPC, critical 
capabilities, such as cruise missile defense of fixed stations, 
are nonexistent. In too many respects, the Army Missile Defense 
(AMD) forces fielded today fall considerably short of being an 
effective foundation for the kind of conflict envisioned by the 
National Defense Strategy, and, while air and missile threats 
have become more capable and complex, U.S. AMD capabilities 
have undergone only a modest modernization.
    In order to accelerate and prioritize the IFPC program, the 
committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million, for a total 
of $81.0 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 64319A.

Mobile Protected Firepower

    The budget request included $10.2 billion for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$393.6 million was for PE 64645A Mobile Protected Firepower 
(MPF).
    The committee recognizes the importance of the Army's 
efforts to modernize and to be better prepared to execute the 
National Defense Strategy. The Army has made clear its 
modernization priorities in order to rapidly build capabilities 
needed for combined arms maneuver against a peer adversary. The 
committee is concerned that the MPF is not suited for a high-
intensity battlefield.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $75.0 million, for a 
total of $318.6 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 64645A, for MPF.

Suite of Vehicle Protection Systems-EMD (Vehicle Protection Suite 
        Project)

    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 IB 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 active protection system (APS) will 
provide a balanced framework that both increases lethality and 
protection for the warfighter. As the Army transitions APS onto 
ground combat vehicles through the Vehicle Protection System, 
it will require the incorporation of a laser warning sensor 
suite onto the system.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 
million to Army Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, line 
117 for Suite of Vehicle Protection Systems-EMD, and an 
additional decrease of $9.0 million, for a total decrease of 
$324.0 million, from Army Procurement of Weapons & Tracked 
Combat Vehicles, line number 6 for the Bradley Program MOD.

Army contract writing system

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $41.9 
million was for PE 65047A Army Contract Writing System.
    The committee is concerned about duplication among the 
Services in contract writing systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $41.9 
million, for a total of $0.0 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
65047A.

Major T&E investment

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $91.8 
million was for PE 64759A major test and evaluation investment.
    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91), this committee urged the Department 
of Defense to invest in its military construction accounts for 
science and technology facilities, as well as those used for 
test and evaluation. Unfortunately, these projects generally 
fall victim to low prioritization, despite their major value to 
the Department's mission.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million, for a total of $116.8 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
64759A, for minor military construction projects for science- 
and technology-related facilities. The committee adds these 
funds in order to fund the request for Armament Test Ops and 
Analysis Facility (58467), Guana Peak Site (63191), EMI RDT&E 
(87871), HPM Building 21245 (60556), Lift and Tiedown Test 
Facility Modernization (91080), Guided Missile Building 
(85286), and Braking and Maneuver Facility (60832), all minor 
military construction projects with science and technology 
uses.
    The committee strongly encourages the Army to ensure that 
coordination regarding the appropriate planning and design 
occurs so that these projects are executable.

High energy laser testing

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which 
$306.0 million was for PE 65601A Army Test Ranges and 
Facilities.
    The committee notes that next generation weapon systems are 
being developed by the Department of Defense and its defense 
industry partners but the Nation's infrastructure for testing 
those weapon systems is antiquated and in need of 
modernization. As directed energy weapon systems mature, the 
need to validate their performance becomes increasingly 
important. The committee notes that the workload and number of 
directed energy demonstrations and exercises have increased 
significantly since 1975 and the projected workload for fiscal 
years 2018 through 2022 is significant.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million, for a total of $321.0 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
65601A, to accelerate the testing of those weapon systems.

                                  Navy

Navy basic research initiatives

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$119.4 million was for PE 61103N university research 
initiatives.
    Basic research is critical to the development of next 
generation naval capabilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $124.4 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
61103N, for basic research. The committee directs that these 
funds be awarded through well-established and competitive 
processes.

Navy defense research sciences

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$458.7 million was for PE 61153N defense research sciences.
    The committee notes that basic research activities serve to 
help train the next generation of scientists and engineers who 
may work on defense technology problems in government, 
industry, and academia.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $463.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
61153N, for basic research. The committee directs that these 
funds be awarded through well-established and competitive 
processes.

Navy quantum information sciences

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$458.7 million was for PE 61153N defense research sciences.
    The committee notes the transformative potential of quantum 
information sciences, with potential impacts across disciplines 
as diverse as cryptography and sensing. In competition with 
near-peer adversaries, such cutting-edge technology will become 
increasingly critical.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $463.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
61153N, for quantum information sciences.

Directed energy applied research

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $14.6 
million was for PE 62114N power projection applied research.
    The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy 
specifically highlights the importance of directed energy and 
the potential that it holds for future operational 
capabilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $17.1 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
62114N, power projection applied research.

Warfighter sustainment applied research

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $56.1 
million was for PE 62236N warfighter sustainment applied 
research.
    The request includes significant growth in Office of Naval 
Research Global (ONR Global). Though ONR Global's mission is 
undoubtedly important, the committee urges additional 
resourcing to go directly toward National Defense Strategy-
aligned priorities as opposed to significantly growing this 
organization.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.5 
million, for a total of $48.6 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
62236N.

Undersea warfare applied research

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $58.0 
million was for PE 62747N undersea warfare applied research.
    The committee continues to recognize the importance of 
building strong partnerships between Navy research labs, 
academia, and shipyards that build our nation's submarines. The 
committee encourages 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 well-defined 
submarine and autonomous undersea vehicle research, needs, 
accelerated technology transition projects, and workforce 
development to help ensure a sustainable industrial base. The 
committee encourages projects that aim to reduce manufacturing 
costs.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million, for a total of $78.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
62747N, undersea warfare applied research.

Innovative Naval prototypes--applied research

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$159.7 million was for PE 62792N applied research in Innovative 
Naval Prototypes.
    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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $164.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
62792N, for directed energy, electronic warfare, and unmanned 
and autonomous systems.

USMC advanced technology demonstration

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$150.2 million was for PE 63640M United States Marine Corps 
Advanced Technology Demonstration.
    The committee notes that, of this amount, a significant 
increase 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. The committee is concerned that such an 
increase is unjustified and cannot be absorbed through the work 
identified in the project description.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 
million, for a total of $140.2 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63640M, for unjustified growth.

Innovative Naval prototypes--advanced technology development

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$161.8 million was for PE 63801N advanced technology 
development in Innovative Naval Prototypes.
    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. The committee notes that undersea warfare 
capabilities are a key component of Navy modernization plans.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.5 
million, for a total of $166.3 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63801N, for directed energy, electronic warfare, and unmanned 
and autonomous systems.

Advanced combat systems technology

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $59.7 
million was for PE 63382N advanced combat systems technology.
    The committee is encouraged by the projects taken on within 
the advanced combat systems program element. The Low-Cost UAV 
Swarming Technology (LOCUST) program involves building a 
launcher that could send dozens of drones out of a tube in a 
swarm designed to ``autonomously overwhelm an adversary.'' The 
Heterogeneous Collaborative Unmanned Systems (HCUS) 
demonstration is part of the Effector Grid category for small 
autonomous systems. HCUS provides autonomous, tactical 
monitoring of an adversary's port-sized littoral area for an 
extended period of time with capability to apply limited 
offensive effects on-demand. The committee urges the Navy to 
continue funding these projects and others in this program 
element.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $62.2 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63382N, for LOCUST, HCUS, and Innovative Naval Prototype 
Transition.

Surface and shallow water mine countermeasures

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $62.7 
million was for PE 63502N surface and shallow water mine 
countermeasures.
    The committee notes that, on April 17, 2018, the Navy 
awarded an $83.3 million contract for the design, test, and 
deployment of the Barracuda mine neutralization system. If all 
options are exercised, the committee understands that this 
contract includes options to design and deliver 750 Barracuda 
Engineering Development Models (EDMs) with a cumulative 
contract value of $362.7 million.
    The committee further notes that the Barracuda Preliminary 
Design Review and Critical Design Review (CDR) are scheduled 
for fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2021 respectively. The 
committee believes that the award of Barracuda EDMs should be 
delayed until an approved CDR drawing is achieved.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $26.0 
million, for a total of $36.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63502N, for surface and shallow water mine countermeasures.

Advanced submarine system development

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$109.0 million was for PE 63561N advanced submarine system 
development.
    The committee understands advanced submarine propulsion 
development could be accelerated, if additional funds were 
available. The committee believes accelerating and expanding 
the use of composite materials, where appropriate, could enable 
significant warfighting and acquisition advantages in the 
construction of submarines.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.5 
million, for a total of $112.6 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63561N, for advanced submarine system development.

Common Hull Auxiliary Multi-mission Platform acceleration 

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $89.4 
million was for PE 63563N ship concept advanced design.
    The committee notes $18.0 million of this request is in 
project 4037 for Common Hull Auxiliary Multi-mission Platform 
(CHAMP) industry studies, which will lead to a domestic common-
hull design to replace aging mission-specific sealift and 
auxiliary designs. The committee understands that the CHAMP is 
a key element of sealift and auxiliary ship recapitalization. 
The committee further notes a March 2018 report to Congress 
stated, ``CHAMP procurement could accelerate to as early as 
fiscal year 2023 with funding and congressional support.'' The 
committee further notes that the Navy has stated that $18.0 
million would be necessary to support such acceleration.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $18.0 
million, for a total of $107.4 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63563N, for ship concept advanced design.

Littoral Combat Ship mission modules

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$103.6 million was for PE 63596N Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) 
mission modules.
    The committee believes activities supporting the LCS mine 
countermeasures mission module should be consolidated in this 
program element or in a new LCS mine countermeasures mission 
module program element.
    Therefore, the committee recommends the transfer of: $7.6 
million from PE 64127N (surface mine countermeasures), $10.1 
million from PE 64126N (littoral airborne mine 
countermeasures), and $16.7 million from PE 64028N (small and 
medium unmanned undersea vehicles).
    Additionally, the committee notes the USS Jackson (LCS-6) 
surface-to-surface missile module test has been deferred and 
recommends a decrease of $5.0 million.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $29.4 
million, for a total of $133.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
63596N, for LCS mission modules.

Land attack technology

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $15.5 
million was for PE 63795N land attack technology.
    The committee notes a program delay and no future years 
funding for the Gun Launched Guided Projectile, despite plans 
to publish a Request for Proposals in fiscal year 2019 for 
Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.5 
million, for a total of $0.0, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 63795N, for 
land attack technology.

F/A-18 infrared search and track

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$108.7 million was for PE 64014N F/A-18 infrared search and 
track (IRST).
    The committee understands that additional funding could 
reduce risk in operational testing of IRST Block II by 
restoring lab and flight tests that were deferred due to prior 
budget reductions.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $24.0 
million, for a total of $132.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64014N, for F/A-18 IRST Block II testing.

Small and medium unmanned undersea vehicles

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $16.7 
million was for PE 64028N small and medium unmanned undersea 
vehicles.
    The committee notes that this program element only includes 
activities related to the Knifefish unmanned underwater 
vehicle, which is part of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mine 
countermeasures mission module. The committee believes 
activities related to LCS mine countermeasures mission modules 
should be consolidated in PE 63596N (LCS mission modules) or in 
a new LCS mine countermeasures mission module program element.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $16.7 
million, for a total of $0.0, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 64028N, for 
small and medium unmanned undersea vehicles and a transfer of 
the $16.7 million decrease to RDT&E, Navy, PE 63596N.

Large unmanned undersea vehicles

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $92.6 
million was for PE 64031N large unmanned underwater vehicles.
    The committee understands that the $21.2 million is early-
to-need based on prior year congressional funding reductions.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $21.2 
million, for a total of $71.4 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64031N, for large unmanned underwater vehicles.

Littoral airborne mine countermeasures

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $17.6 
million was for PE 64126N littoral airborne mine 
countermeasures.
    The committee notes this program element includes $10.1 
million in funds related to the Coastal Battlefield 
Reconnaissance and Analysis airborne mine countermeasures 
system, which is part of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mine 
countermeasures mission module. The committee believes 
activities related to LCS mine countermeasures mission modules 
should be consolidated in PE 63596N (LCS mission modules) or in 
a new LCS mine countermeasures mission module program element.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.1 
million, for a total of $7.5 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64126N, for littoral airborne mine countermeasures and a 
transfer of this $10.1 million to RDT&E, Navy, PE 63596N.

Surface mine countermeasures

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $18.2 
million was for PE 64127N surface mine countermeasures.
    The committee notes that this program element includes $7.6 
million in funds related to the AN/AQS-20 sonar system, which 
is part of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mine countermeasures 
mission module. The committee believes activities related to 
LCS mine countermeasures mission modules should be consolidated 
in PE 63596N (LCS mission modules) or in a new LCS mine 
countermeasures mission module program element.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.6 
million, for a total of $10.6 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64127N, surface mine countermeasures and a transfer of the $7.6 
million decrease to RDT&E, Navy, PE 63596N.

AV-B Aircraft--Engineering Development

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $46.3 
million was for PE 64214M AV-8B Aircraft--Engineering 
Development.
    The committee notes that the Marine Corps plans to divest 
of the AV-8B by 2027 and replace it with the F-35B and that 
this transition is well underway. The committee also notes 
that, of the $46.3 million requested in this budget line, $13.9 
million is for engine safety and reliability improvements and 
engineering change proposals. The remaining $32.3 million 
requested is for weapons and avionics upgrades. The AV-8 
platform was first fielded in the Marine Corps in the early 
1970s, and the committee has concerns about continued 
investment in an aircraft that has limited utility against a 
peer adversary. Rather than continue to invest in a platform 
that, even in upgraded form, will not add meaningful capability 
to the joint force, the committee believes that these funds 
would be better used elsewhere to support modernization 
initiatives across the force.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $16.2 
million, for a total of $30.1 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64214M, for AV-8B Aircraft--Engineering Development.

Physiological episode safety improvements

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $21.0 
million was for PE 64264N for Air Crew Systems Development.
    The committee is concerned that U.S. military aircraft 
currently do not possess the ability to monitor the 
physiological status of aircrew and autonomously act to protect 
them in case of hypoxia or other physiological events. In 
response to physiological episodes in Navy aircraft, the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration has recommended 
an advanced safety sensor that would monitor and record the 
composition of gases inhaled and exhaled by the pilot. These 
types of sensors have been developed by the Air Force Research 
Laboratory, and the committee believes that the Department of 
Defense should explore fielding them to all relevant Department 
aircraft. The committee believes that further integration of 
these breathing sensors into a fully autonomous life support 
system, which monitors the pilot's physiological state and 
automatically reacts to prevent mishaps, should be pursued.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $31.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64264N, Air Crew Systems Development, for physiological episode 
safety improvements.

EA-18G cognitive electronic warfare

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$147.4 million was for PE 64269N EA-18 Squadrons.
    The committee recognizes the growing importance of 
electronic warfare and its critical role in any conflict with a 
peer or near-peer adversary. The committee believes that it is 
imperative that the United States maintains relevant and 
effective electronic warfare capabilities. Moving forward, the 
ability to sense and react to the electromagnetic spectrum will 
be key to success in any conflict with a peer competitor.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $95.3 
million, for a total of $242.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64269N, for Reactive Electronic Attack Measures. This item was 
included on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities 
list.

EA-18G offensive airborne electronic attack special mission pod

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $89.8 
million was for PE 64270N Electronic Warfare Development.
    The committee recognizes the growing importance of 
electronic warfare and its critical role in any conflict with a 
peer or near-peer adversary. The EA-18G special mission pod is 
intended to provide a special purpose mission pod to address 
emergent PACOM operational gaps. The committee believes that it 
is imperative that the United States maintains relevant and 
effective electronic warfare capabilities.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $31.6 
million, for a total of $121.4 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64270N, for EA-18G offensive airborne electronic attack pod. 
This item was included on the Chief of Naval Operations' 
unfunded priorities list.

LPD-17 class systems integration

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $0.9 
million was for PE 64311N LPD-17 class systems integration.
    The committee understands that San Antonio-class (LPD-17) 
amphibious ships were designed to accommodate a 16-cell Mark-41 
Vertical Launch System (VLS), which would increase lethality 
through employment of a variety of munitions, including 
Tomahawk, Enhanced Sea Sparrow, and Standard missiles.
    The committee notes that the Secretary of the Navy and 
Commandant of the Marine Corps testified on April 19, 2018, 
before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, that they 
supported installation of VLS on Flight II LPD-17 class ships.
    The committee further understands that approximately $50.0 
million would be required to complete the non-recurring 
engineering necessary to incorporate VLS on LPD-17 class ships.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million, for a total of $50.9 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64311N, for LPD-17 class systems integration.

SM-6 Block 1B 21 inch rocket motor

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$165.9 million was for PE 64366N Standard Missile improvements.
    The committee recommends an increase of $19.0 million, for 
a total of $146.9 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 64366, for the 21 
inch rocket motor. This is on the Chief of Naval Operations' 
unfunded priorities list.

Amphibious assault ship acceleration

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $60.1 
million was for PE 64567N ship contract design and live fire 
test and evaluation.
    The committee remains concerned with the Navy procurement 
profile for large deck amphibious assault ships, which includes 
a span of 7 years until the next large deck amphibious assault 
ship (LHA-9) is procured in 2024.
    The committee notes that efficiencies could be gained by 
reducing this span, which could enable 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.
    The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to accelerate 
procurement of LHA-9 to not later than 2021 and understands 
that $6.0 million is required for planning to support a fiscal 
year 2021 detailed design and construction award for LHA-9.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 
million, for a total of $66.1 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
64567N, for ship contract design and live fire test and 
evaluation.

Electronic Procurement System

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$268.6 million was for PE 65013N Information Technology 
Development, including $26.3 million for Electronic Procurement 
System.
    The committee is concerned about duplication among the 
Services in contract writing systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $26.3 
million, for a total of $242.3 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
65013N.

Navy Information Technology Systems Development

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$268.6 million was for PE 65013N Information Technology 
Development, including $63.8 million for Navy Personnel and Pay 
(NP2).
    The committee is concerned about the lengthy timeline for 
delivery of capability to users. The committee encourages the 
Department of Defense to adopt modern software development 
practices that deliver capabilities to users in shorter 
increments and timelines. Best practices for incremental 
development call for delivering functional capabilities to the 
end-user at intervals of 6 months or less. The acquisition 
strategy includes a software development approach using a 
commercial off-the-shelf solution. However, NP2 does not plan 
to deliver any capability to users until fiscal year 2020 with 
the next increment of capability planned for 2 years later. The 
committee feels that the use of modern, commercial acquisition 
practices is especially important to support critical 
management and personnel and pay activities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $63.8 
million, for a total of $204.8 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
65013N.

Management, technical, and international support

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $87.6 
million was for PE 65853N management, technical, and 
international support.
    The committee notes several projects contain insufficient 
budget justification and unjustified cost growth.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $9.0 
million, for a total of $78.6 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
65853N, for management, technical, and international support.

Maritime Strike Tomahawk

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$282.4 million was for PE 24229N for Tomahawk missiles and the 
Tomahawk Mission Planning Center.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.7 million, for a 
total of $291.1 million, in PE 24229N of RDT&E, Navy, to 
restore full funding and to maintain fiscal year 2021 initial 
operational capability.

Integrated surveillance system

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $37.0 
million was for PE 24311N integrated surveillance system.
    The committee notes that, since fiscal year 2015, the Navy 
has utilized Transformational Reliable Acoustic Path Systems 
(TRAPS) in anti-submarine warfare missions. The committee 
understands that these deployable systems have performed 
satisfactorily and comprise a critical element of the Navy's 
overall integrated undersea surveillance system. The committee 
is concerned capability or capacity gaps will be created if 
additional TRAPS units are not procured in fiscal year 2019.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $35.0 
million, for a total of $72.0 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
24311N, for integrated surveillance system.

Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile extended range

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$120.8 million was for PE 25601N for HARM Improvements, of 
which $99.2 million is for development of the extended range 
(ER) version of the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile 
(AARGM).
    The committee notes that the Navy plans to create an 
extended range version of the AARGM Block I, with no 
modification to the missile system except for the rocket motor. 
The AARGM Block I is currently in production. The committee 
also notes that the fiscal year 2017 annual report of the 
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) recently 
stated that the AARGM Block I was ``not adequate to support an 
evaluation of operational effectiveness or survivability.'' 
Furthermore, the report stated that the AARGM Block I 
``provides limited employment capability against advanced 
threat surface-to-air radar systems.''
    While longer range is an important factor when competing 
against near-peer adversaries, the committee believes that the 
Navy should not extend the range of the AARGM until the missile 
seeker is effective against ``advanced threat surface-to-air 
radar systems.'' The committee supports the effort to design an 
anti-radiation missile that is relevant against a peer 
adversary. However, given DOT&E's findings on the suitability 
of AARGM Block I, the committee believes that simply extending 
the range will not be sufficient and recommends that the Navy 
find a more comprehensive solution to this problem.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $99.2 
million, for a total of $21.6 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
25601N, in order to pause development of the AARGM ER pending a 
Navy review of requirements.

Tactical Targeting Network Technology

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$104.7 million was for PE 25604N for Tactical Data Links.
    The committee recognizes the increasing importance of data 
links to our warfighting concepts of operations and combat 
effectiveness. The Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) 
data link supports the Navy's Naval Integrated Fire Control--
Counter Air and Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare. The committee 
believes that it is imperative that the Department accelerate 
the fielding of technologies, such as TTNT, that enhance our 
capabilities in any conflict with a peer or near-peer 
adversary.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 
million, for a total of $116.7 million, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
25604N, to accelerate the TTNT capability. This item was 
included on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities 
list.

F/A-18 E/F engine enhancements

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which 
$121.8 million was for PE 25633N for Aviation Improvements.
    The committee recognizes that the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet 
will remain a critical element of the carrier air wing for the 
foreseeable future. The committee supports the Navy's efforts 
to maintain the Super Hornet's relevance and effectiveness.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million, for a total of $136.8 million in RDT&E, Navy, PE 
25633N, to accelerate the design and development of F/A-18 E/F 
Super Hornet engine enhancements to address range, speed, 
efficiency, and survivability improvements. This item was 
included on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities 
list.

Amphibious Assault Vehicle

    The budget request included $18.5 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Navy, of which $22.6 
million was for PE 26629M Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV).
    The committee understands that the Amphibious Assault 
Vehicle (AAV) Product Improvement Program (PIP)/Survivability 
Upgrade Program (SUP) will produce marginal improvements in the 
vehicle's overall survivability and that few of the proposed 
enhancements address threats the vehicle may face in conflict 
against a peer adversary. The AAV is a decades-old platform 
with legacy amphibious and combat capabilities that do not meet 
the needs of modern Marine amphibious forcible entry 
operations. Rather than continue to invest in a vehicle that, 
even in upgraded form, will not provide adequate 
maneuverability, survivability, or ship-to-shore performance, 
the committee believes these funds would be better used 
elsewhere to support modernization initiatives across the 
force.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $22.6 
million, for a total of $0.0, in RDT&E, Navy, PE 26629M, for 
the Amphibious Assault Vehicle.

                               Air Force

Air Force defense research sciences

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$384.3 million was for PE 61102F defense research sciences.
    The committee notes that basic research investments serve 
to help train the next generation of scientists and engineers 
who may work on defense technology problems in government, 
industry, and academia.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $389.3 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
61102F for basic research. The committee directs that these 
funds be awarded through well-established and competitive 
processes.

Air Force quantum information sciences

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$384.3 million was for PE 61102F defense research sciences.
    The committee notes the transformative potential of quantum 
information sciences, with potential impacts across disciplines 
as diverse as cryptography and sensing. In the National Defense 
Strategy's environment of competition with near-peer 
adversaries, such cutting-edge technology will become 
increasingly critical. The committee urges the inclusion of 
research on the underlying mathematics of quantum enabled 
systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $389.3 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
61102F, for quantum information sciences.

High energy laser research initiatives

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$14.5 million was for PE 61108F high energy laser research 
initiatives.
    The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy 
specifically highlights the importance of directed energy and 
the potential that it holds for future operational 
capabilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $17.0 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
61108F.

Materials

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$125.3 million was for PE 62102F materials.
    The committee supports the Air Force's efforts to improve 
structural metallic materials used in high priority aerospace 
and defense missions. The use of high energy synchrotron x-rays 
is helping design engineers to better understand which 
materials are best suited for military performance requirements 
and to develop optimal and efficient manufacturing processes 
for these novel materials. It is critical that Air Force and 
other Department of Defense scientists engage in hands-on 
experiential learning to train more materials scientists and 
engineers in these capabilities, including the creation and 
implementation of high-fidelity simulations and advanced data-
science methods to support development of next-generation 
weapons systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million, for a total of $129.3 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62102F, in support of the Air Force's efforts to improve 
materials used in high priority aerospace and defense missions.

Aerospace vehicle technologies

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$130.5 million was for PE 62201F aerospace vehicle 
technologies.
    The committee notes that hypersonic technologies are a key 
component of the National Defense Strategy 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $135.5 million, in RDT&E, Army, PE 
62201F, for high-speed systems technology, including hypersonic 
vehicle structures.

Affordable responsive modular rocket

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$190.9 million was for PE 62203F aerospace propulsion.
    The committee notes the Air Force's participation in the 
initiative ``Rocket Propulsion for the 21st Century'' (RP-21), 
which serves as a focal point for the rocket propulsion 
development community. The committee applauds the interagency 
involvement in this effort. Within this effort, the exploration 
of next generation liquid rocket engine concepts focused on 
modularity are particularly valuable.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million, for a total of $205.9 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62203F, for the affordable responsive modular rocket.

Multi-mode propulsion applied research

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$190.9 million was for PE 62203F aerospace propulsion.
    One of the efforts within ``Rocket Propulsion for the 21st 
Century'' (RP-21) is directed at developing technologies for 
high thrust chemical and electric thrusters to utilize a common 
propellant and tank. The committee urges the Air Force to 
accelerate these efforts for flight demonstration.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million, for a total of $193.9 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62203F, for multi-mode propulsion.

Solid Rocket Motor Produce On-Demand

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$190.9 million was for PE 62203F aerospace propulsion.
    The committee notes the importance, within the Air Force's 
rocket propulsion efforts, of continuous flow processing 
technology in order to reduce the development time of a new 
motor. The committee believes that such efforts should be 
accelerated to the extent practicable.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million, for a total of $192.9 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62203F, for the Solid Rocket Motor Produce On-Demand (SRM-POD) 
program.

Aerospace propulsion

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$190.9 million was for PE 62203F 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 requirements of 
advanced weapon systems concepts.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $193.4 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62203F, for turbine engine technology development.

Aerospace sensors

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$166.5 million was for PE 62204F aerospace sensors.
    The committee is concerned with the growth in this year's 
request for electronic component technology, electro-optical 
sensors and countermeasures technology and radio frequency 
sensors and countermeasures. Though the committee recognizes 
the importance of these technologies for warfare in contested 
environments, the committee urges the Air Force to take 
advantage of similar work occurring elsewhere in the Department 
of Defense.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.5 
million, for a total of $159.0 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62204F.

Skywave Technologies Laboratory

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$141.9 million was for PE 62605F directed energy technology.
    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91), this committee urged the Department 
of Defense to invest in its military construction accounts for 
science and technology facilities, as well as those used for 
test and evaluation. Unfortunately, these projects generally 
fall victim to low prioritization, despite their major value to 
the Department's mission.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million, for a total of $145.9 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62605F, for minor military construction. The committee adds 
these funds in order to fund the request for the Skywave 
Technologies Laboratory. The committee strongly encourages the 
Air Force to ensure that coordination regarding the appropriate 
planning and design occurs so that these projects are 
executable.

High energy laser research

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$43.4 million was for PE 62890F high energy laser research.
    The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy 
specifically highlights the importance of directed energy and 
the potential that it holds for future operational 
capabilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $45.9 million, in RDT&E Air Force, PE 
62890F.

High powered microwave research

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$43.4 million was for PE 62890F high energy laser research.
    The committee recognizes the importance of high powered 
microwave research as a component of directed energy 
technologies. Another provision in this Act specifically 
authorizes the Joint Directed Energy Transition Office to 
conduct this research along with its other duties.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $53.4 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
62890F for high powered microwave research.

Advanced materials for research

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$34.4 million was for PE 63112F advanced materials for weapons 
systems.
    Though the committee recognizes the importance of materials 
development for critical systems, the committee believes that 
alternative approaches may be needed to ensure successful 
transition of these technologies into operational systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $29.4 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63112F, advanced materials for weapons systems.

Materials affordability

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$34.4 million was for PE 63112F advanced materials for weapons 
systems.
    The Metals Affordability Initiative (MAI) is a public-
private partnership that has produced innovative metals 
technology for use in a variety of Department of Defense 
systems over the past 19 years. The MAI has demonstrated 
significant improvements in the manufacture of specialty metals 
for aerospace applications for both the government and 
industry, and it provides the warfighter with metals of 
improved strength and durability, often at a reduced cost. This 
highly-successful initiative has resulted in over 100 current 
or planned insertions of new technology into systems Defense-
wide with a tenfold return on total government investment (a 
total of $2.4 billion).
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $36.9 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63112F, for materials affordability.

Sustainment in science and technology

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$15.1 million was for PE 63199F sustainment in science and 
technology.
    The committee notes that sustainment science and technology 
are directed at creating sustainable technologies, improving 
sustainment-related tools and processes, and developing 
technologies to fundamentally change sustainment missions. 
Given ongoing concerns about sustainment costs, the committee 
endorses this important mission and recommends that the Air 
Force continue to increase resourcing in this area.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million, for a total of $16.1 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63199F, to develop sustainment technologies to improve 
component design, replacement, and concepts for performance 
improvement and reduced maintenance burden.

Aerospace technology development and demonstration increase for 
        operational energy capability improvements

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$121.0 million was for the PE 63211F Aerospace Technology 
Development/Demonstration.
    The committee continues to recognize 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 in RDT&E, Air Force, for a total of $131.0 million, in 
PE 63211F, for Aerospace Technology Development/Demonstration.
    Specifically, the committee strongly encourages the Air 
Force to use the increase to fund design and manufacturing of 
aircraft finlets, micro-vanes, and high pressure compressor 
blade coatings that have demonstrated reduced drag, evinced 
fuel savings, and decreased maintenance requirements.

Aerospace propulsion and power technology

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$115.4 million was for PE 63216F aerospace propulsion and power 
technology.
    The Advanced Turbine Engine Gas Generator project develops 
and demonstrates core engine technologies for small turbines 
utilized in current and future aircraft, missile, and remotely 
piloted aircraft propulsion systems. The project develops and 
demonstrates technology to reduce cost of ownership by half 
while improving mission flexibility and fuel consumption to 
increase range. It will also pave the way for providing much-
needed competition where there currently is none. The committee 
strongly encourages the commander of AFMC to fund technologies 
that lead to low-cost, high-performance turbofan engines of up 
to 1,200 pounds of thrust.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 
million, for a total of $124.4 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63216F.

Multi-mode propulsion advanced technology development

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$115.5 million was for PE 63216F aerospace technology 
development and demonstration.
    One of the efforts within ``Rocket Propulsion for the 21st 
Century'' (RP-21) is directed at developing technologies for 
high thrust chemical and electric thrusters to utilize a common 
propellant and tank. The committee particularly notes the 
potential for this work to decrease servicing complexity for 
on-orbit refueling and to afford space operators maximum 
mission flexibility to respond to unplanned events.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $120.5 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63216F, for multi-mode propulsion.

Technology for the sustainment of strategic systems

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$115.5 million was for PE 63216F aerospace technology 
development and demonstration.
    The committee urges the Air Force to continue to perform 
altitude demonstrations at the Air Force Research Laboratory's 
high altitude facility in order to develop integrated post-
boost phase technologies. These systems can support strategic 
systems during storage, transportation, on alert, and during 
boost, and post-boost launch. Similar technologies are also 
being developed to reduce lifetime prediction uncertainty for 
individual rocket motors.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $125.5 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63216F, for technology for sustainment of strategic systems.

Electronic combat technology

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$55.3 million was for PE 63270F electronic combat technology.
    The committee supports the 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $60.3 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63270F, for RF/EO/IR warning and countermeasures.

Demonstrator Laser Weapons System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$43.4 million was for PE 63605F advanced weapons technology.
    The committee is aware that collaboration between industry, 
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the Air 
Force Research Laboratory has already produced the electric 
Laser Weapon System to detect, identify, and defeat unmanned 
aircraft system and cruise missile threats. The Demonstrator 
Laser Weapon System was designed to be the premier facility for 
evaluating the efficacy of lasers against a variety of live 
fire targets. The committee notes that the system can be 
upgraded to provide a more robust development testbed to prove 
out the tactics, techniques, and procedures for using a laser 
weapon for base defense. The testbed will also help the Air 
Force to refine procedures for defending against adversary 
unmanned aerial systems and cruise missiles.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $53.4 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
63605F, for continued development of the demonstrator laser 
weapon system.

Prototype Tanker

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$28.4 million was for PE 64776F Deployment and Distribution 
Enterprise R&D.
    The committee is concerned about the growing threat to 
large high-value aircraft in contested environments. The KC-135 
and hopefully the KC-46A in the near future provide greater 
operational availability and range for a broad swath of the 
joint force's aerial power projection and mobility portfolios. 
However, these assets are manned and increasingly difficult to 
protect. The committee believes, given the increasingly 
challenging operating environments our potential adversaries 
are presenting, it is prudent to explore options for optionally 
unmanned and more survivable tankers that could operate 
autonomously as part of a large, dispersed logistics fleet that 
could sustain attrition in conflict. Consequently, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to prototype a 
contested environment tanker.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $38.4 million in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
64776F, for prototyping a contested environment tanker.

Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$1.2 billion was for PE 64858F Tech Transition Program.
    The committee, in consultation with the Air Force, believes 
this program can be accelerated.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $100.0 
million, for a total of $1.4 billion, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
64858F, Tech Transition Program.

Technology transition program

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$1.2 billion was for PE 64858F technology transition.
    The committee supports the Assistant Secretary of the Air 
Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics intent to 
accelerate the Air Force Research Laboratory's Low-Cost 
Attritable Aircraft Technology (using technology from the 
Strategic Capability Office's Avatar program) for collaborative 
pairing with manned platforms, potentially including the F-35. 
The committee views the combined application of commercial 
``smart'' technology, autonomy, and artificial intelligence as 
imperative for solving current military challenges. Teams of 
low-cost collaborative systems provide new mechanisms to ensure 
survivability and mission success without leveraging exquisite 
technology and its associated high cost and long development 
timelines.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $80.0 
million, for a total of $1.4 billion, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
64858F, for low cost attributable aircraft prototype 
transition.

Air Force supply chain innovation

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$1.2 billion was for PE 64858F technology transition.
    The committee is supportive of the Assistant Secretary of 
the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics' 
initiative to focus resources on increasing innovation within 
the Air Force's supply chain. Though constituting approximately 
70% of the Air Force's budget, sustainment receives few 
resources for new technology development--predictive analytics, 
agile manufacturing, digital engineering, and artificial 
intelligence--to drive down costs. Given current aircraft 
availability shortfalls, the committee urges the Air Force to 
focus on the consolidation of technology development, 
applications to current availability challenges, and 
transitioning to the depots, all while developing and equipping 
the sustainment workforce.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $42.8 
million, for a total of $1.4 billion, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
64858F, for Air Force supply chain innovation.

Contracting Information Technology System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$17.6 million was for PE 91410F Contracting Information 
Technology System.
    The committee is concerned about duplication among the 
Services in contract writing systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $17.6 
million, for a total of $0.0 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
91410F.

Advanced Battle Management System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$207.7 million was for PE 64281F Tactical Data Networks 
Enterprise.
    As part of its movement towards an Advanced Battle 
Management System, the Air Force has indicated the need to 
increase the capability of its communications and data links. 
The committee strongly supports efforts to increase the 
capability of our information links. The committee also 
strongly supports efforts to accelerate capabilities that will 
make our forces more relevant and effective at deterring, and, 
if necessary, defeating a peer adversary.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million, for a total of $257.7 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
64281F, for Agile Communications, High Capacity Backbone and 
Link 16 Enhancements in order to accelerate the Advanced Battle 
Management System.

JSTARS recap radar

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$0.0 was for PE 37581F for the JSTARS Recapitalization.
    The committee is concerned that the Air Force's decision to 
cancel the JSTARS Recapitalization program leaves in limbo the 
continued development of the Recap radar, for which the Air 
Force has spent years and millions of dollars bringing to its 
current maturity. The committee supports the Air Force's move 
to an Advanced Battle Management System but is apprehensive 
about the Air Force's proposal to divest existing capability in 
the current JSTARS aircraft while its plan for future 
capability remains aspirational. The risk, if not likelihood, 
of a significant capability gap warrants mitigation.
    As the Air Force evolves its view of what the Advanced 
Battle Management System entails and begins to bring capability 
online, the committee believes that it is prudent to continue 
development of the Recap radar to explore further potential 
uses and provide the Air Force with options.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million, for a total of $50.0 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
37581F, for continued Ground Moving Target Indicator radar 
development.

Major Test and Evaluation Management

    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$91.8 million was for PE 64759F, Major Test and Evaluation 
(T&E) Investment.
    The committee notes the importance of test and evaluation 
infrastructure to bring mature capabilities to the warfighter.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million, for a total of $106.8 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
64759F, to fund improvements for Air Force test infrastructure.

Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$47.3 million was for PE 65018F Air Force Integrated Personnel 
and Pay System (AF-IPPS).
    The committee is concerned about the lengthy timeline for 
delivery of capability to users. The committee encourages the 
Department of Defense to adopt modern software development 
practices that deliver capabilities to users in shorter 
increments and timelines. Best practices for incremental 
development call for delivering functional capabilities to the 
end-user at intervals of 6 months or less. However AF-IPPS does 
not plan to delivery any capability to users until fiscal year 
2021. The committee feels that the use of modern, commercial 
acquisition practices is especially important to support 
critical management, personnel and pay activities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $34.1 
million, for a total of $13.2 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
65018F.

B-52

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$280.4 million was for PE 11113F for B-52 system improvements.
    The Air Force has requested a transfer of $14.8 million 
from Aviation Procurement, Air Force (APAF) to this PE.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $14.8 
million, for a total of $295.2 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
11113F, for B-52 system improvements.

Airborne Early Warning and Control System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$120.7 million was for PE 27417F for the Airborne Warning and 
Control System (AWACS).
    As part of its movement towards an Advanced Battle 
Management System, the Air Force has indicated the need to 
increase the capability of its AWACS aircraft through advanced 
communications, networking, and sensor capabilities. The 
committee believes these capabilities should be accelerated.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $130.7 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
27417F for E-3 Advanced Battle Management and Surveillance 
Bridge Capabilities.

Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$50.9 million was for PE 78055F Maintenance, Repair, and 
Overhaul System.
    The committee is concerned about the lengthy delivery 
timeline for this program, going multiple years without 
delivering capability to the end-user. The committee notes that 
for many IT programs and activities the Department has been 
slow to adopt modern, commercial ``agile'' acquisition 
practices. In many programs the Department is still using dated 
and slower IT development and deployment practices--which 
usually end up being more costly and delivering out-of-date 
software products.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $35.1 
million, for a total of $15.8 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
78055F.

Defense Enterprise Accounting Management System Increment 2

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$99.7 million was for PE 91538F Financial Management 
Information Systems Development, including $11.8 million for 
Defense Enterprise Accounting Management System Increment Two.
    The committee is concerned about the lengthy delivery 
timeline for this program, going multiple years without 
delivering capability to the end-user. The committee notes that 
for many information technology (IT) programs and activities 
the Department has been slow to adopt modern, commercial 
``agile'' acquisition practices. In many programs the 
Department is still using dated and slower IT development and 
deployment practices--which usually end up being more costly 
and delivering out-of-date software products.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $11.8 
million, for a total of $87.9 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
91538F.

                              Defense Wide

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency defense research sciences

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $422.1 million was for PE 61101E defense research 
sciences.
    The committee recognizes that the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency's defense research sciences program element 
provides the technical foundation for long-term national 
security through the discovery of new phenomena and exploration 
for defense applications. The committee is especially 
encouraged by the materials sciences work in this activity.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $427.1 million, in RDT&E Defense-wide, 
PE 61101E.

Critical materials

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $422.1 million was for PE 61101E defense research 
sciences.
    The committee recognizes the work done by the Critical 
Materials Institute (CMI) to focus on technologies that make 
better use of rare earth materials and eliminate the need for 
rare earth materials that are subject to supply disruptions. 
Therefore, the committee urges the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency to work closely with entities such as CMI to 
further its own research on critical materials related to 
Department of Defense needs.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $424.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 61101E, for critical materials research.

Defense-wide quantum information sciences

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $42.7 million was for PE 61110D8Z basic research 
initiatives.
    The committee notes the transformative potential of quantum 
information sciences, with potential impacts across disciplines 
as diverse as cryptography and sensing. In competition with 
near-peer adversaries, such cutting-edge technology will become 
increasingly critical.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $49.7 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 61110D8Z, for quantum information sciences.

Basic research initiatives

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $42.7 million was for PE 61110D8Z basic 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $49.7 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 61110D8Z.

Activities to determine more effective personal protective equipment 
        against blast injury

    The budget request included $708.1 million in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for 
Basic Research, of which $47.8 million was for PE 61117E Basic 
Operational Medical Research Science.
    The committee remains concerned about the prevalence of 
mild and severe Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) among 
servicemembers. Servicemembers exposed to repetitive concussive 
events or severe TBI due to repeated blasts and blast injuries 
are at high risk for long-term negative consequences to brain 
health, including the development of chronic neuro-degenerative 
disease.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $57.8 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
for Basic Research, PE 61117E, for Basic Operational Medical 
Research Science to conduct activities to determine the most 
effective personal protective equipment against blast injury. 
The provision authorizing such activities is contained in this 
title.

Joint munitions program

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $19.1 million was for PE 62000D8Z joint munitions 
program.
    The committee is encouraged by the program element's 
mission of developing joint enabling technologies that can be 
used by the Program Executive Officers as they develop their 
specific weapon programs. As expressed in the National Defense 
Strategy, future conflicts will increasingly require a joint 
perspective in these types of technology areas.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $21.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 62000D8Z, for insensitive munitions.

Applied research for the advancement of science and technology 
        priorities

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $60.6 million was for PE 62251D8Z applied research for 
the advancement of science and technology priorities.
    Though the committee is supportive of prototyping and early 
launch of science and technology applied research projects to 
shape investments, the committee is concerned with the large 
growth for this program element, given that the request was 
$11.0 million lower in the previous budget request.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.5 
million, for a total of $53.1 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 62251D8Z.

Tactical technology

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $335.4 million was for PE 62702E tactical technology.
    In accordance with the National Defense Strategy, the 
committee is supportive of developing new concepts and 
technologies to enhance the next generation of tactical 
systems. The committee urges the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency to continue efforts in Advanced Tactical 
Technology and Aeronautics Technology.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $337.9 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 62702E.

Multi-Azimuth Defense Fast Intercept Round Engagement System

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $335.4 million was for PE 62702E tactical technology.
    The committee 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 Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency appears to be undertaking some of these efforts 
without sufficient coordination with the defense research 
community.
    The committee notes particularly that the Multi-Azimuth 
Defense Fast Intercept Round Engagement System (MAD-FIRES), 
while potentially capable, faces an uncertain transition future 
due to the complexity involved with installation deployment and 
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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $330.4 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 62702E, for MAD-FIRES.

Materials and biological technology

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $226.8 million was for PE 62715E materials and biological 
technology.
    The committee is concerned with the lack of transition 
plans for some technologies in Functional Materials and Devices 
and by the significant growth within Accelerating Discovery and 
Innovation without a clear justification.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 
million, for a total of $211.8 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 62715E.

Combating terrorism technology support

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $125.2 million was for PE 63122D8Z combating terrorism 
technology support.
    Despite recognizing the immense contributions of this 
program element to technological advancements over the past 
decades, the committee recognizes that in order to embrace the 
strategic goals laid out by the National Defense Strategy, 
funding for science and technology should move toward potential 
applications to near-peer adversaries. Further, the committee 
is concerned with the large growth between the budget request 
for the previous year and this year's request.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $14.0 
million, for a total of $111.2 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63122D8Z.

Advanced aerospace systems

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $227.6 million was for PE 63286E advanced aerospace 
systems.
    At his confirmation hearing, the recently confirmed Under 
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering emphasized 
the urgent need for American progress on hypersonic weapons. 
This program element includes the Hypersonic Air-breathing 
Weapon Concept as a joint Air Force and Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency (DARPA) effort, in addition to 
Tactical Boost Glide, another joint Air Force and DARPA effort. 
Both of these technologies represent promising progress, and 
the committee urges the DARPA to increase its focus on their 
development.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $232.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63286E.

Blackjack

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $15.0 million was for PE 63287E Blackjack program.
    The committee notes that funding for a Blackjack on-orbit 
demonstration is the Air Force's highest unfunded priority. The 
committee believes that the successful demonstration of a 
proliferated constellation of satellites in Low Earth Orbit 
would have profound implications for the resiliency and 
survivability of critical space missions.
    The committee recommends an increase of $110.0 million, for 
a total of $125.0 million, in Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, PE 63287E, to accelerate a 
cooperative on-orbit demonstration of the co-orbiting military 
missile warning constellation embedded within the commercial 
LEO mega-constellation and space-cloud network infrastructure. 
The committee directs the Air Force and DARPA to work with the 
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to assess the potential for 
meeting MDA's space-based requirements on such a constellation.

Defense Innovation Unit Experimental

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $29.3 million was for PE 63342D8W Defense Innovation Unit 
Experimental (DIUx).
    In its short tenure, DIUx has filled a critical niche 
between emerging technology firms and the Department of 
Defense. Over the coming year, the committee urges DIUx to 
consider the metrics by which it measures its success and its 
role in the full research and engineering enterprise that the 
Department operates.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $0.5 
million, for a total of $29.8 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63342D8W.

Networked communications capabilities

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $12.7 million was for PE 63662D8Z networked 
communications capabilities.
    Despite the importance of this mission, the committee is 
concerned about potential duplication of this program element's 
activities with those of the Services and urges closer 
coordination with similar programs instead of more funding 
within this line.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.5 
million, for a total of $5.2 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63662D8Z.

Enhancing cybersecurity for small vendors

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $114.6 million was for PE 63680D8Z, the Defense-wide 
manufacturing science and technology program.
    Cyber vulnerabilities faced by the defense industrial base 
are a threat to national security. If cybersecurity 
vulnerabilities remain unaddressed, defense supply chains face 
a higher likelihood of harboring serious and exploitable 
vulnerabilities. Moreover, many small firms have a significant 
lack of awareness of the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
cybersecurity requirements, which all DOD suppliers must meet.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $119.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63680D8Z, for cybersecurity protection of small vendors.

Defense-wide manufacturing science and technology program

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $114.6 million was for PE 63680D8Z Defense-wide 
manufacturing science and technology program.
    The Advanced Electronics and Optics program is a series of 
efforts addressing advanced manufacturing technologies with a 
wide range of applications. Additional funds can support 
development of advanced thin-film filters for eyewear, 
providing laser protection and rapid adjustment to changing 
light, improving warfighter visibility and adaptability.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million, for a total of $116.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63680D8Z, for eye protection systems.

Defense Logistics Agency manufacturing technology program

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $49.7 million was for PE 63680S manufacturing technology.
    The committee notes the critical importance of improving 
manufacturing capability through a product's life cycle and 
applauds this program for providing low-risk technology 
implementation for small businesses and defense unique 
suppliers. The program's focus on maintaining viable supply 
sources and improving manufacturing processes have resulted in 
particularly large savings for the Department of Defense.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $52.3 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63680S.

Defense Logistics Agency generic logistics research and development 
        technology demonstrations

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $11.8 million was for PE 63712S generic logistics 
research and development technology demonstrations.
    The committee notes the critical importance of logistics, 
especially given the National Defense Strategy's assumption 
that future operating environments will be contested. The 
committee urges prototyping and demonstrations in order to 
quickly test capabilities that might hold promise for future 
operational concepts.
    The committee notes that for many years the Department of 
Defense has been developing various innovative technologies 
such as autonomous vehicles, unmanned aircraft systems, 
additive manufacturing, and robots to help support a wide 
variety of mission needs. Some of these technologies could 
significantly improve combat capability and help save and 
preserve the lives of warfighters by performing similar duties 
on the battlefield. Autonomous vehicles could be used to move 
convoys of vehicles carrying water, fuel, and other supplies 
through dangerous areas without putting warfighters directly at 
risk. The committee understands that the Services have been 
working on these and other technologies to also enhance the 
Department's global supply chain.
    The committee encourages the Services to jointly develop 
and share new technology gains and breakthroughs so that all 
the Services can benefit from more technologically advanced 
supply chain capabilities. Additionally, while leveraging the 
latest technologies can help address global supply chain needs, 
the committee notes the importance of monitoring, regulating, 
and managing the potential risks from innovative technologies.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million, for a total of $12.8 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63712S.

Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program and 
        Environmental Security Technology Certification Program 
        increases

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $77.7 million was for the PE 63716D8Z Strategic 
Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) and 
$58.6 million was 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 requirements, provide a 
return on investment, and are executed through a free and open 
competition.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, PE 63716D8Z, for SERDP, and an 
increase of $10.0 million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, PE 63851D8Z, 
for ESTCP for respective totals of $87.7 million and $68.6 
million.
    The committee strongly encourages the Department to use the 
increases in SERDP and ESTCP to address the following: (1) To 
help ensure 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 
polyfluoroalkyl substances; (2) To develop, demonstrate, 
validate, and field fluorine-free firefighting foam; (3) To 
meet long-term environmental threats and sustain training and 
testing ranges; (4) To advance sustainable technologies and 
bio-based products that meet military requirements; and (5) To 
advance other technologies deemed appropriate.

Microelectronics technology development and support

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $168.9 million was for PE 63720S manufacturing 
technology.
    The committee notes that the Tunable Filter Program focuses 
on advancement of microelectronic tunable thin film filters to 
provide greater functionality for wireless communications 
systems at reduced cost, size, weight, and power demand. The 
budget request includes insufficient funds to continue this 
program, critical to development of next-generation 
communications systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $173.9 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63720S.

Advanced electronics technologies

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $111.0 million was for PE 63739E advanced electronics 
technologies.
    The committee understands the importance of 
microelectronics fabrication, and, in particular, the Beyond 
Scaling Advanced Technologies project, which focuses on large 
scale co-development with industry as well as the design and 
capture of advanced intellectual property (IP) architectures, 
IP sharing, and access to foundries. The committee urges 
coordination between this effort and similar ongoing 
complementary work in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $7.5 
million, for a total of $118.5 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63739E, for Electronics Resurgence Initiative.

Network-centric warfare technology

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $483.5 million was for PE 63766E network-centric warfare 
technology.
    Though the committee appreciates the importance of network-
centric warfare for the future battle environment, the 
committee is concerned about the potential for transition of 
some of the projects within this program element. The committee 
is specifically concerned with tactical exploitation of the 
acoustic channel.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 
million, for a total of $473.5 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63766E.

Sensor technology

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $190.1 million was for PE 63767E sensor technology.
    The committee recognizes the threat posed by multiple small 
unmanned aerial systems beyond the line-of-sight. Therefore, 
the committee is encouraged by the mission and progress of 
projects like Aerial Dragnet and encourages collaboration with 
similar efforts occurring elsewhere in the Department of 
Defense.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million, for a 
total of $191.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, PE 63767E, for 
sensor technology.

Quick reaction special projects

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $69.6 million was for PE 63826D8Z quick reaction special 
projects.
    The committee is concerned about the duplication of 
activities within this program element elsewhere in the 
Department of Defense. The committee is particularly concerned 
about the ability of the Rapid Reaction Fund to achieve its 
stated mission.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 
million, for a total of $59.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63826D8Z.

Test and evaluation science and technology related to hypersonics and 
        directed energy

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $96.3 million was for PE 63941D8Z test and evaluation 
science and technology.
    Given the importance of hypersonic weapons and directed 
energy to the execution of the National Defense Strategy, 
establishing high quality testing facilities for these systems 
should be a high priority for the Department of Defense. Too 
often, these supporting functions are forgotten and research 
suffers for lack of test facility capacity.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $106.3 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63941D8Z, for hypersonics and directed energy test.

Test and evaluation science and technology workforce development

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $96.3 million was for PE 63941D8Z test and evaluation 
science and technology.
    The committee recognizes the integral importance of test 
and evaluation to successful science and technology 
development. The committee urges the Department of Defense to 
prioritize supporting capabilities that will enable 
technological progress--namely, investment in the workforce 
qualified in these disciplines. Research across disciplines 
depends on the engagement of experienced and qualified 
personnel.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $101.3 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 63941D8Z, for workforce development.

Operational energy capability improvement

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $40.5 million was for the PE 64055D8Z Operational Energy 
Capability Improvement Fund (OECIF).
    The committee continues to recognize 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 $50.5 million, in RDT&E, PE 64055D8Z, 
for OECIF.
    Specifically, the committee strongly encourages 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, sustainable 
forward operating bases, alternative energy storage in 
contested environments, waste to energy technologies that are 
necessary given the continual challenge of open-air burn pits, 
joint infantry company prototypes, long-endurance unmanned 
aerial vehicles, and other technologies deemed appropriate.

National Security Innovation Activities

    The budget request included $3.7 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, for 
advanced technology development.
    The committee remains concerned about foreign investment in 
emerging hardware technologies with potential national security 
applications that are produced by United States companies.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $150.0 
million to Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), 
Defense-wide, line number to be determined, to conduct 
activities to establish interactions between the Department of 
Defense and the commercial technology industry and academia 
with the goal of encouraging private investment in specific 
hardware technologies of interest to future defense technology 
needs with unique national security applications. The provision 
authorizing such national security innovation activities is 
contained in this Act.

Corrosion control and prevention funding increase

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $3.8 million was for the PE 604016D8Z 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 cost to prevent 
and mitigate corrosion of its assets, including military 
equipment, weapons, facilities, and other infrastructure, is 
approximately $22.9 billion.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $8.8 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 604016D8Z, for the DOD Corrosion Program.

Trusted and assured microelectronics

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
$233.1 million was for PE 64294D8Z trusted and assured 
microelectronics.
    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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.5 
million, for a total of $238.1 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 64294D8Z, for new trusted approach development.

Defense Contract Management Agency information technology development

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $12.0 million was for PE 65013BL, Information Technology 
Development.
    The committee is concerned about the lengthy delivery 
timeline for this program, going multiple years without 
delivering capability to the end-user. The committee notes that 
for many information technology (IT) programs and activities 
the Department has been slow to adopt modern, commercial 
``agile'' acquisition practices. In many programs the 
Department is still using dated and slower IT development and 
deployment practices--which usually end up being more costly 
and delivering out-of-date software products.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $12.0 
million, for a total of $0.0 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65013BL.

Deputy Chief Management Officer policy and integration

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $2.1 million was for PE 65075D8Z Deputy Chief Management 
Officer (DCMO) Policy and Integration.
    The committee recognizes that the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) gave 
the Office of the Chief Management Officer significantly 
increased responsibilities for data management and integration 
across the Department of Defense. Based on this new mission, 
the committee encourages the Department to invest in improved 
data processing and analytics tools to fulfill its expanded 
responsibilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million, for a total of $3.1 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65075D8Z, for data and advanced analytics.

Defense-wide electronic procurement capabilities

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $6.4 million was for PE 65210D8Z for Defense-wide 
Electronic Procurement Capabilities.
    The committee is concerned about duplication among the 
Services in contract-writing systems. The committee encourages 
the program to consolidate requirements for contract-writing 
systems across the department.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $6.4 
million in RDT&E, Defense-wide, PE 65210D8Z, for a total of 
$0.0 million.

Trusted and assured microelectronics engineering and manufacturing 
        development

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $56.2 million was for PE 65294D8Z trusted and assured 
microelectronics.
    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 fulfill Department of Defense needs.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million, for a total of $58.7 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65294D8Z.

Hypersonic experimentation facilities

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $258.7 million was for PE 64940D8Z, Central Test and 
Evaluation Investment Development (CTEIP).
    The committee is encouraged by the priority the Department 
of Defense has placed on hypersonic capability development. 
However, the committee remains concerned that the United States 
may face a shortfall in advanced hypersonic experimentation 
facilities. The committee recognizes the important role that 
wind tunnels play in research development, and believes that 
the Department should make investments in hypersonic test and 
experimentation facilities that leverage the capabilities of 
academic institutions, government laboratories, and Industry 
teams to perform the necessary applied research.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million, for a total of $268.7 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 64940D8Z, for hypersonic experimentation facilities.

Joint mission environment test capability

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $84.2 million was for PE 65100D8Z joint mission 
environment test capability.
    The committee shares the view, repeatedly cited across the 
Department of Defense, that the lack of cyber range capacity, 
connectivity, and adequate interoperability is negatively 
impacting the military's ability to train in seamless, 
operationally realistic cyberspace environments and poses one 
of the greatest cyber challenges to the joint force.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $89.2 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65100D8Z, for cyber range capacity and development. These 
funds will allow for the construction of additional cyber range 
capacity and connectivity and support the Department's cyber 
ranges by improving their cyber range architectures, 
instrumentation, standards, and workforce.

Technical studies, support and analysis

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $22.6 million was for PE 65104D8Z technical studies, 
support and analysis.
    The committee urges the Department of Defense 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.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million, for a total of $17.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65104D8Z.

Developmental Test and Evaluation

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $20.2 million was for PE 65804D8Z, Developmental Test and 
Evaluation.
    The committee notes that software is becoming an 
increasingly important part of weapons systems and requires 
matching test capabilities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $25.2 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65804D8Z, to improve software testing capabilities.

Policy research and development programs

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $6.3 million was for PE 35186D8Z policy research and 
development programs.
    The committee urges closer coordination with similar 
efforts elsewhere in the Department of Defense and across the 
intelligence community. The committee is also concerned about 
the growth in this request over past years.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $3.0 
million, for a total of $3.3 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 65186D8Z.

Personnel security and continuous evaluation innovation

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $5.6 million was for PE 35327V insider threat.
    The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) directed the 
Defense Security Service to undertake an additional mission of 
background investigations and personnel security for Department 
of Defense (DOD) personnel. Elsewhere in this Act, the 
committee directed the DOD to engage with cutting-edge 
technology entities in order to advance existing capabilities 
related to personnel security, and this funding is meant to 
complement that directive.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million, for a total of $10.6 million, in RDT&E, Defense-wide, 
PE 35327V, for personnel security and continuous evaluation 
innovation.

Director, Operational Test and Evaluation cyber projects

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Defense-wide, of 
which $71.0 million was for PE 65814OTE, Operational Test 
Activities and Analyses.
    The committee notes that cybersecurity is an increasingly 
important matter for programs. As technologies and systems 
become more complex, the Department must augment investments in 
test and evaluation technologies.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.9 
million, for a total of $81.9 million, for PE 65814OTE, 
Operational Test Activities and Analyses.

                       Items of Special Interest

AC-130J High Energy Laser

    The committee recommends full authorization of the $34.0 
million requested in fiscal year 2019 for the U.S. Special 
Operations Command (USSOCOM) AC-130J High Energy Laser (HEL) 
program intended to deliver a 60 kilowatt laser for operational 
assessment during fiscal year 2022. However, the committee is 
concerned that the future year's defense program for fiscal 
years 2020 through 2022 does not project sufficient funds for 
the completion of this effort and an additional $62.0 million 
will be required to integrate, test, and assess the laser 
weapons system in the coming years.
    As noted in testimony before the committee, the advanced 
state of the HEL technology may permit an expedited schedule of 
integration, testing, and operational assessment of this weapon 
system. The committee believes that the Department should make 
the investment necessary to field this potentially 
transformative capability as soon as possible.
    For fiscal year 2018, the committee notes that the Air 
Force and the Rapid Reaction Technology Office has committed to 
providing a total of $29.0 million to complement the $15.6 
million allocated by USSOCOM for the AC-130J HEL effort. The 
committee strongly supports continued joint funding of this 
program given the significant potential application of HEL 
capabilities beyond special operations missions and the need to 
ensure integration with other HEL-related efforts across the 
Department.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
Intensity Conflict, to submit a plan for fully funding the AC-
130J HEL program in fiscal years 2020 to 2022 with the 
Department's budget request for fiscal year 2020.

Acoustic Threat Detection

    The committee supports ongoing efforts by the Army to 
develop and operationally test acoustic threat detection 
technologies and is supportive of the continued deployment of 
these systems in Afghanistan and other locations to aid of 
combat operations. However, the committee is concerned about 
increased threats from unmanned aerial systems to forward 
operating bases. The committee encourages the Army to develop 
and operationally test sensor systems that can accurately 
detect and geo-locate both ground and air threats.
    Therefore, not later than 60 days after the enactment of 
this Act, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on 
existing threat detection technologies and capabilities, 
results of exercises and deployed operational testing, 
technologies available to detect both ground and air threats 
using a single integrated system, and the ability to accelerate 
the development and fielding of this technology to a program of 
record.

Active Protection System for Abrams, Bradley, Stryker

    The committee notes that the Army's M1 Abrams Tank will be 
upgraded with the Trophy Active Protection System (APS), which 
has already been used in battle to protect the Israel Defense 
Forces Merkava tanks.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91) provided $138.7 million in funding for one 
brigade in Europe and another $171.0 million in an unfunded 
requirement for more APSs that could be used for Trophy for the 
Korean theater. The budget request included $617.5 million that 
would support funding the procurement of 282 APSs and 
countermeasures for the Abrams tanks.
    The Committee strongly supports the President's Budget 
Request for APS for Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker.

Additive manufacturing within the military departments

    The committee remains strongly supportive of the Department 
of Defense's efforts to leverage additive manufacturing (AM) 
processes and applications in order to improve the Department's 
capabilities and materiel readiness. The committee strongly 
encourages the Department to pursue AM in order to augment the 
current supply chain, achieve shorter lead times compared to 
traditional manufacturing methods, negate the impact of 
obsolete or out-of-production sources of supply, and reduce 
costs and weight at the point of need.
    The committee recognizes that the requirement to certify 
and qualify AM parts and components remains a fundamental 
challenge to broader and more rapid use of AM capabilities 
across the military departments. The committee is encouraged by 
the formation of the Joint AM Steering Group and Joint AM 
Working Group and encourages them to work with the Services to 
identify AM best practices. The committee also encourages the 
Services to continue advancing the qualification, 
certification, and integration of AM parts into the supply 
chain. The committee believes that the Services should continue 
to develop requirements and training necessary at the levels of 
warfighter, artisan, and acquisition officer. The Department 
must also ensure that any technical data and intellectual 
property related to AM parts are appropriately protected.

Advanced countermeasure dispenser system for 4th generation/legacy 
        aircraft

    The committee is aware that potential adversaries are 
making significant improvements in their ability to detect, 
target, and engage U.S. tactical aircraft across the infrared 
(IR) and radio frequency (RF) spectrum. Fourth-generation, 
``legacy aircraft'', are particularly vulnerable and, as they 
will form a significant portion of our tactical aircraft 
inventory for decades to come, their survivability will be 
increasingly challenged.
    Legacy aircraft must include the ability to counter these 
emerging threats through readily-available and quickly-
integrated means, including advance IR/RF expendable 
countermeasures and more capable dispensing systems.
    Therefore, the committee strongly supports investment to 
sustain the survivability of our 4th generation tactical 
aircraft, including advanced countermeasures and their 
associated dispensing systems.

Advanced hull technology

    The committee understands that the Navy may be making 
greater use of small planing boats to counter asymmetrical 
threats. The committee has supported the Navy's investment in 
sophisticated computer hydrodynamic modeling and simulation 
tools for design, testing, and analysis of high-performance and 
high-efficiency hull forms.
    The committee encourages the Navy to increase its 
investment in an advanced hull form development and prototype 
demonstration initiative and at sea testing to accelerate the 
development and transition of advanced hull designs, 
particularly hull forms that reduce injury to small craft 
operators and warfighters.

Advanced low-weight body armor report

    The committee is aware that next generation body armor 
technology, including ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, 
may provide maximum protection against a wide range of 
ballistics threats in a lighter, more flexible application that 
enhances comfort, mobility, and safety. Furthermore, high 
performance lightweight body armor technology could 
successfully protect warfighters, and with a range of modern 
lightweight, low-profile material grades, next generation body 
armor may offer a practical solution for all soldiers. The 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, in 
conjunction with the service secretaries, is directed to submit 
a report to the congressional defense committees not later than 
90 days after the enactment of this Act. The report should 
describe the Department's efforts to make available ultra-high 
molecular weight polyethylene and other next generation body 
armor technologies, including for vests, helmets and inserts. 
The report should also review technologies across the Services 
and highlight those that provide exceptional protective 
performance without compromising comfort, agility, or function.

Aerospace sensors

    U.S. Air Force (USAF) and U.S. Navy front-line fighter 
aircraft are equipped with the Active Electronically Scanned 
Array (AESA) radar with all services actively pursuing back fit 
of AESA radars on legacy aircraft. The USAF has identified 
threats from adversaries operating at frequencies where AESA's 
capabilities can be further improved and the USAF has tasked 
the Air Force Research Lab to lead the development of 
technologies that address these capability gaps. The Air 
Force's objective is to develop hardware that can be used 
across the services to address spectrum threats not only to 
AESA radars but threats to weapons, missile seekers, and other 
airborne platforms. The committee believes that dedicated 
resources to this program will result in newer, more capable 
arrays which will provide significant performance advantages, 
with wider frequency coverage. 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.

Airless Tire Technology Demonstration

    Special operations and other forces are heavily deployed 
across the world and will continue to be, in increasingly 
asymmetrical and unconventional warfare environments. The 
committee supports technology that will dramatically improve 
the mobility and safety of military personnel operating in 
hazardous environments, like non-pneumatic or airless tire 
technology. Airless tires can be superior to conventional tires 
in specific locations because they remain consistent in 
different atmospheric pressures and austere environments, are 
low maintenance, and require no additional inflation gauges or 
tools, saving weight and space for other essential equipment. 
The committee notes that an airless tire technology prototype 
has been developed and patented commercially and could be 
deployed in the next 18-24 months.

Army Assured Mobility in Northern Regions

    Given the National Defense Strategy's emphasis on great 
power competition, the Committee is interested in the Army's 
plans for ensuring the mobility of Army ground vehicles in 
northern terrain environments to include the Arctic region and 
similar cold weather terrain. The Committee encourages the 
Secretary of the Army to ensure that ground vehicles are 
adequately prepared by conducting a series of experiments, if 
necessary, in these harsh northern environs, to include snow, 
ice, and muskeg. Such experiences could demonstrate science and 
technology capabilities to support future acquisition. 
Furthermore, the Secretary may develop a test plan to assess 
the current vehicle fleet and, if required, develop potential 
vehicle upgrades to support maneuver in northern regions that 
incorporate new hardware and software technologies.

Combat Vehicle Light Weight Development Program

    The committee understands that legacy ground combat 
vehicles are struggling to meet performance requirements, 
especially survivability, due to the increasing threat and 
resulting armor applique weight increases. Developing 
lightweight combat vehicles is critical to warfighter 
effectiveness, fuel management, and mobility.
    Therefore, the committee encourages the Department of 
Defense to accelerate research, development, and partnership 
activities involving industry, government laboratories, and 
academia to accelerate development of lightweight materials and 
manufacturing methods for next generation ground combat 
vehicles.
    The focus of the program should be on new, stronger, and 
lighter materials, multi-material manufacturing processes, 
innovative lightweight design methods, and technology transfer 
to develop a robust industrial base.

Comptroller General review of Department of Defense industry 
        Independent Research and Development funding

    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to undertake a review of the Department of Defense's 
(DOD) industry Independent Research and Development (IR&D) 
funding.
    For nearly 80 years, the Department of Defense (DOD) has 
relied on industry IR&D as a key source of innovation to help 
maintain U.S. superiority on the battlefield. IR&D is initiated 
and conducted by defense contractors without direct DOD 
funding. Rather, IR&D costs are allowable as indirect expenses 
on contracts to the extent that they are allocable, fair, and 
reasonable.
    To qualify as IR&D, the work must fall within the four 
following areas: (1) Basic research; (2) Applied research; (3) 
Development; and (4) Systems and other concept formulation 
studies. Further, the work must not be sponsored by a grant, 
required in the performance of a contract, or include technical 
effort expended in developing and preparing technical data 
specifically to support a submitted bid or proposal. The 
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) outlines 
additional IR&D requirements. Importantly, DOD's IR&D program 
offers participating industry firms the independence to decide 
which technologies to pursue, as long as these efforts are of 
potential interest to the DOD, as required by the Defense FAR 
Supplement. In recent years, however, the DOD and industry have 
cited communication gaps as having undermined their ability to 
validate that this linkage exists. Specifically, industry 
participants have lacked consistent visibility on DOD's 
investment priorities, and the DOD has lacked insight into 
industry IR&D projects.
    The DOD has taken some steps to address the aforementioned 
gaps, including the creation of a Defense Innovation 
Marketplace website to facilitate IR&D communication. 
Nonetheless, the committee remains concerned that these actions 
may not provide sufficient guidance to maximize the impact of 
industry's IR&D investments for the DOD. The committee notes 
that the 2018 National Defense Strategy also highlights the 
need for additional changes to industry culture and investment 
sources in order to maintain DOD's technological advantage. 
Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to review DOD's IR&D efforts. This review 
should address: (1) DOD's policies and processes for managing 
IR&D, including how it structures contracts with industry 
partners to facilitate IR&D; (2) The levels and types of 
investment the DOD and industry have made in IR&D; (3) The 
benefits and incentives that IR&D offers to its industry 
participants; and (4) The innovation outcomes that the DOD and 
industry have obtained through IR&D. The review should also 
recommend improvements to DOD's IR&D efforts, as appropriate.

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Gremlins Air-Recoverable 
        Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System

    The committee is aware of the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) led ``Gremlins'' research project 
focused on technologies enabling aircraft to launch volleys of 
affordable and reusable unmanned air systems (OAS), while 
reliably recovering them in mid-air. The committee is familiar 
with the persistent anti-access area denial (A2/AD) threat and 
believes that the project may develop a strategic tool in 
countering such tactics. The committee remains encouraged by 
the ongoing research and progress of the project, noting the 
award of a Phase 3 contract to support a feasibility 
demonstration in fiscal year 2019.
    The committee encourages the Air Force to review and 
evaluate the Gremlins Program as the demonstrated capabilities 
mature, and develop a coordinated strategy with DARPA for 
potential transition of systems or technologies into Air Force 
programs. Considering the importance of overcoming A2/AD 
tactics by our adversaries, the committee expects the Air Force 
to keep the congressional defense committees updated on the 
Department's plans for potential transition of this critical 
technology into a formal acquisition effort.

Department of Defense Laboratory talent management and succession 
        planning

    The committee shares concerns raised by the Defense Science 
Board that the Department of Defense laboratories should invest 
in succession planning, in order to ensure quality high-level 
staff. This concern is especially acute given the near-constant 
need to adapt to emerging technology. Laboratory directors 
should conduct a strategic planning process to ensure that high 
level personnel are serving in appropriate positions and that 
an adequate succession plan exists.

Diamond transistor technology for power conversion in combat 
        infrastructure 

    The committee recognizes the Army's ongoing need to reduce 
the size and weight and increase the power and efficiency of 
electrical power conversion and distribution systems used in 
combat and field deployable operations. The committee 
understands that diamond semiconductors offer the potential to 
potentially reduce the size and weight of these systems, 
provide significant gains in power and efficiency, and increase 
system survivability through enhanced electromagnetic pulse 
protection. The committee is encouraged by the interest shown 
by the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center 
Combat Engineering Research Laboratory in investigating new 
techniques to build on previous efforts to produce diamond 
transistors, in trying to mature the technology to support 
potential device and product development, and believes more 
research effort in this field is warranted.

Fielding of radiation detection devices

    The committee is encouraged by the Army's efforts to field 
additional modern radiation detection devices, specifically AN/
PDR-75A Radiac Sets (Personal Dosimeters), in order to reduce 
the current readiness gap within the Active Army force 
structure. Although nearly fifty percent of Active Army forces 
do not yet have this relatively inexpensive, yet critical item 
of equipment, funding provided in fiscal year 2018 will allow 
the Army to reduce that shortfall significantly. The committee 
is further encouraged by the Army's efforts in fiscal year 2019 
to develop and field the next-generation Joint Personal 
Dosimeter-Individual (JPDI). An individual dosimeter that 
includes immediate visual alert, measurement of radiation dose, 
and inclusion of a comprehensive, legal record and definitive 
proof of radiation exposure over a soldier's entire career is 
highly beneficial.
    The committee encourages the Army to conduct a rigorous, 
fair, and open competition for this new system to ensure the 
very best dosimeter is developed and selected for deployment to 
soldiers worldwide in order to increase unit and individual 
survivability.

Hyper Velocity Projectile

    The committee is aware that the Strategic Capabilities 
Office (SCO) is testing a Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP), a 
next generation, common, low drag, guided projectile capable of 
completing multiple missions for Navy 5-inch guns, Army and 
Marine Corps 155-mm howitzers, and future electromagnetic (EM) 
railguns.
    The committee understands that the development and fielding 
of HVP is a priority to address mission requirements for 
conventional cannon artillery, naval surface fire support, 
cruise missile defense, anti-ship warfare, and anti-aircraft 
warfare. The HVP will also be critical to future EM railguns, 
which could achieve projectile speeds of Mach 6, double that of 
conventional naval cannons and artillery.
    The committee believes that the increased velocity, 
precision and extended range of the HVP will provide the Navy, 
Army, and Marine Corps with the capability to address a variety 
of current and future threats. Coupled with accurate guidance 
electronics, HVP could provide low cost mission effectiveness 
against current threats and the ability to adapt to future air 
and surface threats.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the 
Strategic Capabilities Office, in consultation with the 
Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Army, and the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps, to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees by December 31, 2018, on the 
status of the HVP program. The report should include when 
testing will complete and a description of how HVP could be 
fielded on current and future naval guns and cannon artillery, 
including the Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) Program.

Improved Turbine Engine Program

    The committee commends the Army for moving forward with 
research and development for the Improved Turbine Engine 
Program (ITEP). The committee notes the importance of this 
critical program, which is intended to develop a more fuel-
efficient and powerful engine for the current UH-60 Black Hawk 
and AH-64 Apache helicopter fleets. This new engine will 
substantially increase operational capabilities by increasing 
range and improving 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 supports ITEP in fiscal year 2019.

Land-Based Anti-Ship Missile

    The committee is concerned that the United States has no 
mobile, land-based anti-ship missile capability. The committee 
supports the Army's Long-Range Precision Fires modernization 
effort, in particular its Land-Based Anti-Ship Missile (LBASM) 
development. The ability to engage and sink enemy ships from as 
many domains as possible can be a critical capability in a 
contested maritime environment. The committee strongly 
encourages the Army to collaborate with the other Services on 
compatible sensor technology, fire control systems, and 
networks to maximize the joint force's ability to locate and 
successfully engage sea-based weapon systems. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to brief the appropriate 
defense committees by December 31, 2018, on this program, 
including how the Services are cooperating and collaborating on 
this effort.

Military applications for Graphene

    The committee understands that graphene is a promising 
material that possesses very significant levels of tensile 
strength, flexibility, transparency, conductivity, and other 
properties. The committee also understands that initial 
research demonstrates promising applications for graphene. The 
committee believes that the Department of Defense (DOD) should 
pursue research into materials that may provide competitive 
advantages, particularly against near-peer potential 
adversaries. The committee believes that the Department should 
evaluate potential military applications of graphene.
    Not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act, 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, in 
consultation with the Director, Army Research Laboratory; 
Director, Navy Research Laboratory; and Director, Air Force 
Research Laboratory, shall provide to the congressional defense 
committees a report on potential military applications of 
graphene. The report shall include the following elements: (1) 
A description of DOD efforts to study graphene; (2) An 
assessment of the maturity of basic and applied research on 
graphene; and (3) The potential military applications of 
graphene for ship and aircraft coatings, land-based and space-
based sensors, individual protective equipment, facility blast 
protection, water and fuel filtration, energy storage, and 
energy generation in photovoltaic cells.

Modernizing Towed 105 Artillery Systems

    The committee understands that the Army is considering the 
procurement of a self-propelled 105mm howitzer that could 
increase the lethality and maintain the mobility of Infantry 
Brigade Combat Teams. The committee remains concerned about the 
proliferation of sophisticated quick-fire counter-battery 
systems, and believes that the system under consideration could 
provide a substantial improvement to the Army's deterrent 
posture in Europe. The committee is aware that the system under 
evaluation incorporates artillery soft recoil technology with 
existing 105mm artillery systems and then further integrates 
these technologies onto a light tactical vehicle platform. This 
approach could enable the Army to achieve significant 
improvements in combat capability with only modest reinvestment 
of funding for current or future planned M119 modifications. 
The committee encourages the Army to continue to review this 
capability through the Army's cross-functional team or urgent 
operational needs processes.

Next Generation Health Monitoring System (NGHMS)

    The committee is aware of the Army UH-72 Light Utility 
Helicopter (LUH) testing of the Next Generation Health 
monitoring system (NGHMS). The committee understands that 
initial testing shows the potential for NGHMS to collect 
maintenance intelligence and prognostics to enable early 
warning of failing mechanical systems. This information could 
reduce emergency maintenance costs, provide predictable 
maintenance schedules, and increase readiness for the LUH 
fleet.
    The committee is aware that recent Army bench testing of 
the technology was successful. Installation onto LUH platforms 
for operational testing will begin in March 2018. Specifically, 
the U.S Army will install NGHMS on 8 Lakota platforms. This 
initial operational testing is intended to validate increases 
in readiness and reductions in operating costs. However, to 
assure proper evaluation across a variety of missions and 
terrains, the committee encourages the Army to outfit an 
additional 20 LUH Aircraft with NGHMS and include them with the 
current test schedule. The committee believes that additional 
testing will provide critical information and allow for near-
term decisions to achieve efficient maintenance structures that 
foster quality and well-organized fleet management.

Policy issues surrounding emerging technologies for combat and non-
        combat use

    The committee notes increasing public debate from 
policymakers and civil society regarding the employment of 
emerging technologies. The committee applauds technological 
advancements in fields such as artificial intelligence, 
unmanned aerial vehicles, facial recognition software, 
surveillance capabilities, and biological enhancements but 
encourages the Department of Defense (DOD) to designate an 
entity to thoroughly examine the policy questions surrounding 
their use in combat and non-combat scenarios, including 
potential political, legal, and ethical impacts.
    The Department should outline methods of technological 
usage for new technologies, especially capabilities that 
utilize the privacy and data of U.S. citizens. For instance, 
cautionary reports from civil society, academia, and industry 
warn of the potentially harmful effects of artificial 
intelligence in the national security space. With the 
proliferation of drone use and artificial intelligence, the DOD 
has yet to proactively address questions of application and 
use. The committee urges the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Research and Engineering to consider the anticipated 
application of emerging technologies in combat and non-combat 
scenarios.

Rapid-charging hybrid energy storage fuel cells

    The committee acknowledges the availability of advanced 
hybrid energy storage systems that rapidly charge, allowing 
more time in the field, providing more effective use of 
alternative energy sources, and supporting the use of micro-
grids for more robust capability. The committee encourages 
further research of these technologies to enhance system 
capability.

Report on Metal Matrix Composites for Army Vehicles

    The committee recognizes the versatility and broad 
application that Metal Matrix Composite (MMC) Technology 
provides for the armed services by reducing the weight of parts 
by fifty percent and increasing the service life by three to 
four times over traditional steel. The committee recommends 
that the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Research, Development, and 
Engineering Center (TARDEC) continue to test, develop, and 
field components that can reduce vehicle weight, reduce fuel 
consumption, increase payload capacity, and extend service 
life.
    The committee further directs the Assistant Secretary of 
the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology to provide 
the congressional defense committees a report on the progress 
of development and implementation of MMC components that can be 
fielded in Army Ground and Tactical Wheeled Vehicles in order 
to reduce vehicle weight, reduce fuel consumption, increase 
payload capacity, and extend service life. This report should 
be received no later than March 31, 2019.

Research, development, and procurement of wearable and mobile remote 
        power capabilities

    The committee understands the advantages that remote power 
capabilities provide to warfighters in the field, especially 
renewable power sources such as wearable solar panels. Further, 
the committee understands the benefits this type of combat 
capability provided through dedicated research and development 
funding, along with procurement and sustainment resources, to 
not only the military services, but also improve the mission 
capabilities of Federal and state law enforcement entities.
    Additionally, the committee recognizes the ability of 
academic and private entities to research and develop remote 
power capabilities due private sector applications of the 
technology. Therefore, the committee strongly encourages the 
Department of Defense to continue to invest resources in 
academic, private, government entities to research, develop, 
and deploy portable power capabilities across the military 
services in support of warfighter needs.

Soldier Borne Sensor (SBS) Program 

    The committee supports the Secretary of the Army's recent 
emphasis on modernization, particularly the efforts to increase 
the lethality of our soldiers. Further, the committee is aware 
that small unit intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
capabilities can provide soldiers with critically needed 
situational awareness particularly in subterranean and Global 
Positioning System-denied environments. The committee 
understands that the Soldier Borne Sensor (SBS) program is key 
to these efforts. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services by September 30, 2018 on the SBS 
program. At a minimum, this report shall include a detailed 
assessment of threshold requirements, objective requirements, 
and other factors under consideration as the Army makes a 
determination for the SBS program.

Surrogates for operational testing of torpedoes and torpedo defensive 
        systems

    The committee understands that the Navy routinely conducts 
in-water operational testing of its anti-submarine torpedoes 
against manned U.S. Navy submarines. The Director of 
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) has indicated that test 
range safety rules, combined with the inability of U.S. nuclear 
attack submarines to appropriately emulate threat-
representative submarines, limit the operational realism of 
these test events. The committee notes that since 2013, the 
Navy, in coordination with the DOT&E, has worked to define the 
requirements for a mobile set-to-hit torpedo target, but has 
yet to procure such targets. The committee is concerned that 
U.S. defenses are not being tested using test assets 
representative of many highly capable and proliferated threat 
torpedoes.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to deliver to the congressional defense committees not later 
than March 1, 2019, a plan for the use of threat-representative 
surrogates for torpedoes and torpedo defensive systems. For 
fiscal years 2020 through 2024, the plan shall include threats 
being addressed, test and evaluation activities, budgeted 
funding, additional funding requirements, and the associated 
schedule.

Technology and transition accelerators

    The committee recognizes the potential and benefits of the 
Technology and Transition Accelerators established by the 
Department of Defense. Technology accelerators, including those 
efforts under the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research 
and Engineering, are aimed at providing opportunities for the 
Department to leverage public-private partnerships in order to 
build a network connecting national security challenges with 
innovators and entrepreneurs. Technology transition 
accelerators, like the Defense Advanced Research Project 
Agency's Microsystem Technology Office Transition Accelerator 
and the Small Business Innovation Research program, strive to 
improve the business models of small high-tech companies and 
support researchers in moving technologies from concept to 
commercialization in order to position them for impact in both 
the defense and commercial markets. The committee encourages 
the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to 
review these and other similar activities and assess their 
potential application to other parts of the research and 
engineering enterprise.

Trusted and assured microelectronics

    The committee is aware of the importance of the Department 
of Defense's long-term strategy to ensure trusted and assured 
supply chains for defense systems. The committee also 
recognizes that the Joint Federated Assurance Center (JFAC) 
provides a bridge between science and technology programs and 
defense programs, enhancing the Department's ability to rapidly 
transition microelectronics technology to the joint force. Not 
later than February 1, 2019, the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Systems Engineering shall provide to the congressional 
defense committees a briefing on a strategy to optimize and 
formalize the technology transition process utilizing the JFAC.

Ultra Low Power Deployable Radar

    The committee is aware of efforts undertaken by U.S. 
Special Operations Command 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. The committee understands that 
the military services are exploring the utility of this 
capability to meet their requirements and looks forward to the 
results of their review.

 Ultra-Lightweight Camouflage Net System

    The U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps rely on multispectral 
camouflage nets to cloak U.S. and allied weapon systems from 
enemy visual detection, radars, and sensors. Foreign detection 
devices such as sensors and radars now are overmatching the 
current camouflage nets and pose an imminent threat to U.S. 
forces. The committee notes the long standing success of our 
allied partner nations who employ mobile camouflage systems on 
their combat vehicles, especially within NATO and the European 
theater. These relatively inexpensive camouflage net systems 
provide enhanced signature management protection, reduce heat 
and temperature inside and around combat vehicles, and yield 
fuel savings without interfering with the operation of the 
vehicles.
    Army commanders have expressed an immediate operational 
need for mobile camouflage systems, in woodland, desert, and 
arctic variants in particular. The committee is aware of the 
Army's on-going operational testing of mobile camouflage 
systems at the National Training Center and elsewhere and 
encourages further acceleration of those efforts. Given the 
potential significant advantages of developing this capability, 
with specific interest towards enhancing interoperability, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide the 
congressional defense committees, within 90 days of enactment 
of this Act, with a report which outlines the mobile camouflage 
system test results and the Army's plan and timeline to fund 
development, testing, and fielding of these systems to the 
warfighter.

Workforce and infrastructure for National Defense Strategy priority 
        technologies

    The committee recognizes that the National Defense Strategy 
identified certain priority emerging technologies (for example, 
advanced computing, ``big data'' analytics, artificial 
intelligence, autonomy, robotics, directed energy, hypersonics, 
and biotechnology) as having the potential to change the very 
character of war. The committee has followed this designation 
with the authorization of investments in research within these 
categories within other portions of this Act.
    However, the committee urges the Department of Defense 
(DOD) to prioritize those supporting capabilities that will 
enable technological progress in these areas-namely, workforce 
and infrastructure. Too often, these supporting functions are 
forgotten and research suffers for lack of qualified personnel 
or test facilities within the DOD laboratories and the Major 
Range and Test Facility Base.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report on workforce and infrastructure needs for 
the development of each of these priority technologies over the 
coming five years. The report should include specific 
shortfalls in each category, if they exist, and recommendations 
for legislative action if necessary. The report must be 
submitted by March 15, 2019, to the relevant congressional 
defense committees.

                  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--Energy and Environment

Further improvements to energy security and resilience (sec. 311)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
further improvements to energy security and resilience within 
the Department of Defense by ensuring mission assurance is 
prioritized in energy policy and management. Additionally, the 
provision would require the development of goals and metrics to 
assess progress when implementing energy resilience projects.
Funding of study and assessment of health implications of per- and 
        polyfluoroalkyl substances contamination in drinking water by 
        Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (sec. 312)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 316(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to allow funds to be 
transferred to the Secretary of Health and Human Services for 
the study and assessment of health implications of per- and 
polyfluoroalkyl substances.
Military Mission Sustainment Siting Clearinghouse (sec. 313)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 183a of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that 
the Military Mission Sustainment Siting Clearinghouse shall be 
organized under the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
and Sustainment. Additionally, this provision encourages the 
Military Mission Sustainment Siting Clearinghouse to prioritize 
pilot safety when evaluating energy projects. The committee 
understands the immense workload of the clearinghouse and 
therefore, recommends a $1.0 million funding increase for the 
Clearinghouse office as specified in the funding tables.
Operational energy policy (sec. 314)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2926 of title 10, United States Code, to provide a 
comprehensive operational energy policy and to promote the 
development and acquisition of equipment that enhances energy 
security and energy resilience.
Funding treatment of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and 
        perfluorooctanoic acid at State-owned and operated National 
        Guard installations (sec. 315)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to treat perfluorooctane sulfonic acid 
and perfluorooctanoic acid in drinking water at State-owned and 
operated National Guard installations with several limitations. 
The provision would also authorize the National Guard access to 
environmental restoration funds.
    The committee notes that this provision does not reflect 
any intent of serve as a statement on government liability. 
This is a process for funding to address a very specific and 
severe health concern. The committee takes no stance on pending 
court cases between the federal government and state and local 
municipalities. The committee hopes that the lessons learned 
from this incident by all parties involved will prevent such an 
event from occurring in the future.

                          Subtitle C--Reports

Reports on readiness (sec. 321)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
Quarterly Readiness Report to Congress (QRRC) to establish a 
tracking mechanism for the number of monthly C-level upgrades 
or downgrades by a unit commander. The provision would also 
separate the annex on operational contract support and make it 
a standalone annual report in order to decrease the delivery 
time of the QRRC.
Report on cold weather capabilities and readiness of United States 
        Armed Forces (sec. 322)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the current cold weather capabilities 
and readiness of the United States Armed Forces not later than 
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Pilot programs on integration of military information support and civil 
        affairs activities (sec. 331)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the commanders of the geographic combatant commands and U.S. 
Special Operations Command to carry out pilot programs for the 
integration of military information support and civil affairs 
activities in support of the theater campaign plans of such 
combatant command.
    The committee believes that Department of Defense civil 
affairs and military information support activities are 
complementary and are important tools to support the military 
objectives of the combatant commands. These efforts can be 
better leveraged to provide whole of government solutions to a 
rapidly evolving global security environment.
    The committee also notes that the process for funding the 
execution of military information support and civil affairs 
activities often does not align with operational timelines or 
involves fiscal authorities that are misaligned to the purpose 
of the activity. The fiscal authority provided under this pilot 
program would provide a flexible and more appropriate means for 
funding military information support and civil affairs 
activities while also incentivizing whole of government 
solutions in support of U.S. messaging and stabilization 
objectives.
Reporting on future years budgeting by subactivity group (sec. 332)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the military 
departments to include in their OP-5 Justification Books the 
amount for each subactivity group as detailed in the Department 
of Defense's future years defense program.
    The committee notes that other Justification Books, such as 
those for Procurement and Research, Development, Testing, and 
Evaluation, currently contain this information.
Restriction on upgrades to aviation demonstration team aircraft (sec. 
        333)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of Defense from upgrading the type, model, or 
series of aircraft used by a military service for its fixed 
wing aviation demonstration teams, including the Blue Angels 
and Thunderbirds aircraft, until the Service's active and 
reserve duty squadrons and weapons training schools have 
replaced 100 percent of the existing type, model, and series of 
aircraft unless the Secretary grants a waiver to upgrade for 
the purposes of pilot safety.
U.S. Special Operations Command civilian personnel (sec. 334)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that, of the funds authorized in Operation & Maintenance, 
Defense-wide for U.S. Special Operations Command civilian 
personnel, not less than $6.2 million shall be used to fund the 
detail of civilian personnel to the office of the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity 
Conflict (ASD SOLIC) to support the Secretariat for Special 
Operations.
    The committee remains concerned that current civilian 
manpower within the ASD SOLIC is not sufficient to fulfill the 
``service secretary-like'' responsibilities for the advocacy 
and oversight of special operations forces mandated by section 
922 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017 (Public Law 114-328). According to a report required by 
section 1074 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), an independent manpower 
study by the U.S. Army Manpower Analysis Agency determined that 
a total of 64 civilian personnel could be required to execute 
the ``service secretary-like'' responsibilities required of the 
ASD SOLIC by law. According to the same report, only 14 
personnel are currently assisting the ASD SOLIC for the 
fulfillment of these responsibilities.
    The committee is concerned that the number of civilian 
personnel assigned to U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) 
continues to grow, including a planned increase of 128 civilian 
personnel in fiscal year 2019. The committee notes that the 
establishment of the ASD SOLIC Secretariat for Special 
Operations should result in administrative and oversight 
efficiencies and the transfer of functions that are more 
appropriately conducted by the ASD SOLIC. This provision is 
intended to facilitate the transfer of no fewer than 50 
civilian personnel from SOCOM to the ASD SOLIC for support of 
the Secretariat for Special Operations.
Limitation on availability of funds for service-specific Defense 
        Readiness Reporting Systems (sec. 335)
    The committee recommends a provision that would restrict 
the Department of Defense funds to operate service-specific 
Defense Readiness Reporting Systems (DRRS) until the Secretary 
of Defense submits a resource and funding plan to eliminate 
service-specific DRRS.
    The committee notes that according to chapter 2 of title 
10, United States Code, as amended by the Strom Thurmond 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public 
Law 105-261), DRRS was to be ``applied uniformly throughout the 
Department of Defense.'' The committee is concerned that the 
military services are not adhering to the prescribed law by 
having separate readiness reporting systems, even though they 
all bear the same name. The committee notes that since each 
service, with the exception of the Air Force, operates its own 
system separate from the Office of the Secretary of Defense and 
Joint Staff, it is difficult and time consuming to capture a 
real-time, accurate readiness rating.
Repurposing and reuse of surplus Army firearms (sec. 336)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 348(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) by inserting ``shredded 
or'' before ``melted and repurposed''.
    The committee notes the provision would grant the Army 
flexibility to better control costs when conducting scheduled 
demilitarizing of surplus firearms.
Limitation on availability of funds for establishment of additional 
        specialized undergraduate pilot training facility (sec. 337)
    The committee recommends a provision that would limit funds 
to establish a new specialized undergraduate pilot training 
location until the Secretary of the Air Force submits a 
prescribed certification. The provision would also require the 
Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report on specialized 
undergraduate pilot training production, resourcing, and 
locations.
Scope of authority for restoration of land due to mishap (sec. 338)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2691 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify 
vehicle crashes must meet the regulations of the Federal 
department with administrative jurisdictions of the affected 
land.
Redesignation of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR) (sec. 339)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Utah Test and Training Range located in northwestern Utah and 
eastern Nevada to be redesignated.

                 Subtitle E--Logistics and Sustainment

Limitation on modifications to Navy Facilities Sustainment, 
        Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM) structure and mechanism 
        (sec. 351)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of the Navy from making any modifications to the 
existing Navy Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and 
Modernization (FSRM) structure until 90 days after providing 
notice of the proposed FSRM modification to the congressional 
defense committees.

                              Budget Items

United States Southern Command unfunded priorities increase
    The budget request included $51.3 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $1.3 billion was for SAG 411 
Security Programs.
    The committee notes that United States Southern Command 
(SOUTHCOM) identified intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance as an unfunded priority.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase in OMA of 
$14.3 million for SAG 411 Security Programs for SOUTHCOM 
airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.
Army marketing and advertising reduction
    The budget request included $42.0 billion in the Operation 
and Maintenance, Army (OMA), of which $698.9 million was for 
SAG 331 Recruiting and Advertising.
    The committee continues to be concerned with the Army's 
lack of oversight and inability to track performance metrics in 
its recruiting, marketing, and advertising efforts. The 
committee is also concerned by the lack of contracting 
professionals employed by the Army Marketing and Research Group 
and expects the Army to take appropriate accountability 
measures on those contracts that were awarded inappropriately. 
The committee notes the requested resources could be better 
aligned for other readiness priorities.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $200.0 
million in OMA to SAG 331 Recruiting and Advertising.
Army Operation and Maintenance budget request for civilian pay
    The budget request included $51.3 billion for Operation and 
Maintenance, Army.
    The Office of Inspector General released a study in March 
2018 that found the Army has under executed its civilian pay 
budget for the last 3 fiscal years, mainly due to the Army's 
non-compliance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and 
Office of the Secretary of Defense guidance.
    Specifically, the Inspector General found that the 
adjustments applied to the basic compensation calculation were 
normally not permitted by OMB policy and overtime was not 
included in the Army budget request. Additionally, army 
officials utilized excess civilian compensation to pay for 
underfunded non-pay operating expenses, intentionally not 
hiring up to the Army's civilian personnel authorizations.
    The Army under-executed the civilian pay requested in the 
fiscal year 2017 President's Budget by $481.5 million, which 
was the most the Army has under-executed in the last 3 years.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $200.0 
million to Operation and Maintenance, Army.
United States Southern Command unfunded priorities increase for sensor 
        integration
    The budget request included $56.8 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $1.4 billion was for SAG 1C1C 
Combat Communications and Electronic Warfare.
    The committee notes that United States Southern Command 
(SOUTHCOM) identified intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance as an unfunded priority.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase in OMN of 
$1.7 million for SAG 1C1C Combat Communications and Electronic 
Warfare for SOUTHCOM airborne intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance.

Enterprise information reduction

    The budget request included $49.0 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy, of which $921.9 million was for SAG BSIT 
Enterprise Information.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $45.0 
million to SAG BSIT Enterprise Information for a general 
reduction.

Navy facilities, sustainment, restoration, and modernization increase

    The budget request included $49.0 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), of which $2.0 billion was for SAG BSM1 
Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization.
    The committee notes the importance of maintaining the 
crucial facilities that support the warfighter both in the 
United States and overseas. The committee believes facilities, 
sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM) funding is 
crucial to rebuilding and maintaining readiness.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $406.0 
million to SAG BSM1 for FSRM.

F-35 depot component repair capability

    The budget request included $42.1 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $758.2 million was for 
SAG 11A Air Operations, Primary Combat Forces and Support.
    The committee remains concerned by the Not Mission 
Capable--Supply (NMC-S) rates of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. 
In part, the high NMC-S rates are due to a lack of adequate 
repair capacity. As the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
noted in a report published on October 26, 2017, titled ``F-35 
Aircraft Sustainment: DOD Needs to Address Challenges Affecting 
Readiness and Cost Transparency'' (GAO-18-75), ``DOD does not 
have enough capacity to repair F-35 aircraft parts because the 
establishment of repair capabilities at the military depots is 
6 years behind schedule'' (page 12). The report goes on to say, 
``Program officials in part attributed these delays to the 
military services not providing enough funding for depot 
requirements; however, service officials told us the program 
office did not clearly identify some depot requirements in a 
timely manner necessary for the services to fund those 
requirements'' (page 13).
    Despite the clear and obvious shortcomings in F-35 
sustainment, the committee is not convinced that the program 
office and the Services are adequately addressing the problems, 
including providing adequate funding to stand up depot 
component repair capabilities and purchase the necessary lay-in 
material, both of which are years behind schedule.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million in OMAF to SAG 11A Air Operations, Primary Combat 
Forces and Support for the stand up of depot component repair 
capabilities.

Air Force demolition increases

    The budget request included $42.0 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $2.9 billion was for 
SAG 11R Real Property Maintenance. The budget request also 
included $3.3 billion in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force 
Reserve (OMAFR), of which $120.7 million was for SAG 11R Real 
Property Maintenance.
    The committee notes the importance of Department of Defense 
infrastructure to supporting operational readiness. The 
committee is concerned, however, that the Department is not 
allocating proper resources for demolishing older buildings 
that are not in use but still require crucial resources to 
maintain.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends increases of $25.0 
million to SAG 11R in OMAF for demolition and $2.8 million to 
SAG 11R in OMAFR for demolition.

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System weapons system 
        sustainment

    The budget request included $42.1 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $3.8 billion was for 
SAG 11W Air Operations, Contractor Logistics Support and System 
Support.
    The budget request included the retirement of three E-8C 
Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) 
aircraft. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a 
provision that would prohibit the retirement of any E-8C JSTARS 
aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $95.9 
million in OMAF to SAG 11W Air Operations, Contractor Logistics 
Support and System Support to restore reductions associated 
with the divestment of three E-8C JSTARS aircraft.

Air Force weapon system sustainment increases

    The budget request included $42.0 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $3.8 billion was for 
SAG 11W Contractor Logistics Support and System Support. The 
budget request also included $3.3 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force Reserve (OMAFR), of which $241.2 million 
was for SAG 11W Contractor Logistics Support and System 
Support.
    The committee notes the importance of weapon system 
sustainment (WSS) to ensure the Air Force's crucial weapon 
systems that support the warfighter are at the highest 
readiness rating possible. The committee notes that the Air 
Force has additional execution capability to bring WSS to 100 
percent for the active component and 91 percent for the reserve 
component.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends increases of $550.0 
million to SAG 11W Contractor Logistics Support and System 
Support OMAF for WSS and $52.0 million to SAG 11W Contractor 
Logistics Support and System Support in OMAFR for WSS.

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System flight hours

    The budget request included $42.1 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), of which $4.4 billion was for 
SAG 11Y Air Operations, Flying Hour Program.
    The budget request included the retirement of three E-8C 
Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) 
aircraft. Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends a 
provision that would prohibit the retirement of any E-8C JSTARS 
aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million in OMAF to SAG 11Y Air Operations, Flying Hour Program 
to restore flying hour reductions associated with the 
divestment of three E-8C JSTARS aircraft.

Deployable airbase systems

    The budget request included $42.1 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force.
    As part of its strategic approach for addressing long-term 
strategic competition with China and Russia, the National 
Defense Strategy calls for building a more lethal force, 
including investments in forward force maneuver, posture 
resilience, and resilient and agile logistics. The objectives 
of these investments are to ensure that U.S. forces can 
``deploy, survive, operate, maneuver, and regenerate in all 
domains while under attack'' and conduct ``logistics 
sustainment while under persistent multi-domain attack.'' 
Meeting these objectives will require a transition ``from 
large, centralized, unhardened infrastructure to smaller, 
dispersed, resilient, adaptive basing that include active and 
passive defenses'' as well as an emphasis on ``prepositioned 
forward stocks and munitions, strategic mobility assets,'' and 
``distributed logistics and maintenance.''
    Consistent with the priorities set forth in the National 
Defense Strategy, the committee has fully supported resiliency 
efforts such as the prepositioning of European contingency air 
operations set deployable airbase Systems, which is part of the 
European Deterrence Initiative, to complement and enhance the 
theater-wide response capability of the U.S. Air Force in 
Europe.
    However, the committee is concerned that the appropriate 
level of investment in similar resiliency efforts in the Indo-
Pacific region has not materialized. U.S. force posture in the 
Indo-Pacific region remains heavily concentrated in Northeast 
Asia within range of China's advanced arsenal of ballistic and 
cruise missiles, posing a significant risk to forward-stationed 
forces, to the ability of the joint force to execute the 
contingency plans of the Department of Defense, and to the 
credibility of U.S. deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region.
    As a result, Admiral Harry Harris, Commander, U.S. Pacific 
Command (PACOM), identified force posture initiatives focused 
on resiliency as critical requirements in his letter to the 
committee of February 22, 2018, concerning PACOM's unfunded 
priority list and in his testimony to the committee on March 
15, 2018.
    Therefore, the committee supports the procurement of seven 
deployable airbase systems in fiscal year 2019 to be 
prepositioned forward in the PACOM area of responsibility in 
order to support the priorities of the National Defense 
Strategy and PACOM's ``resiliency'' and ``agile logistics'' 
force posture initiatives, as well as to enhance the credible 
combat power of U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific region.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $156.8 
million in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force.

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System personnel

    The budget request included $6.4 billion in Operation & 
Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG), of which $2.6 billion 
was for SAG 11F Aircraft Operations.
    The budget request included the retirement of three E-8C 
Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) 
aircraft. Included in the divestment is a cost of $1.6 million 
and 16 Full Time Employees. Elsewhere in this Act, the 
committee recommends a provision that would prohibit the 
retirement of any E-8C JSTARS aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.6 
million in OMANG to SAG 11F Aircraft Operations to restore the 
cuts associated with the divestment of three E-8C JSTARS 
aircraft.

Air National Guard increase per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance 
        environmental restoration funding transfer

    The budget request included $6.4 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG), of which $988.3 
million was for SAG 11Z Base Support.
    The committee continues to support the Air Force's 
environmental services efforts to remediate and cleanup per- 
and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
    Accordingly, as requested by the Air Force, the committee 
recommends an increase of $11.0 million in OMANG to SAG 11Z for 
environmental compliance to remediate and cleanup PFAS.
    The committee notes a matching amount of $11.0 million will 
be decreased in the tables from Environmental Restoration, Air 
Force SAG 42G to reflect the transfer.

Plan for incorporating logistics sustainment under attack into war 
        games

    The budget request included $28.6 million in Operations and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW) for SAG 1PL1 Joint Chiefs of 
Staff.
    The committee recognizes that the National Defense 
Strategy's focus on near-peer adversaries fundamentally 
challenges long-held assumptions around uncontested logistics 
sustainment. The committee urges the Department of Defense to 
incorporate appropriate and realistic assumptions around 
logistics and transportation into operational war gaming.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to 
integrate contested logistics and offset technologies into 
exercises carried out by the military departments. These 
exercises should include an identification of common 
assumptions for logistics sustainment based on joint and 
individual recommendations of United States Transportation 
Command and of the military departments. It is also important 
to include a method for capturing lessons learned and providing 
feedback to the Joint Staff and military departments following 
the completion of these exercises. Where possible, the 
committee encourages the inclusion of commercial sector 
partners critical to logistics and sustainment in these 
wargames.
    Further, the committee is supportive of the Department of 
Defense's plans to hold a joint table-top exercise to 
specifically evaluate the effects of energy denial on the 
generation, deployment, employment, and sustainment of combat 
forces. This joint table-top exercise for a scenario in the 
Pacific theater will be designed to thoroughly examine multiple 
seams and the challenges associated with delivery of energy 
over the last tactical mile. Given the fact that power and 
energy are increasingly essential to the employment of military 
capabilities, and new technologies identified in the National 
Defense Strategy, the committee recognizes and strongly 
supports the Department's efforts to plan this exercise and 
strongly encourages the Department to continue to 
comprehensively assess the impacts of operating in an energy 
denied or restricted environment.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million in OMDW to SAG 1PL1 Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Defense Security Service

    The budget request includes $789.2 million in Operations 
and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for the Defense Security Service 
(DSS). The committee notes that DSS has identified shortfalls 
in critical positions that are focused on the protection of 
classified information, technologies, and material in the hands 
of cleared industry.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $18.6 
million in Operations and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for 129 
additional civilian full time equivalent positions to support 
DSS efforts to protect classified information, technologies, 
and material in the hands of cleared industry.

Personnel security background investigations

    The budget request includes $789.2 million in Operations 
and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for SAG 4GTE Defense 
Security Service (DSS).
    The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) directed DSS to 
undertake an additional mission of background investigations 
and personnel security for Department of Defense personnel. 
This transition will require dedicated resources to ensure the 
smooth transfer of responsibilities, and to bridge the gap 
between the Department of Defense and the National Background 
Investigations Bureau as the transfer takes place. The addition 
of this mission will levy an additional duty on an already 
heavily-taxed Defense Security Service, with broad 
responsibilities across the defense industrial base.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $45.0 
million to OMDW, for SAG 4GTE to support DSS efforts to 
establish these capabilities, which may be deployed toward 
transition-focused workforce or developing supporting analytic 
tools, as approved by the security executive agent, as 
necessary.

Funding for impact aid

    The budget request included $2.89 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                     +40.0
 students.............................................
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities......             +10.0
    Total.............................................             +50.0
 

Center for Disease Control study increase

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN).
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91), required the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense to conduct a Center for Disease Control (CDC) 
nationwide health study on per- and polyfluoroalkyl 
contamination in drinking water.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in OMDW to SAG 4GTN Office of the Secretary of Defense 
to continue the CDC health study.

Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse increase

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in the Operation 
and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN), of which $1.6 million was for 
the Department of Defense (DOD) Siting Clearinghouse.
    The committee continues to support the mission of the 
office. However, the committee is also concerned that DOD has 
not allocated sufficient resources to the office given its 
workload and high number of projects.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million to SAG 4GTN for the DOD Siting Clearinghouse. The 
committee encourages the Clearinghouse to make pilot safety a 
top priority and to continue to ensure that construction 
projects do not significantly compromise flight operations 
without appropriate mitigating action.

Defense Environmental International Cooperation program increase

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN), of which no funds were for the 
Defense Environmental International Cooperation (DEIC) program.
    The committee continues to note 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 program enables the Army 
National Guard to share best practices and lessons learned from 
its own HA/DR missions with U.S. allies. This important program 
promotes and develops allied HA/DR capability for a relatively 
small amount of money.
    For example, given current readiness challenges within the 
United States Southern Command and its limited bandwidth to 
respond to HA/DR missions, the Army National Guard has used the 
DEIC program to provide training and capability development to 
countries within the region to remove debris and otherwise 
respond in the event of an earthquake or hurricane. The 
committee continues to support the DEIC program and disagrees 
with DOD's intent to terminate a low-cost and useful training 
program for the Army National Guard.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million to SAG 4GTN for DEIC.

Department of Defense emerging contaminants increase

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN), of which $964,000 was for 
Department of Defense (DOD) emerging contaminants.
    The committee continues to support the mission of the 
office to study, analyze and evaluate threats to warfighters 
and their families. However, the committee is also concerned 
that DOD has not allocated enough resources to the office given 
its workload and the likelihood that DOD will have to address 
an increasing number of emerging contaminants in the future-for 
example, 1,4 Dioxane, Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid, and 1,2,3- 
Trichloropropane-much like it has with per- and polyfluoroalkyl 
substances in sources of drinking water.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million to SAG 4GTN for the DOD emerging contaminants.

Department of Defense environmental resiliency increase

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN), of which only $743,000 was for 
Department of Defense (DOD) environmental resiliency efforts.
    The committee continues to support the mission of the 
office to study, analyze, evaluate, and provide technical 
support to warfighters and installations as environmental 
challenges continue to cost DOD significant resources and 
readiness. However, the committee is also concerned that DOD 
has not allocated enough resources to the office given its 
workload and the likelihood that DOD will have to address 
environmental resilience challenges.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million to SAG 4GTN for DOD environmental resiliency efforts.

Department of Defense rewards program reduction

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN), of which $3.5 million was for 
the Department of Defense (DOD) rewards program.
    The committee continues to be concerned that the DOD 
rewards program has been hampered by historical under-
execution.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $3.0 
million to SAG 4GTN for the DOD rewards program.

Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative

    The budget request included $1.5 billion in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN), of which $75.0 million was for 
the Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI).
    The committee notes that encroachment resulting from 
incompatible development and loss of habitat continues to pose 
a major long-term threat to readiness and to the viability of 
military installations, ranges, and airspace throughout the 
country. REPI involves partnerships between the Department of 
Defense (DOD), state and local governments, and conservation 
organizations to share the costs of acquiring protective 
easements from willing landowners.
    The committee continues to support the mission of REPI and 
believes the program has proven to be highly effective in 
addressing encroachment. The committee supports the 
Department's evaluation of REPI to ``protect mission capability 
by cost-sharing the long-term protection of high-value habitat 
and limiting incompatible land uses around DOD ranges and 
installations'' and ``help avoid more expensive costs, such as 
the need for training workarounds or segmentation and future 
military construction to modify or relocate training assets to 
less-restricted locations,'' as stated in the President's 2019 
budget.
    However, the committee is concerned that the Department 
continues to underfund REPI despite its success to date and the 
high degree of leverage from partner contributions. 
Additionally, the Department has expressed concerns about the 
growing need to protect key installations, ranges, and 
airspace, yet has failed to match those concerns with adequate 
resources.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 
million to SAG 4GTN for REPI and strongly encourages the 
Department to reflect in future REPI budget requests the 
urgency of the problem of encroachment and the success REPI has 
provided in addressing that problem.

Air Force decrease per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance environmental 
        restoration funding transfer

    The budget request included $296.8 million in Environmental 
Restoration, Air Force. The committee continues to support the 
Air Force's environmental services efforts to remediate and 
cleanup per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
    Accordingly, as requested by the Air Force, the committee 
recommends a decrease of $11.0 million in Environmental 
Restoration, Air Force to SAG 042G for environmental compliance 
to remediate and cleanup PFAS.
    The committee notes a matching amount of $11.0 million will 
be increased in the tables to Air National Guard SAG 11Z Base 
Support to reflect the transfer.

Foreign currency fluctuations

    The budget request included $199.5 billion for Operation 
and Maintenance.
    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. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an undistributed decrease 
of $267.0 million for FCF.

Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps increase

    The budget request included $80.2 billion in Operations and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide, of which $138.3 million was for 
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC).
    The committee believes JROTC programs are an important 
program for the nation and have been historically underfunded 
by the Department of Defense.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.48 
million in Operations and Maintenance, Defense-wide for Junior 
Reserve Officers' Training Corps programs.

Air Force Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup

    The budget request did not include funding in Undistributed 
Operation and Maintenance.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million to Undistributed Operation and Maintenance, Air Force 
for the cleanup of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances at 
certain National Guard locations.

Air National Guard Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup

    The budget request did not include funding in Undistributed 
Operation and Maintenance.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million to Undistributed Operation and Maintenance, Air 
National Guard for the cleanup of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl 
substances at certain National Guard locations.

Army Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup

    The budget request did not include funding in Undistributed 
Operation and Maintenance.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million to Undistributed Operation and Maintenance, Army for 
the cleanup of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances at certain 
National Guard locations.

Navy Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances cleanup

    The budget request did not include funding in Undistributed 
Operation and Maintenance.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million to Undistributed Operation and Maintenance, Navy for 
the cleanup of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances at certain 
National Guard locations.

                       Items of Special Interest

Air Force runway infrastructure

    The committee believes that the Air Force's physical runway 
infrastructure is an essential component of the readiness of 
U.S. operational and strategic forces. The committee believes 
that the maintenance of such assets is critical to launching 
aircraft quickly and effectively across a variety of mission 
areas. The committee is concerned by multiple examples where 
the Air Force has yet to or is addressing these requirements 
without urgency.
    In particular, the committee notes the continued operation 
of Offutt Air Force Base, the 55th Air Wing, and the operations 
at U.S. Strategic Command are essential to America's continued 
national security. As such, the committee believes the current 
effort to design and execute a planned repair or rebuild of the 
runway is critical, and should be executed with the utmost 
speed, resourcing, and diligence. In addition, the committee 
notes the Little Rock Air Force Base provides a unique and 
crucial capability, serving as the nation's tactical airlift 
``Center of Excellence.'' The continued successful operation of 
Little Rock Air Force Base is contingent on having a fully 
functioning runway, and the committee similarly highlights the 
importance of its expeditious completion.
    The committee is concerned the Air Force lacks an overall 
runway infrastructure plan to address its ongoing runway 
maintenance issues, and if it is not addressed, failing runways 
will lead to a direct impact on operational readiness.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to conduct an assessment and provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees no later than February 1, 
2019, detailing the operational requirements for Air Force 
airfields in addition to the state of airfields where runway 
degradation currently poses a threat to operations, as well as 
installations where such degradation threatens operations in 
the five and ten year time frames. The briefing shall include 
the operational requirement for airfields, an assessment of the 
impact to operations, cost to repair, cost to replace, 
remaining useful life, and narrative on the required daily 
maintenance to ensure the runway is acceptable for full 
operations at the installation, and any challenges with 
infrastructure acquisition methods and processes. The briefing 
shall also include the operational impact if the respective 
runway became inoperable due to a major degradation incident, 
such as a crack or fracture resulting from lack of maintenance 
and repair. Finally, the briefing shall include a plan to 
address any shortfalls associated with the Air Force's runway 
infrastructure.
    If required, a classified annex may accompany the 
unclassified briefing.

All services marketing audit

    The committee notes the importance of effective marketing 
and recruiting efforts to ensure adequate end strength and 
technical capabilities of the military services. The committee 
notes that in 2016, the U.S. Army Audit Agency (AAA) began two 
internal audits of the Army Marketing and Research Group 
(AMRG), both of which recently concluded. The committee 
understands that the audits indicate that the AMRG wasted a 
significant amount of money on ineffective marketing programs.
    Given the results of the AAA audits of the AMRG, the 
committee is concerned that similar problems may exist in the 
other Services' marketing organizations. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to engage the Naval 
Audit Service and the Secretary of the Air Force to engage the 
Air Force Audit Agency to undertake similar individual audits 
of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force marketing groups and 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than February 1, 2019. At a minimum, the report shall 
include: (1) The effectiveness of advertising programs in the 
different Services at recruiting and retaining candidates; (2) 
An analysis of how efficiently the Services' advertising 
organizations spend their money; (3) Any best practices that 
can be shared between the Services to ensure better advertising 
practices; and (4) Any additional areas of concern that the 
auditing agencies deem appropriate.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to conduct a review of the final audits 
upon their release and submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
not later than April 1, 2019.

Ammunition plant reform and stockpile of explosives

    The committee is concerned that modernization project 
delays at Holston Army Ammunition Plant may have created a 
temporary over reliance on foreign sources for trinitrotoluene 
(TNT) as it relates to ammunition and munitions production. The 
committee strongly encourages the Department to begin domestic 
production of insensitive munitions explosives (IMX) as soon as 
possible in order to improve the posture of the ammunition 
production industrial base and restore war reserve stockpiles. 
Additionally, the committee encourages the Department to 
explore any appropriate use of the Defense Production Act as it 
relates to any strategic stockpiling of TNT and IMX.
    The committee commends the Department of the Army on its 
continued efforts to make the organic Government Owned 
Contractor Operated ammunition production facilities more 
competitive, efficient, and cost-effective through constant 
reforms. While progress has been made, there are still areas 
upon which costs and process can be improved through further 
reform in order to reduce overhead. The committee encourages 
the Department to continue to work with industry for further 
and appropriate reforms. For example, the committee notes that 
all Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support contracts are 
not identical with respect to how revenues are treated at 
different facilities. The committee encourages the Department 
to standardize such contracts to the maximum extent 
practicable.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army to submit a report to the congressional defense committees 
no later than September 1, 2018, on initiatives the Department 
plans to take in order to make ammunition production facilities 
more competitive and efficient.

Arctic search and rescue

    The committee is aware that growing international interest 
and changing environmental conditions in the Arctic have led to 
increased commercial and governmental activity in the High 
North. With this steady surge, 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 in section 
1068 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016 (Public-Law 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 176th Wing of the Alaska 
National Guard is the closest dedicated response force with the 
only refueling capability to respond to a search-and-rescue 
incident in the Arctic. The unit currently possesses two air-
dropped, palletized Arctic Sustainment Packages (ASPs) to 
enable the survival of 50 individuals for 3 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. Each ASP requires considerable resources for 
sustainability, demanding 500 man-hours to re-pack ASPs after 
testing and to continually keep contents viable. In light of 
the increased activity in this region, the committee believes 
that this capability could benefit from additional sustainment 
funding to maintain the two existing ASPs, and encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to prioritize its resourcing.

Assessment of assigning a Security Force Assistance Brigade to U.S. 
        Africa Command

    The committee understands that the Army intends to 
establish six Security Force Assistance Brigades (SFAB) for the 
purpose of providing geographic combatant commanders with a 
capability to train, advise, and assist foreign security 
partners. The committee notes that U.S. Africa Command does not 
currently have assigned forces to support requirements within 
its area of responsibility and relies on forces allocated 
through the Global Force Management process.
    As such, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, no 
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
to submit to the congressional defense committees an assessment 
of the advisability and feasibility of assigning an SFAB on an 
enduring basis to U.S. Africa Command for the purpose of 
supporting the security cooperation activities of the Command. 
The assessment shall also include a comparison of the relative 
merits of utilizing an SFAB to support security cooperation 
activities as compared to other conventional Army units, 
including a Brigade Combat Team, and Special Operations Forces.

Assessment of Department of Defense installation management

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
maintains over 550,000 facilities on about 28 million acres 
with an estimated plant replacement value of about $830.0 
billion. The committee understands that the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) has had DOD's defense support 
infrastructure portfolio on its high-risk list since 1997 due 
in part to the large financial commitment needed to maintain 
this vast portfolio, and DOD's continuing holding of unneeded 
real property assets and chronic underfunding of facilities 
sustainment.
    The committee is concerned with the financial commitment 
needed to maintain all of these facilities when DOD believes so 
many are excess to need. Prior GAO reports raise questions 
about the effectiveness of DOD's real property assets 
management. The report from GAO entitled, ``Excess Facilities: 
DOD Needs More Complete Information and a Strategy to Guide its 
Disposal Efforts''' (GAO-11-814) found DOD had utilization rate 
data for only 46 percent of its facilities and no strategy for 
disposing of excess facilities after the fiscal year 2013 end 
of its demolition program. GAO also found that DOD was 
considering a broader approach to facilities management, 
including consolidation where possible. Yet in the September 
2014 report, ``Defense Infrastructure: DOD Needs to Improve Its 
Efforts to Identify Unutilized and Underutilized Facilities''' 
(GAO-14-538), GAO reported that DOD had only improved its 
facilities utilization data from 46 percent of facilities to 53 
percent.
    Knowing the utilization of existing facilities is an 
important prerequisite to effective consolidation. In the June 
2015 report ``Underutilized Facilities: DOD and GSA Information 
Sharing May Enhance Opportunities to Use Space at Military 
Installations''' (GAO-15-346), GAO reported that neither DOD 
nor the General Services Administration had a process by which 
federal agencies could be housed in excess DOD space, a 
practice that permits the host installation to avoid the 
utilities and maintenance costs they would have otherwise 
incurred in maintaining these vacant facilities, thus freeing 
up funds for maintaining facilities actually being used by DOD 
organizations. In the March 2016 report, ``Defense 
Infrastructure: More Accurate Data Would Allow DOD to Improve 
the Tracking, Management, and Security of Its Leased 
Facilities''' (GAO-16-101), GAO found that DOD is continuing to 
lease commercial administrative space within 50 miles of 
installations identified for force structure reductions three 
years earlier.
    Until 2011, GAO cited chronic underfunding of facilities 
sustainment as a reason for defense support infrastructure's 
inclusion on the high-risk list. At that time, GAO concluded 
that DOD had increased sustainment investment sufficiently and 
accordingly removed sustainment from the high-risk list. 
However, since then, DOD has reported it is again underfunding 
sustainment, raising questions about the mission capability of 
some of its facilities since such underfunding can lead to 
facilities not being in good working order and to life, health, 
and safety concerns.
    The committee believes it is critical that DOD make cost 
effective decisions about how to manage this large facilities 
portfolio including excess facilities by appropriately 
targeting sustainment funds and disposing of or effectively 
reusing excess facilities where possible. Moreover, nothing 
prevents DOD from disposing of some excess facilities using 
authorities it already has. Even in the absence of a Base 
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round, DOD should effectively 
use all available and existing authorities to appropriately 
manage this facilities portfolio.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to 
provide a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives with the President's 
fiscal year 2020 budget submission. The Secretary's report 
should address, but not be limited to the following: (1) What 
progress, if any, the military departments have made since the 
2013 planned end of the demolition program in disposing of 
excess facilities and by what means other than BRAC; (2) How 
the military services prioritize facilities for disposal and 
the Services' plans for disposal other than through BRAC 
through the end of the current future years defense program; 
(3) How DOD and the military services target facilities 
maintenance funds to ensure the highest priority facilities are 
properly maintained over excess facilities; (4) DOD's and the 
military services' long term strategy for ensuring that excess 
property is disposed other than through BRAC and how facilities 
maintenance funds can be more effectively used; (5) What 
progress, if any, the military services have made in moving 
from leased space to excess owned space on installations and 
otherwise granting space to non-DOD tenants when such tenancy 
is consistent with the installation's military mission.
    The committee further directs the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to brief the 
congressional defense committees on the findings of the report 
not later than January 30, 2019.

Assessment of hybrid electric drive performance

    The committee notes the Navy's operational energy program 
includes the installation of a Hybrid Electric Drive (HED) 
propulsion system on the USS Truxton. The committee understands 
the Navy anticipates the USS Truxton installation of the HED 
should pay for itself in 6 to 13 years.
    The committee is interested in how the Navy will test, 
evaluate, and measure the at-sea performance and effectiveness 
of the HED on USS Truxton. If the Navy intends to make an 
informed decision about whether to program future HED 
installations, the committee believes the Navy must ensure such 
decisions are based on rigorous analysis of quantitative data 
collected from the USS Truxton.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to conduct a comprehensive test and evaluation assessment 
of the HED installation on the USS Truxton. The assessment may 
include a classified annex. The assessment shall include, but 
not be limited to: (1) The HED system use and related effects 
monitoring using the Navy Energy Usage System; (2) Daily 
operational reports (e.g., OPREP-5) related to HED and its 
performance; (3) A comparison of two DDG-51 class ships (HED 
and non-HED) while the ships are executing similar mission 
sets, both training cycle and deployment (preferably a DDG 
flight IIA within the same strike group or other task group); 
(4) Metrics that quantitatively evaluate and compare transit 
operations, training operations, presence operations, 
operational missions, enhanced mission effectiveness, reduced 
logistical burdens and mission risk, and increased capability 
and resilience; (5) An analysis of operating costs compared to 
ships in the same class without HED for the same time period; 
(6) Updated investment planned for HED in the future years 
defense program; and (7) Any other elements the Secretary deems 
appropriate.
    The assessment shall be conducted with a report delivered 
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House 
of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the United 
States no later than January 1, 2020. The report shall describe 
the findings of each of the seven prescribed assessment areas. 
Within 60 days after receiving the plan, the Comptroller 
General shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and House of Representatives an evaluation of the report 
and assessment.

Battery storage and safety programs clarification

    The committee strongly supports the continuation of funding 
to the Department of Navy and the Office of Naval Research in 
the advancement of its battery storage and safety programs to 
support force protection and applied research. The committee 
notes that for the purposes of clarifying the term ``battery 
storage and safety'', the committee means those battery storage 
and safety technologies and advancements which provide energy 
resilience to the Department of Defense. The committee also 
notes that in section 101, title 10, United States Code, the 
term ``energy resilience'' means the ability to avoid, prepare 
for, minimize, adapt to, and recover from anticipated and 
unanticipated energy disruptions in order to ensure energy 
availability and reliability sufficient to provide for mission 
assurance and readiness, and other mission essential operations 
related to readiness, and to execute or rapidly reestablish 
mission essential requirements.

Battery storage technology

    The committee recognizes that battery storage technology is 
a vital component in micro-grid resiliency and energy security 
and independence. The committee seeks further information 
regarding the Department of Energy's advanced research and 
development efforts to isolate and protect domestic micro-grids 
from potential cyber-attacks through self-sustaining energy 
infrastructure. The Department of Energy has recognized the 
importance of shielding the nation's critical energy 
infrastructure from cyber-attacks. Emerging hybrid technologies 
are being used to develop micro-grids that can insulate 
targeted areas from cyber threats. The committee recognizes 
that integrating battery storage as an alternative for high-
voltage transmission lines enhances the ability for Department 
of Defense facilities to access a consistent energy source and 
continue operations.

Briefing on Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry PFAS 
        report

    The committee understands that the Department of Health and 
Human Services (HHS) Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
Registry (ATSDR) is in the process of completing toxicological 
profiles for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfiuorooctane 
suifonic acid (PFOS), perfiuorononanoic acid (PFNA) and 
perfluorohexane suifonic acid (PFHxS) in drinking water, 
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601 et seq. The contamination of 
the water supply resulting from the leeching of these chemicals 
used in the military's firefighting foam in ground water 
impacts the readiness of our troops and the health of our 
active duty and reserve service members and their families. In 
order to address the readiness issues associated with this 
contamination, the committee requests a briefing on this ATSDR 
report within thirty days.

Building energy resilience on military installations

    The committee strongly supports recent efforts by the Army 
to increase its energy resilience with a 50 megawatt multi-fuel 
generation facility on Schofield Barracks. The committee notes 
the facility will be able to provide the Army the first right 
to power, a black start capability, and 100 percent of its 
operational requirements for Schofield Barracks, Wheeler Army 
Airfield and Field Station Kunia in the event of an intentional 
or unintentional power outage. Notably, the power plant will 
have a minimum five days of fuel on site and a 30 day fuel 
supply available on the island of Oahu. Not only do these kind 
of cooperative agreements provide the Army the ability to 
improve its installations without any capital investments of 
its own, they also provide a combat capability that improves 
readiness.
    Due to its strategic location, the power facility remains 
above the tsunami strike zone which not only directly benefits 
the Army, but also will enhance the grid resilience and provide 
an energy security benefit to the local community and medical 
services. Notably, it is the only current baseload power 
generation facility on the island of Oahu that is located above 
a tsunami strike zone. Another notable and successful Army 
example of building energy resilience on its military 
installations, is Fort Drum, home of the 10th Mountain 
Division, which now has the ability to power its installation 
for over a month off the grid in the event of an outage. The 
committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense to 
pursue similar cooperative agreements, particularly in 
locations that face high-costs of energy like Alaska and 
Hawaii.
    The committee particularly encourages distributed energy 
projects that are strategically located in order to provide 
energy security and resilience to military installations. The 
use of non-Department or third party financing mechanisms, such 
as power purchase agreements and energy savings performance 
contracts, to pursue such large-scale energy resilience 
projects is strongly encouraged.

Comptroller General review of Defense-wide Working Capital Fund 
        overhead charges and fees

    The Defense-wide Working Capital Fund (DWWCF) is the 
working capital fund managed by the defense agencies, and 
consists of six activity groups. Three of these activity groups 
are operated by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), two by the 
Defense Information Systems Agency, and one by the Defense 
Finance and Accounting Service. These defense agencies use the 
DWWCF cash balance to cover costs for providing services and 
purchasing various commodities. The DWWCF is reimbursed through 
charges to customers, including overhead and other fees.
    The Department of Defense (DOD) manages working capital 
funds, which were established to satisfy recurring DOD 
requirements using a businesslike buyer-and-seller approach. 
According to DOD's Financial Management Regulation, the goal of 
the DWWCF is to remain revenue-neutral, allowing the fund to 
break even over time. As of the end of fiscal year 2017, the 
DWWCF held a cash balance of about $3.0 billion.
    The committee is interested in understanding the activities 
funded through the DWWCF, how rate structures are determined, 
and options for achieving efficiencies.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate: (1) The activities the 
defense agencies fund through overhead charges and fees 
collected from customers, and how these activities differ from 
those funded through annual appropriations; (2) Methods used to 
determine the rate structure of overhead charges and fees; and 
(3) Options, if any, that DOD has considered to adjust its 
approach to managing overhead charges and fees to achieve 
greater efficiencies or reduce costs.
    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, 2019, with a final report 
to follow.

Congressional notification of incidents

    The committee is concerned that the Office of the Secretary 
of Defense and the military departments have not promptly and 
consistently notified the committee of the occurrence of 
significant incidents and accidents. While certain military 
departments have routinely sent timely notifications to the 
committee, there has often been a lack of even basic 
information communicated when troubling events have occurred.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Department to 
establish a rigorous, well-defined process and system to 
provide notifications to the committee for basic and initial 
reporting of incidents such as, but not limited to: class A and 
B mishaps for aircraft, ships and submarines, training 
casualties and accidents, safety stand downs and operational 
pauses, relief of command, significant explosions and fires at 
installations, and significant security barrier breaches.

Corrosion prevention and oversight

    The committee established Office of Corrosion Policy and 
Oversight (CPO) in part to unify and strengthen Department of 
Defense (DOD) efforts to address corrosion and its impacts on 
our military weapon systems and infrastructure. Prior to CPO, 
DOD corrosion prevention and control efforts were ineffective, 
inefficient and lacked coordination across the military 
services. The critical role CPO serves in this regard is 
essential as DOD strives to restore full spectrum readiness and 
sustain its weapons and installations.
    The committee strongly supports DOD's March 2018 assessment 
that reaffirms the value of CPO and strongly recommends that 
``the CPO office be retained in order to continue an impressive 
legacy of nearly 15 years of achieving significant cost savings 
and improvements in the availability of department-wide weapons 
systems, equipment and infrastructure, while enabling and 
partnering with the services and industry to continually 
improve corrosion reduction efforts.''
    The committee notes that DOD's report and recommendation 
make apparent that the authorities accorded CPO remain valid. 
For example, in the assessment, DOD cites that CPO has achieved 
a $2.0 billion reduction in the annual cost of corrosion, 
increased the average availability of aircraft, ships and 
ground vehicles by 10 percent, decreased the overall percentage 
of corrosion-related maintenance by 4 percent, all while 
reducing duplication and bureaucracy throughout DOD.
    The committee is nevertheless concerned that efforts to 
reorganize some DOD activities and considerations to 
restructure CPO put at risk the office's ability to sustain and 
build upon its impressive record of success. Were the status of 
the office to significantly erode, DOD would likely revert back 
to the fragmented and ineffective approach to corrosion 
reduction that prompted the creation of CPO in the first place.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of United States to conduct a thorough review of the 
restructured CPO and submit to the committees on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report no 
later than December 1, 2018 that evaluates the extent the 
restructure aligns with the original intent of section 2228, 
title 10, United States Code, to make certain that the 
restructured CPO has the ability to operate across Department-
wide activities such as research and development, operation and 
maintenance, sustainment and acquisition for weapon systems and 
infrastructure, as well as to serve as an overarching 
facilitator and integrator across the various military 
departments. Additionally, the report will evaluate the extent 
to which the restructure will allow CPO to sustain and build 
upon its successes in cost reduction, increases in asset 
availability, and reduction in duplication of critical 
corrosion prevention and mitigation activities.

Cost benefit analysis of alternative-fueled vehicles and infrastructure

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
maintains an inventory of 177,000 owned and leased nontactical 
vehicles, including passenger, trucks and other vehicles, at a 
cost of $874.0 million per year, and that increased use of 
alternative fueled vehicles (AFVs) would reduce petroleum 
consumption and costs. The committee also notes that AFVs by 
definition have a wide range of fuel sources from natural gas, 
hydrogen, coal, ethanol and electricity. Energy Savings 
Performance Contracts (ESPCs) are one mechanism to allow the 
purchase or lease of non-tactical AFVs and associated fueling 
and charging infrastructure. ESPCs are third-party financed 
contracts to achieve energy savings and benefits ancillary to 
that purpose, such as reduced operation and maintenance costs. 
While ESPC authority under 42 U.S.C. 8287 is currently limited 
to energy savings measures applied to federal buildings and 
facilities, the committee notes that such authority could also 
be applied to AFVs and associated infrastructure. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Director, Cost Assessment and Program 
Evaluation to conduct an independent cost-benefit analysis on 
the business case for entering into ESPC agreements to support 
the use of AFVs and the fueling or charging infrastructure 
necessary for alternative fueled vehicles, and to provide a 
briefing on the results of that analysis within 180 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act.

Cost benefit analysis on conducting organic depot level maintenance on 
        the joint surveillance target attack radar system

    The committee notes that the current depot maintenance 
program for the joint surveillance target attack radar system 
(JSTARS), currently conducted by a private contractor, has 
experienced significant delays in maintenance cycles. 
Contracted maintenance has also failed to meet the Air Force's 
requirement to have no more than three aircraft in depot to 
meet operational needs. The contractor averaged six aircraft in 
depot during calendar year 2017. The Air Force was unable to 
perform 179 sorties from November 2016 to October 2017, 
including 8,500 Ready Aircrew Program events, which reduced 
combat effectiveness. This diminished the Air Force's ability 
to meet combatant command (COCOM) mission requirements and 
Global Response Force taskings. In addition, the committee is 
concerned that the Air Force was unable to support seven 
sorties in support of COCOMs, and the Joint Staff denied 
requests for JSTARS support due to low aircraft availability. 
As a result of low aircraft availability forecast, the total 
Global Force Management Allocation Plan offering was reduced 
for fiscal year 2018.
    The committee believes that cost and maintenance 
efficiencies could be achieved by returning depot maintenance 
responsibilities to the Air Force organic industrial base. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force 
to submit to the congressional defense committees a report that 
describes and assesses the costs and benefits to the Air Force 
of conducting depot-level maintenance on the JSTARS platform at 
an organic depot in comparison to a private contractor, no 
later than September 30, 2018.

Depot best practices

    The committee notes that the Government Accountability 
Office has issued several reports on challenges experienced at 
the organic maintenance depots, including challenges pertaining 
to deteriorating equipment and facility condition, filling 
critical personnel skills, meeting service repair needs, and 
excesses in carryover of workload. These problems can lead to 
delays in the maintenance of weapon systems that ultimately 
affect readiness by impeding the services' ability to conduct 
training and provide forces to perform missions around the 
world. Despite these challenges, it is not clear the extent to 
which the Department of Defense (DOD) is assessing and, to the 
extent possible, mitigating the risk of maintenance delays when 
identifying its depot workload requirements.
    The committee further notes that while DOD has developed 
some initiatives that are intended to help improve its depot 
operations, such as the Navy's Shipyard Optimization Plan and 
the DOD Maintenance Executive Steering Committee, it is not 
clear if DOD is effectively sharing and implementing best 
practices and lessons learned identified by its individual 
depots. Therefore, section 346 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), 
directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a ``comprehensive plan for the 
sharing of best practices for depot-level maintenance among the 
military services.'' The committee received the Secretary's 
letter response pursuant to the requirement on March 26, 2018. 
The committee finds that while the response describes the 
existence of several groups, committees, and activities related 
to the ``enterprise governance framework of joint 
collaboration,'' the response does not include a comprehensive 
plan for sharing of best practices for depot-level maintenance 
as required by section 346.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to submit a report or reports to the 
congressional defense committees, addressing: (1) To what 
extent are DOD and the services sharing and implementing best 
practices and lessons learned at individual depots with other 
depots; (2) To what extent have specific weapon systems repair 
activities gained benefits from implementation of such best 
practices or lessons learned; (3) To what extent have DOD and 
the services identified and quantified the key factors that 
influence whether depots complete their weapon system 
maintenance mission on time and shared these factors among 
themselves; (4) To what extent do DOD and the services make 
sure that depot workload requirements are generating required 
depot capability and capacity e.g., skilled personnel, 
sufficiency in facilities and equipment, assured availability 
of supplies and materials or other relevant factors and, as 
appropriate, share best practices and lessons learned among 
themselves; (5) To what extent do DOD and the services identify 
risk to meeting anticipated depot workload timeframes, develop 
mitigation strategies to address that risk, and, as 
appropriate, share their risk management strategies among 
themselves.
    The Comptroller General may also include other related 
matters as deemed appropriate in order to provide a 
comprehensive examination. The committee further directs the 
Comptroller General to provide a preliminary briefing to the 
congressional defense committees on the Comptroller General's 
evaluation not later than April 30, 2019, with a report or 
reports to follow.

Development of future fluorine-free fire fighting foams

    The committee is strongly supportive of the Department of 
Defense's (DOD) plans to develop future fluorine-free fire 
fighting foams (F6). Once again this year, the committee has 
increased funding for both the Strategic Environment Research 
and Development Program (SERDP) and the Environment Security 
Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), largely in part to 
develop, demonstrate, and validate a fluorine-free surfactant 
that still meets military specification (MILSPEC) F-24385 and 
mimics the fluorocarbon surfactant performance attributes of 
aqueous film forming foam (AF3).
    While AF3 performs well against fires, highly fluorinated 
chemicals are highly persistent long after their use and have 
been associated with serious health problems, such as cancer, 
liver and thyroid disease, and immune system and development 
effects, particularly in the case of per- and polyfluoroalkyl 
substances (PFAS). The dangers of PFAS also prompted this 
committee to authorize DOD and the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention to conduct a nation-wide human health survey on 
the effects of PFAS in sources of drinking water.
    The committee is encouraged by and supportive of DOD 
efforts to reduce the use of AF3 and substitute with a 
perfluorooctane sulfonate-free firefighting foam C6. However, 
even short-chain C6 may pose the same health risks as AF3 since 
it has been documented that C6 can pass through granulated 
activated charcoal water filters.
    Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages DOD to use 
funding increases in SERDP and ESTCP to develop, demonstrate, 
validate and field F6. Notably, multiple countries, including 
NATO allies, use fluorine-free firefighting foam at airports, 
as well as the oil and gas industry. DOD has made encouraging 
process to date, for example, the Naval Research Laboratory has 
full strength basic tested and continues to test samples of 
non-Fluorine foam that have been identified by industry, such 
as silicon and oxygen combinations. Lastly, the committee 
strongly encourages the Department of the Navy to amend MILSPEC 
F-24385 to no longer require fluorine in AF3 and F6, as 
appropriate.

Employment of Special Operations Forces

    The committee has great interest in actions by the 
Department of Defense to respond to the priorities identified 
in the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and how they impact the 
readiness and employment of Special Operations Forces (SOF). In 
particular, the committee notes the important role of SOF in 
supporting counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations 
around the world. Almost 17 years since the terrorist attacks 
of September 11, 2001, SOF remain in high demand by Geographic 
Combatant Commanders and, as a result, continue to face high 
operational and personnel tempo. In response to the stress on 
the force, the committee notes that U.S. Special Operations 
Command is undertaking initiatives to bring SOF into compliance 
with Secretary of Defense directed deployment to dwell goals.
    The committee notes that Department of Defense has a 
limited number of SOF personnel and believes that an 
appropriately trained and prepared SOF force of sufficient size 
must be ready and available for contingency operations that may 
involve a near-peer competitor as identified in the NDS. 
Therefore, the committee strongly urges the Department to 
review how it currently employs SOF in response to Geographic 
Combatant Commander requirements to ensure sufficient numbers 
of SOF are appropriately trained and ready to respond to 
contingencies across the spectrum of conflict, including with a 
near-peer competitor.

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 the Armed Forces 
the most 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 
increase utilization of IRT projects to provide mission-
essential training, prioritizing programs that directly support 
the most challenging and relevant training opportunities and 
increasing program outreach toward identifying quality training 
opportunities in the most logistically challenging geographical 
areas. 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, New Jersey, New 
Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, 
Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
    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.

Establishment of the energy resilience project development and 
        implementation office

    The committee is encouraged by the progress the Department 
of Defense has made to promote energy resilience, efficiency, 
and distributed energy across its military installations with 
limited resources and personnel to accomplish these priorities. 
However, the committee recognizes that vulnerabilities to 
energy supplied to military installations and operations place 
our national security at risk. Further, senior Department 
officials continue to express concern to the committee on the 
ability of the Department to keep pace with these threats and 
accelerate energy resilience project development due to 
resource constraints, the inability to retain and recruit 
qualified energy and technical professionals, and potential 
flexibility in existing authorities.
    The committee strongly supports efforts by the military 
departments and defense agencies to increase its energy 
resilience with targeted and prioritized decisions to procure 
or upgrade infrastructure, distribution systems, equipment, 
fuel, and energy generation facilities. Further, the committee 
strongly supports the department's alternative financing 
pursuits and notes that it is uniquely positioned to develop 
energy resilience projects on its military installations to 
remediate risks from commercial electric and fuel grid 
disruptions. Not only do alternative financing agreements 
provide the department the ability to improve its installations 
without any capital investments of its own, they also provide a 
combat capability that improve the department's national 
security and readiness posture. The committee notes that these 
public and private sector partnerships are essential to advance 
the department's national security strategy, and that these 
partnerships should support integration of a defense workforce 
with science, technology, engineering, economic, and financial 
backgrounds to communicate with the private sector.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to work with the secretaries of the military departments, along 
with the defense agencies, to conduct an investigation for a 
central office to accelerate energy resilience project 
development and implementation. The Secretary should consider 
equitable representation from the military departments and 
defense agencies during the review, and consult with the 
services and defense agencies when providing a recommendation. 
The review should include, at a minimum, the following: (1) A 
review of lessons learned from existing service execution 
offices such as the Navy's Resilient Energy Program Office, the 
Army's Office of Energy Initiatives, and the Air Force's Office 
of Energy Assurance; (2) Personnel skills, manning, and 
resources needed to establish the office; (3) The appropriate 
organizational reporting structure of such an office; (4) 
Strategy, mission, and performance goals the office would 
pursue (to include the scope of projects considered and funding 
strategy considerations); (5) Recruitment, retention, and 
training strategy; and (6) Legislative authorities and other 
recommendations to consider for the establishment of an office 
to accelerate energy resilience project development. Lastly, 
the Secretary shall brief the committee on the results of its 
review not later than March 1, 2019.

Establishment of the occupational group for federal energy managers

    The committee is encouraged by the progress the Department 
of Defense has made to promote energy resilience, efficiency, 
and distributed energy across its military installations with 
limited resources and personnel to accomplish these priorities. 
However, the committee recognizes that vulnerabilities to 
energy supplied to military installations and operations place 
our national security at risk. Further, senior Department 
officials and personnel on military installations continue to 
express concern to the committee on the ability of the 
Department to keep pace with these threats due to the inability 
to retain and recruit qualified energy management professionals 
with the appropriate technical skills.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to work with the Office of Personnel Management to establish an 
occupational group for energy management in its Handbook of 
Occupational Groups to ensure legislative requirements for 
energy efficiency, distributed energy, and energy resilience 
are met. At a minimum, the energy management occupational group 
shall allow the Department to meet Title 10 energy 
requirements, and those energy requirements found in Department 
of Defense Directives and Instructions. The Occupational Group 
shall include grades from GS-1 to GS-15, or equivalent graded 
positions. Lastly, the Secretary shall brief the committee on 
its progress not later than March 1, 2019.

Guidance on utility privatization contracts

    The committee supports the conveyance of utility systems to 
private entities and is aware of the increased energy 
resilience and reliability that has resulted at installations 
where this has occurred, but notes that restrictions on 
operation and maintenance funds have slowed progress on 
critical projects that are required to increase energy 
resilience and reliability. The committee is also aware of 
efforts undertaken by the Army to encourage Army commands to 
use available operation and maintenance funds for utility 
infrastructure improvements associated with privatized utility 
systems, and encourages the Department of Defense and the other 
services to provide similar guidance to clarify and better 
leverage operation and maintenance funds for utility 
improvements with utilities privatization contracts to meet 
energy resilience and installation readiness requirements.

High purity aluminum

    The committee recognizes the importance of high purity 
aluminum (HPA) to meet national security requirements of 
manufacturing and weapon system performance. HPA plays a 
critical role in defense platforms such as in the bulkheads for 
the F-35 and the advanced armor for the Joint Light Tactical 
Vehicle. HPA is also used to make alloys that are used in other 
defense and space platforms. The demand for HPA is expected to 
continue to increase as the Department of Defense ramps up 
production on key next generation air and ground platforms and 
the need for weight reduction remains a key requirement. The 
committee understands that the United States currently has only 
two domestic producers of HPA and relies on imports from 
Russia, the Middle East, and elsewhere to meet demand.
    Accordingly, the committee encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to take affirmative steps to maintain secure sources of 
supply for HPA and to consider investing in appropriate 
improvements to make the production of domestic HPA more 
efficient and available than through the traditional smelting 
process.

High-energy intensity report

    The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) required the 
then-Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 
and Logistics, in consultation with the assistant secretaries 
responsible for energy, installations, and environment of the 
military services, to submit a report on efforts to achieve 
cost savings at military installations with high levels of 
energy intensity. The committee notes that this report is now 
over six months overdue. The committee continues to believe 
that energy costs in areas of high-energy intensity is a 
critical issue that should be addressed. Accordingly, the 
committee encourages the Under Secretary of Acquisition and 
Sustainment to promptly complete the report and submit it to 
the congressional defense committees.

High-pressure cold spray repair

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is 
using high-pressure cold spray repair, a solid-state metal 
additive manufacturing technology that is capable of reapplying 
metal to highly worn or corroded metal surfaces without 
damaging the base metal. The committee understands this 
technology would restore the strength and serviceability of 
parts that previously would require replacement. The committee 
notes this technology could enable more cost-effective and 
timely maintenance and has been used by the Department of the 
Navy to achieve cost savings for the repair of critical 
components. Therefore, the committee encourages the Secretary 
of the Navy to expand the use of this technology for the 
development of new repair processes for additional Navy 
components.

Leveraging non-Department funds to address infrastructure maintenance 
        backlogs and project delays

    The committee is strongly encouraged by the Department of 
Defense (DOD) and its efforts to improve energy resilience and 
security infrastructure on its installations. For example, DOD 
has turned to the use of energy savings performance contracts 
(ESPCs) as one means to leverage private sector financing and 
investments which are paid back over time by DOD through 
measured and verified energy-related savings. The committee 
strongly encourages DOD to incorporate energy resilience and 
security measures into its projects and contracts pursued 
through non-Department funding.
    The committee also recognizes that DOD has historically 
prioritized resources for its operations and weapons 
modernization over its facilities sustainment restoration and 
modernization (FSRM) accounts, which has resulted in a 
significant infrastructure maintenance backlog, including older 
and deteriorating facilities, which in turn degrades readiness 
and quality of life for warfighters.
    In order to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog, 
increase the magnitude of capital improvements, costs savings, 
and cost avoidance for DOD, the committee strongly encourages 
the Department and its military installations to leverage its 
FSRM accounts, in combination with third-party and non-
Department funding sources and financed energy savings 
projects, to maximize energy infrastructure investments through 
mechanisms like ESPCs and utility energy service contracts 
(UESC). As such, FSRM funds should be used for one-time 
payments upon the award of new ESPC and UESC projects and as 
partial payments for recurring operation and maintenance 
activities.
    Additionally, the committee remains concerned that DOD has 
failed to streamline delays encountered during the ESPC, UESC, 
and power purchase agreement processes, which could otherwise 
assist in decreasing the infrastructure maintenance backlog and 
increase installation resilience that is critical to mission 
assurance.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to establish a policy to better leverage non-Department funding 
to address its infrastructure maintenance backlog and energy 
resilience requirements, including setting a Department 
performance contracting goal along with a tracking system to 
identify and address project phase bottlenecks, with a timeline 
goal of 18 months from notice of opportunity to notice of 
intent to award. The Secretary shall brief the committee on its 
progress no later than March 1, 2019.

Light emitting diodes for aviation applications

    The committee is aware of ongoing efforts by the Services 
and the Defense Logistics Agency to increase the utilization of 
light emitting diodes (LED) for aviation applications, both 
through retrofitting existing aircraft and requiring LEDs for 
exterior and interior use on new designs. In addition to their 
long life, high reliability, and reduced energy consumption, 
LEDs reduce glare and interference with night vision equipment. 
Most commercial airplanes use LEDs for navigation, position, 
beacon, anti-collision, cabin, and cargo lighting. Accordingly, 
the committee encourages the services to retrofit LEDs onto 
existing aircraft when they undergo modification and 
maintenance. The committee also encourages the services to 
establish LED requirements for ongoing aviation development and 
acquisitions, such as the Long Range Strike Bomber and unmanned 
aerial vehicles.

M240 medium machine gun modernization

    The committee is concerned the Army may be assuming too 
much risk in the small arms industrial base with respect to the 
family of M240 medium machine guns. Current funding profiles 
could lead to a potential production line shutdown. The 
shutdown of existing production lines could create significant 
operational impacts if requirements change. The committee notes 
that the budget request included $2.1 million for M240 
production; however, no funding is projected for new production 
in fiscal year 2020 or fiscal year 2021.
    The committee encourages the Army to closely monitor this 
critical industrial base and work with the original equipment 
manufacturer to develop courses of action to ensure the 
production line remains viable and capable of supporting 
potential increased requirements. The committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the committee by 
September 28, 2018. This briefing shall include, at a minimum: 
(1) The projected service life of the current M240 inventory; 
(2) The Army's plan and schedule to replace the current M240 
inventory either with newer M240 models or an entirely new 
system; (3) How the Army will address increased requirements 
caused by growth in end strength and combat formations; (4) 
Relevant cost analysis for restarting the M240 production line 
after a period of dormancy; and (5) A description of the 
capacity challenges and minimum sustaining production rates 
with regard to the original equipment manufacturer.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army to provide a study to the committee by October 1, 2018, on 
the feasibility of transitioning the existing fleet of M240B 
medium machine guns to the lighter-weight M240L configuration. 
This assessment shall take into consideration the estimated 
costs associated with this transition to include the transition 
of current inventories of M240Bs to the M240L variant.

Maintaining current balance of government and private contractors under 
        10 U.S.C. 2466

    The committee continues to recognize the importance of 
section 2466, title 10, United States Code, in its sustainment 
of our military readiness. The committee continues to view core 
depot level workload as synonymous with organic workload, and 
core workload should be accomplished by government employees in 
facilities owned and operated by the United States. While the 
committee supports privatization of functions that are not 
inherently governmental in nature, including some depot 
maintenance of above core systems, the committee does not 
support the wholesale privatization of those functions 
necessary to ensure readiness and to defend the United States 
and our allies during periods of armed conflict. Depot 
maintenance is inherently governmental when conducted on 
mission essential weapons systems used in combat, combat 
support, combat service support, and combat readiness training.
    Congressional support of privatization initiatives is based 
on the achievement of cost savings to the government as a 
result of a competitive marketplace.
    The committee continues to see that competition, rather 
than privatization, may achieve the greatest degree of 
potential savings. To preserve our military readiness, the 
Department of Defense should sustain the organic capability and 
capacity to maintain and repair mission-essential equipment 
associated with combat, including new weapons systems to the 
greatest extent possible. Finally, to ensure efficient use of 
organic maintenance and repair capacity, as well as the best 
value to the taxpayer, we believe the Department of Defense 
must continue to effectively utilize its logistics facilities.

Marine Corps Base of the Future

    As noted by the Marine Corps, the January 2017 tornado 
resulted in ``extensive damage requiring significant repair and 
construction'' at Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany. That 
challenge prompted an opportunity to identify inadequate 
command and control, a misaligned workforce, excess 
infrastructure, and the desire to have an island capability for 
energy resilience.
    In light of the continued deferment of facilities 
sustainment restoration and modernization funding by the 
Department, the committee is strongly supportive of the recent 
efforts by the Marine Corps to hold its inaugural Base of the 
Future Symposium, which sought collaboration from local 
communities, private industry, government officials and 
academia in order to improve installation design and services 
that are responsive, resilient, and improve process. The 
committee continues to support the concepts of increasing 
operational effectiveness, readiness, quality of life, safety 
and efficiency on installations while pursuing techniques and 
technologies that leverage data analytics, automation, 
robotics, and the internet of things.

Marine Corps Policy on flame-resistant uniforms

    The committee notes the Marine Corps issues the Enhanced 
Flame Resistant Combat Ensemble (EFRCE) to deploying Marines 
and Sailors. The EFRCE is the latest upgrade to the Marine 
Corps' Flame-Resistant Combat Ensemble inventory, updating a 
long-sleeve shirt and trousers with a more durable and better 
performing flame resistant material that allows the uniform to 
self-extinguish reducing the incidence and severity of burn 
injuries.
    The committee commends the Marine Corps' efforts to develop 
and field high performance flame resistant clothing to 
deploying Marines. However, the committee is concerned the 
EFRCE is only issued to select deploying marines and sailors. 
The committee believes the same high performance and flame-
resistant protection capabilities provided by the EFRCE in 
combat operations could also be applied for domestic training 
and field exercises in the United States, if deemed 
operationally relevant.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to provide a briefing to the committee by March 1, 2019, 
on steps being taken to evaluate the EFRCE and other flame 
resistant combat uniforms, items to include: (1) A market 
survey of materials that could be used in a Flame Resistant 
(FR) Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniform (MCCUU) uniform; (2) A 
cost benefit analysis of issuing EFRCE or a FR MCCUU at initial 
entry rather than issuing MCCU at initial entry; (3) The near-
term policy for authorizing use in appropriate field exercises 
and training scenarios at unit commander's discretion; and (4) 
The advisability and feasibility of implementing a long-term 
fielding plan for incorporating the EFRCE and/or other flame 
resistant combat uniforms as organizational equipment in 
appropriate units.

Military working dogs

    As reflected in the findings of the Department of Defense 
Inspector General (DODIG) report 2018-81, the committee remains 
concerned that a lack of guidance remains, particularly for 
nontraditional military working dog (MWD) programs that are not 
directly supported by the 341st Training Squadron, 37th 
Training Wing, at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. 
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in collaboration with the secretaries of the other 
military departments with MWD assets to fully implement the 
recommendations from DODIG report 2018-81.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in collaboration with the secretaries of the other 
military departments with MWD assets, to submit a report not 
later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act, that 
examines the status of all MWDs since 2013 and addresses at a 
minimum, the following: (1) The number of MWDs transferred from 
overseas to the United States for retirement; (2) The number of 
MWDs overseas that did not transfer to the United States and 
their ultimate disposition or destination; (3) The number of 
MWDs transferred to law enforcement agencies; (4) The number of 
MWDs dogs that were transferred to one of their handlers; (5) A 
description of the actions taken by the military to notify 
current or previous handlers of the opportunity to adopt their 
MWD; (6) A description of the oversight of the adoption process 
to ensure that MWDs are placed in appropriate settings; and (7) 
Examine options and potential costs of assisting those handlers 
who adopt MWDs with veterinary care for the MWD retirees.
    The committee urges the services to have Contractor Working 
Dog (CWD) assets operate under the same regulations as MWDs and 
recommends the services ensure such requirements are provided 
for all future CWD programs.

Navy next generation small arms weapons training and readiness 
        requirements

    The committee is concerned that after 5 years, the Navy has 
not yet developed a next generation, comprehensive strategy to 
address the significant small arms training shortfalls 
identified in the 2013 Washington Navy Yard shooting report and 
subsequent shooting incidences.
    As noted in prior National Defense Authorization Acts, the 
committee understands that the Navy Expeditionary Combat 
Command (NECC) and the Navy Strategic Systems Program (SSP) 
have successfully demonstrated an innovative synthetic small 
arms training approach capable of providing consistent, 
metrics-based proof of live-fire transfer across various skill 
levels for individual and crew-served training, while reducing 
ammunition and training time costs. NECC and SSP's advanced 
human performance, cognitive, and metrics driven training 
approach enforces improvements in reaction time, precision 
under stress, and decision-making skills to aid long-standing 
Navy challenges in meeting hostile intent determination and 
escalation of force decisions. Despite the success of these 
programs, and their alignment with a Department of Defense-wide 
move toward advanced training approaches that leverage human 
performance techniques and data collection as key program 
requirements, the committee is concerned that other Navy 
commands continue to rely on legacy simulation systems that are 
not required to prove their effectiveness, and have not given 
serious consideration to new, innovative metric-based synthetic 
training programs capable of achieving, and validating Navy 
security force and fleet-wide small arms tactical and crew-
served readiness improvements.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to provide the committee with a briefing by February 1, 
2019 detailing the Navy's comprehensive plan to meet the 
enhanced small arms training advancements discussed above. The 
briefing shall include, but not be limited to, how the Navy 
will: (1) Address afloat and ashore security forces and Navy 
Installation Command small arms training improvements outlined 
in the 2013 Washington Navy Yard report; (2) Meet the unique 
requirements for small arms and improved crew-served weapons 
training and effectiveness under U.S. Fleet Forces Command, and 
the Navy Criminal Investigative Service; (3) Meet the key 
training objectives for hostile intent determination and 
escalation of force requirements described above; (4) Validate 
that human performance, readiness metrics, and proof of live-
fire transfer will be key capability requirements of the Navy's 
plan; and (5) Develop an acquisition strategy that requires 
legacy and future small arms simulation systems to 
competitively demonstrate their ability to meet rigorous next 
generation readiness requirements outlined above as a pre-
requisite to receiving new or continued funding in fiscal year 
2019 and future years.

Operational energy technologies

    The committee is aware of a variety of technologies that 
may improve operational flexibility, enhance logistics, and 
reduce supply lines for forces operating in deployed 
environments, to include the ability to convert natural gas to 
tactical fuels, improve power generation, distribution, and 
storage in deployed environments, and increase the range and 
capability of tactical vehicles. The committee is supportive of 
these efforts and encourages the Department of Defense to 
transition such natural gas to tactical fuel technologies from 
the research and development stage in support of operational 
requirements. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to provide a briefing to the Senate Armed Services 
Committee, not later than March 1, 2019, that outlines steps 
the Department is taking, to include resourcing and timelines 
for maturation of operational energy technologies, to 
transition such technologies to full scale demonstrations and 
commercial production.

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 of Defense's operations require 
stringent specifications for the coating of each piece of 
equipment.
    The committee understands that paint training programs 
provide training for military painters and coating operations. 
The committee notes that 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.

Predicting soil-terrain-atmospheric conditions

    The committee is aware of the valuable support the U.S. 
Army Engineer Research and Development Center-Cold Regions 
Research and Engineering Laboratory provides in rapidly and 
accurately predicting key terrestrial properties (e.g. soil/
dust, water, snow, vegetation) in forward operating areas and 
extreme environments. Given the broad spectrum and diversity of 
these conditions, the committee strongly recommends that the 
Army accelerate its collection of this data to support the full 
spectrum of military activities including terrestrial aircraft 
operations and identifying improvised landing zones, ground 
mobility, dust emission, and monitoring the availability of 
vital water resources. The committee also strongly encourages 
developing new methods of linking variable and frequently 
changing land surface-atmospheric conditions on the deployment 
and performance of vital sensor-based tactical systems.
    In order to enhance the ability to rapidly and accurately 
predict the full spectrum of these terrestrial properties, the 
committee strongly urges the expanded use of remotely collected 
data, which directly benefits military operations, especially 
for adaptive and expedient force protection and maneuvers 
across highly variable terrain in all military operating 
environments and under variable climate and weather conditions.

Privatization of stormwater conveyance systems

    The committee remains concerned with the ability of the 
Department of Defense's (DOD) infrastructure to handle 
stormwater at many of its installations. Additionally, the 
committee is discouraged with DOD's failure to comply with 
section 2813 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), which stated that it was 
the sense of Congress that ``wastewater'' captures stormwater 
within the definition of section 2688(i) of title 10, United 
States Code. Not utilizing privatization to repair aging 
infrastructure at Fort Benning, for example, resulted in $3.5 
million dollars' worth of damage due to catastrophic failures 
suffered during a December 2015 storm. The committee directs 
the Department of Defense to provide a report no later than 
December 1, 2018, on installation storm water conveyance 
systems and plans on addressing any shortcomings that currently 
exist.

Report on transportation infrastructure critical to Eastern Range space 
        operations

    The committee notes that the Indian River Bridge in Florida 
is critical to the ability of the Department of Defense to 
provide space launch and range operations in support of the 
nation's objectives. The Indian River Bridge is a federally 
owned property used by two federal agencies, and the 
replacement of the bridge requires a joint solution to ensure 
that the bridge is able to support national security space 
payloads. The committee also notes that the Secretary of the 
Air Force, who carries out the preponderance of space 
activities within the Department, must be included in the 
development of any solution with respect to the Indian River 
Bridge to ensure that space launch operations are not affected 
by the replacement of such bridge.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in consultation with the Administrator of the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, to submit to the 
congressional defense committees no later than October 1, 2018, 
a report on the transportation infrastructure that is critical 
to the ability of the Department to use the Eastern Range in 
Cape Canaveral, Florida, for space launch operations. The 
report shall include: (1) An identification of Department and 
non-Department transportation infrastructure supporting the 
Eastern Range that is critical to Department space operations, 
including payload processing, delivery, and Department-operated 
launch capabilities; (2) An assessment of the ability of such 
transportation infrastructure or alternatives to safely 
transport all Department mission payloads during the period 
beginning on the first day of fiscal year 2019 and ending on 
the last day of fiscal year 2030; (3) An analysis of the impact 
on Department space launch operations of an inability of such 
transportation infrastructure to safely transport mission 
payloads through fiscal year 2030; and (4) A detailed plan to 
ensure that payload processing, delivery, and Department-
operated launch capabilities are unencumbered by a failure in 
such transportation infrastructure.
    The report may contain a classified annex, if deemed 
appropriate.

Report on universal camouflage inventory and use

    The committee supports the Army's transition from Universal 
Camouflage Pattern (UCP) to Operational Camouflage Pattern 
(OCP) for soldier combat uniforms and organizational clothing 
and individual equipment (OCIE). The committee is very 
supportive of the Air Force's recent decision to replace the 
Airman Battle Uniform and adopt OCP for all of its combat 
uniforms. The committee is also aware of a significant current 
inventory of OCIE in UCP, which includes, but is not limited 
to, Modular Lightweight Load Carrying Equipment and Improved 
Outer Tactical Vests.
    The committee understands that the Army Program Manager for 
Soldier Protection and Individual Equipment (PM SPIE) is 
currently evaluating overdye technologies and processes. This 
evaluation could validate technology and processes for UCP 
printed products to be altered into a color palette that blends 
with the new down selected camouflage prints and continues to 
pass all necessary requirements. The committee believes that 
these overdye technologies and processes could save significant 
resources, possibly up to 70 percent of the current item price, 
as the Army transitions to OCP.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than August 31, 2018. The report shall 
include, but is not limited to, defining current efforts 
underway to repurpose and field UCP clothing and equipment, 
efforts underway within PM SPIE to evaluate overdye 
technologies and processes, and a plan with cost and timelines 
to field these technologies and processes towards addressing an 
economically viable drawdown and use of otherwise obsolete OCIE 
in UCP.

Review of Department of Defense mission assurance program

    The committee continues to be supportive of the Department 
of Defense's (DOD) issued mission assurance policy and 
strategy. However, the committee is concerned there may not be 
a robust mission assurance framework to fully consider mission, 
installation, facility, and infrastructure requirements (e.g. 
utility, water and wastewater, communication, and 
transportation systems), when developing critical mission 
assurance requirements.
    The committee is also concerned that information and data 
sharing challenges persist among installation, facility, 
infrastructure, and mission personnel on military 
installations. The committee believes that a more robust and 
comprehensive mission assurance framework needs to be 
considered, and that a process to share mission assurance 
information and data could help inform the development of 
critical mission requirements that support budgetary decisions.
    Prior Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports have 
identified similar challenges with DOD's identification and 
prioritization of defense critical infrastructure efforts. In 
2008, the GAO identified several management weaknesses in DOD's 
implementation of the Defense Critical Infrastructure Program 
(DCIP) to comprehensively account for critical mission 
requirements (GAO-08-373R, GAO-08-851, and GAO-09-42). For 
example, the GAO reported that DOD lacks sufficient information 
to determine the full extent of the risks and vulnerabilities 
to critical assets. The GAO also identified the lack of 
infrastructure-related information regarding the networks, 
assets, points of service, and inter- and intra-dependencies; 
and, that existing programs did not routinely coordinate or 
share details of critical mission requirements with 
complementary DOD mission assurance programs.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to evaluate DOD's Mission Assurance 
program. The GAO review should assess the extent to which: (1) 
DOD fully takes into consideration supporting installation, 
mission operator, and critical supporting infrastructure (such 
as utility, water and wastewater, communication, and 
transportation systems) when developing critical mission 
assurance requirements; (2) The data management systems, such 
as the strategic mission assurance data system and mission 
assurance risk management system, accurately collect and take 
into account infrastructure-related information regarding the 
networks, assets, points of service, and inter- and intra-
dependencies; (3) Metrics are in place to measure performance 
of achieving critical mission assurance requirements; (4) 
Processes are established to share information and data to 
inform development of critical mission requirements and 
budgetary decisions, and the extent to which these processes 
affected budgetary decisions; and (5) The military services 
have complied with existing DOD mission assurance requirements 
and policies.
    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 
March 28, 2019, on preliminary findings of the Comptroller 
General's evaluation with a report to be completed by July 30, 
2019. A classified annex may be provided, as appropriate.

Review of the Navy's shipyard improvement plan

    The committee notes that the Navy's four public shipyards 
are critical to maintaining fleet readiness and supporting 
ongoing operations involving the Navy's nuclear-powered 
aircraft carriers and submarines. However, as the Comptroller 
General reported in 2017, the condition of the Navy's shipyards 
is poor and they have not been fully meeting the Navy's 
operational needs. Previous efforts to address these issues 
have been inadequate, in part because the Navy lacked results-
oriented elements. Notably, the Navy presented its Shipyard 
Optimization Plan in February 2018, which the Navy describes as 
the first phase of a larger effort. The committee believes the 
Navy's assessment of public shipyard dry dock capacity is 
particularly important, as it identifies 67 of 68 deferred 
maintenance availabilities under the status quo, all of which 
would be restored upon making the public shipyard dry dock 
investment recommended by the report.
    The committee is encouraged by the Navy's efforts to 
develop a long-term and comprehensive plan, yet the committee 
is also concerned about the extent to which the Navy's plan 
incorporates the recommended elements for effectively managing 
its shipyard capital investments and fully identifies the 
funding and authorities needed to eliminate maintenance 
backlogs.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees regarding the Navy's effort to address its 
public shipyard shortfalls. The report should evaluate the 
extent to which the Navy's plan: (1) Addresses infrastructure 
deficiencies needed to support the current and 30-year force 
structure projections, includes metrics and other results-
oriented elements to guide shipyard capital investments and 
sustain progress in addressing the shipyards' needs; (2) 
Includes a five-year workload management plan for the entire 
nuclear maintenance enterprise, both public- and private-sector 
capacities, that limits lost operational days; (3) Identifies 
the funding and authorities required to eliminate maintenance 
backlogs and return to predictable, sustainable, and affordable 
ship maintenance availabilities for the planned navy force 
structure; and (4) Any other related matters the Comptroller 
General considers appropriate.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
brief the Senate Committee on Armed Services not later than 
March 15, 2019, on preliminary findings of the Comptroller 
General's evaluation, with the report to follow at a date to be 
determined at the time of the briefing.

Rough terrain container handler

    The committee notes the wide-ranging efforts of the 
military logistics community to provide vital resources for the 
warfighter. However, the committee remains concerned by the 
lack of a comprehensive and appropriately resourced sustainment 
strategy for RT240 Rough Terrain Container Handler (RTCH) 
despite the Department of Defense (DOD)'s inventory of over 
1,100 RTCHs on hand and the hundreds of thousands ISO 
containers within the DOD's purview.
    The committee is concerned by the age of the RTCH fleet, 
the rumored overall poor readiness of the systems on hand, and 
notes that there is not a recapitalization program for these 
systems, nor a long-term strategy to modernize a fleet that was 
procured in 1998. The committee believes the Army's lack of a 
RTCH Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) will lead to further 
reduced readiness and an eventual budget request to replace the 
RTCH with new equipment.
    Of special concern is the differing paths the Army has 
taken compared to the Marine Corps, which has initiated a RTCH 
SLEP beginning in fiscal year 2019. The Marine Corps has 
requested $8.1 million beginning in 2019 to begin a multi-year 
program to execute a SLEP for 117 of their 160 vehicles. The 
Army has chosen not to follow this model for its almost 1000 
vehicles and is instead using an internal Operation and 
Maintenance, Army fund to perform its own program to sustain 
the fleet. As the Marine Corps is specifically investing in 
modern technology to harvest new capabilities and working with 
industry to speed the process of repairing their war weary 
systems, there is a clear divergence in the two programs.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Army to 
develop plans to sustain the RTCH fleet, preserve the RTCH 
industrial base, both within and outside the Army, improve 
readiness and guarantee RTCH availability for operations into 
the 2030s. It requests a briefing to the Committee on those 
plans, and how current RTCH readiness meet U.S. Transportation 
Command (TRANSCOM) logistics requirements, within 60 days of 
bill passage.
    In addition, since the Army and Marine Corps are pursuing 
different strategies to sustain this critical operational 
capability, the committee is interested in the potential impact 
of the two strategies on sustainment of this $1.0 billion 
investment made by DOD over the past two decades. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to: (1) Review the readiness and condition of the RTCH 
fleets in the Army and Marine Corps; (2) Identify, analyze, and 
compare the Army's and Marine Corps' sustainment strategies for 
their respective RTCH fleets, including whether these 
approaches have assessed available modernization capabilities 
that would enhance joint deployability; (3) Describe and assess 
any strategic risks associated with the Army's and Marine 
Corps' approaches to modernizing their respective RTCH fleets 
to meet TRANSCOM logistics requirements; and (4) Report on any 
other related matters the Comptroller General deems 
appropriate.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General to brief the 
Senate Committee on Armed Services not later than April 1, 
2019, on preliminary observations of the Comptroller General's 
evaluation, with a report to follow at a date to be determined 
at the time of the briefing.

Surface Deployment and Distribution Command common and logistics broker 
        waiver process

    The committee requests that the Secretary of the Army 
explore a waiver process within the Army Surface Deployment and 
Distribution Command (SDDC) for Department of Defense 
transportation officers who utilize the Automated 
Transportation Request System. This process may include 
allowing a SDDC registered transportation service provider 
freight carrier to serve as a common and logistics company or 
freight broker in such instances when it is determined by the 
transportation officer that cost and performance are better 
served by such action.
    The committee urges this review in order to ensure that 
transportation officers are able to utilize those freight 
carriers best suited to serve the warfighter in terms of 
performance and cost.

Use of fire extinguishers in Department of Defense facilities and 
        National Model Codes

    The committee is aware that portable fire extinguishers are 
essential to the safety of members of the Armed Forces and 
their families. The protection of service members and their 
families is imperative to the readiness of the force. Every 
Department building should apply building and fire codes that 
are in line with national model codes and state building and 
fire codes. The committee notes that National model codes 
promulgated by the National Fire Protection Association and the 
International Code Council have been adopted by almost every 
state in the nation. The committee is concerned that the 
removal of these devices and subsequent adherence to the change 
in United Facilities Criteria has the potential to harm force 
readiness and protection service wide.
    The current United Facilities Criteria should be updated to 
ensure it provides members of the Armed Forces, their families 
and other Department of Defense personnel with fire protection 
standards that are met by their civilian counterparts, 
including requiring portable fire extinguishers on military 
installations.

Use of Global Combat Support System-Army by deployed units

    The committee notes that the Global Combat Support System-
Army (GCSS-Army) is a defense business system that is being 
acquired to replace several separate systems used to manage 
critical logistics support activities at Army units, such as 
ordering and tracking supplies, maintaining accountability of 
organizational equipment, and monitoring unit maintenance. The 
committee understands that units will use GCSS-Army not only 
when they are at their home station, but also when they are 
deployed. In September 2014, the Comptroller General released 
``DOD Business Systems Modernization'' (GAO-14-470), which 
reviewed the early implementation of GCSS-Army at selected 
units and found that it was generally meeting their logistics 
requirements. At that time, the full system capability had been 
fielded to very few units, and the units were not deployed when 
using the system. The committee continues to be interested in 
the Army's progress and plans for using GCSS-Army to support 
military operations.

Water resources for Department of Defense installations

    According to the Department of Defense (DOD), near term 
weather variability such as changes in the number of 
consecutive days of high or low precipitation as well as 
increases in the extent and duration of droughts may exacerbate 
water shortages. DOD has stated that potential effects of water 
shortages on the Department's installations include the 
following: disruption to--and competition for-reliable fresh 
water supplies; and reduced--or changed-availability and access 
to water resources to support personnel.
    Moreover, increasing demand for water places stress on the 
finite supplies of water that DOD installations depend on to 
fulfill their missions and make the management of water 
resources in the future more challenging if there is 
competition for fresh water. Drought conditions can impact 
military training when live fire training must be curtailed to 
avoid inadvertently starting wildfires. Water scarcity--the 
increased potential for the reduction in or disruption of an 
installation's reliable access to water--has already caused DOD 
installations in the United States to implement aggressive 
water conservation and reuse measures. DOD has conducted 
studies that indicate critical installations could run out of 
water within two decades.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
to conduct a review of the Department's water resource 
management practices and the identified or potential impacts 
from water scarcity and brief the committee no later than 
January 30, 2019. At a minimum, the review shall answer: (1) 
How do selected DOD missions and installations rely on water 
and what are the potential impacts of water scarcity on DOD 
installations and mission capability; (2) To what extent have 
DOD installations experienced increasing water scarcity or 
drought conditions since 2014 and how has DOD mitigated any 
such impacts; (3) What challenges does DOD face, if any, in 
mitigating the impacts of water scarcity; and (4) To what 
extent does DOD ensure that installations take full advantage 
of all available sources of fresh water and what impediments if 
any exist that hamper the ability to access fresh water.

              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 2019, as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2019                  Change from
                                                  FY 2018  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2019       FY 2018
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army..........................................     483,500    487,500         485,741     -1,759          +2,241
Navy..........................................     327,900    335,400         331,900     -3,500          +4,000
Marine Corps..................................     186,000    186,100         186,100          0            +100
Air Force.....................................     325,100    329,100         325,720     -3,380            +620
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................   1,322,500  1,338,100       1,329,461     -8,639          +6,691
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The committee notes that the national unemployment rate is 
at a 10-year low point. In the past, when national unemployment 
was low and the military sought large end strength increases, 
the all-volunteer force has struggled to recruit and retain 
sufficient numbers of high-quality servicemembers. Therefore, 
the committee recommends end strength increases aligned with 
historical growth and tied to specific missions.
    The committee encourages the Army to use the additional end 
strength provided by this section to support priorities 
identified in the National Defense Strategy, such as Short 
Range Air Defense Battalions, Indirect Fire Protection 
Capabilities, Multiple Launch Rocket System Battalions, Air 
Defense Artillery Brigade Headquarters, Corps Headquarters in 
Europe, and the requisite trainees, transients, holdees, and 
students.
    For the Navy, the provision would authorize one of the 
largest year-to-year end strength increase since the end of the 
Cold War. While the committee recognizes the need for a larger 
end strength to meet future fleet demands, the Navy is 
unaccustomed to rapid growth and must demonstrate its ability 
to responsibly meet end strength targets.
    For the Marine Corps, modest growth supports emerging 
demands for special operations forces enabler personnel and is 
in line with historical end strength increases.
    For the Air Force, the provision would authorize end 
strength growth in line with historic achievable levels to 
increase pilot and enlisted aircrew production.
    The committee notes that current law authorizes the 
Secretary of Defense to approve up to a 3 percent Active-Duty 
end strength variance from the levels authorized by Congress. 
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to make use 
of this authority if the military services demonstrate the 
ability to responsibly grow beyond authorized levels.
End strengths for commissioned officers on active duty in certain 
        grades (sec. 402)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Active-Duty end strengths for officers in grades of major, 
lieutenant colonel, and colonel, and Navy grades of lieutenant 
commander, commander, and captain as of September 30, 2019, as 
follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Major/        Lieutenant
                              Service                                  Lieutenant       Colonel/       Colonel/
                                                                        Commander       Commander      Captain
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army...............................................................          15,470           8,700        3,970
Navy...............................................................          11,010           6,670        3,060
Marine Corps.......................................................           3,920           1,910          650
Air Force..........................................................          13,920          10,270        3,450
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
    DOD Total......................................................          44,320          27,550       11,130
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The end strength authorizations contained in this provision 
are aligned with the projections included in the fiscal year 
2018 Defense Manpower Requirements Report. The committee notes 
that the fiscal year 2019 Defense Manpower Requirements Report 
was not submitted by the legally specified due date and was 
therefore not considered for the purposes of this provision.

                       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 2019, as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2019                  Change from
                                                  FY 2018  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2019       FY 2018
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...........................     343,500    343,500         343,500          0               0
Army Reserve..................................     199,500    199,500         199,500          0               0
Navy Reserve..................................      59,000     59,100          59,000       -100               0
Marine Corps Reserve..........................      38,500     38,500          38,500          0               0
Air National Guard............................     106,600    107,100         106,600       -500               0
Air Force Reserve.............................      69,800     70,000          69,800       -200               0
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................     816,900    817,700         816,900          0               0
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 2019, as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2019                  Change from
                                                  FY 2018  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2019       FY 2018
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...........................      30,155     30,595          30,155       -440               0
Army Reserve..................................      16,261     16,386          16,261       -125               0
Navy Reserve..................................      10,101     10,110          10,101         -9               0
Marine Corps Reserve..........................       2,261      2,261           2,261          0               0
Air National Guard............................      16,260     19,861          19,450       -411           3,190
Air Force Reserve.............................       3,588      3,849           3,588       -261               0
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................      78,626     83,062          81,816     -1,246           3,190
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the minimum number of military technicians (dual status) for 
the reserve components of the Army and Air Force as of the last 
day of fiscal year 2019, as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2019                  Change from
                                                  FY 2018  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2019       FY 2018
                                                             Request   Recommendation   Request     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...........................      22,294     22,294          22,294          0               0
Army Reserve..................................       6,492      7,495           6,492     -1,003               0
Air National Guard............................      19,135     18,969          18,969          0            -166
Air Force Reserve.............................       8,880      9,908           8,880       -973               0
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
    DOD Total.................................      56,801     58,666          56,635     -1,976            -166
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for 
        operational support (sec. 414)

    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, 2019, as 
shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2019                  Change from
                                                  FY 2018  -----------------------------------------------------
                    Service                     Authorized                              FY 2019       FY 2018
                                                             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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

Military personnel (sec. 421)

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

Limitation on use of funds for personnel in fiscal year 2019 in excess 
        of statutorily specified end strengths for fiscal year 2018 
        (sec. 422)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Department of Defense from increasing end strengths for the 
various military departments and components beyond the levels 
authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) until the Secretary of Defense 
submits the report on ``Highest-Priority Roles and Missions of 
the Department of Defense and the Armed Forces'' required 
elsewhere in this Act.

                              Budget Items

Military personnel funding changes

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

                    [Changes in millions of dollars]
 
 
 
Military personnel underexecution.....................          -1,937.1
End strength reduction................................            -993.2
Foreign currency fluctuation..........................            -133.0
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps increase......             +1.22
    Total.............................................         -3,062.08
 

    The committee recommends a total reduction in the Military 
Personnel (MILPERS) appropriation of $3,062.08 million. This 
amount includes: (1) A reduction of $1,937.1 million to reflect 
the Government Accountability Office's most recent assessment 
annual MILPERS under execution; (2) A decrease of $993.2 
million to reflect active and reserve component end strength 
reductions from the President's Budget request; (3) A decrease 
of $133.0 million for foreign currency fluctuation; and (4) An 
increase of $1.22 million for Junior Reserve Officers' Training 
Corps.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy

              Part I--Officer Personnel Management Reform

Modernizing officer personnel management in support of the National 
        Defense Strategy
    The 2018 National Defense Strategy states correctly that 
``the creativity and talent of the American warfighter is our 
greatest enduring strength.'' Furthermore, the strategy calls 
for a ``broad revision'' of talent management principles among 
the armed services to increase the lethality and adaptability 
of the force. The committee supports these priorities and 
recommends several provisions to modernize officer personnel 
management and bolster the effectiveness, recruitment, and 
retention of the all-volunteer force.
    Officer personnel management is a complex combination of 
statute, regulation, culture, and tradition that determines how 
military leaders are recruited, trained, retained, promoted, 
assigned, and compensated. Despite its importance, a personnel 
system is not an end unto itself. An effective officer 
personnel system must achieve desired military outcomes, which 
are based on a coherent defense strategy. When the personnel 
system becomes out of alignment with the strategy, the system 
must be revised. This is precisely the situation facing the 
current officer personnel management system.
    Officer careers are managed according to the tenets of the 
38-year-old Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA) 
(Public Law 96-513). DOPMA places strict limitations on 
commissioned officer personnel management and requires all 
military Services to manage their officer corps in the same 
general manner within specific statutory constraints. DOPMA 
limits the number of officers who may be allowed to serve in 
mid-grade officer ranks, how an officer is appointed, when an 
officer may be promoted, how promotion decisions will be made, 
and when an officer should be removed from service.
    Over the last several years, the committee has carefully 
studied the legislation, policy, and practice governing officer 
careers. The committee held public hearings on the topic in 
2015, 2017, and 2018, where expert civilian and military 
leaders urged reform. In 2017, committee staff visited each 
military Service personnel headquarters to gain an in-depth 
understanding of how DOPMA is implemented on a day-to-day 
basis. The committee hosted multiple member and staff policy 
meetings to thoroughly understand current policy and options 
for reform, including recommendations from the Department of 
Defense. Based on the committee's thorough research and 
deliberate process, the committee recommends several provisions 
to modernize DOPMA to properly orient the officer corps for the 
threats identified by the National Defense Strategy.
    DOPMA was based on the assumption that the Armed Forces 
would primarily be required to defeat a single adversary, 
namely the Soviet Union. It was drafted at a time when 
lawmakers could not have foreseen the variety of challenges 
facing today's military. In 1980, the primary military outcome 
DOPMA was designed to achieve was building and maintaining a 
perpetually young and vigorous force prepared for the large-
scale maneuver warfare tactics of the Cold War. To achieve this 
outcome, DOPMA continued and strengthened an ``up-or-out'' 
promotion system as the fundamental concept for the management 
of officer personnel. The committee report (H. Rpt. 96-1462) 
accompanying the DOPMA legislation stated, ``The simple fact is 
that if the system is working right, it will, of necessity, 
result in passover for promotion of officers who are fully 
qualified to serve in the next-higher grade.''
    Today, strategy, tactics, and dramatically different 
military demographics demand different outcomes from a 
personnel system than what DOPMA was designed to achieve. The 
2018 National Defense Strategy notes the United States faces 
``a security environment more complex and volatile than any we 
have experienced in recent memory.'' To respond to this 
volatility, the strategy calls for a ``lethal, resilient, and 
rapidly adapting Joint Force.'' Rapid adaptability, rather than 
youth and vigor, is the primary outcome that must be achieved 
by a modernized officer personnel system.
    Adaptability in the context of officer personnel policy 
means the ability to quickly recruit, promote, and retain the 
officers required to respond to emerging threats. To achieve 
this outcome, the committee recommends several provisions that 
de-emphasize predetermined promotion timelines and rigid 
constraints on officer manpower. Additionally, the committee 
recommends expanding constructive credit authority to allow the 
military to quickly recruit experienced personnel from the 
civilian labor pool. These provisions modernize rather than 
overturn the fundamental officer management principles that 
have served the military well over the past many decades.
    Force utilization and demographics must also be considered 
carefully in designing effective personnel policy. The authors 
of DOPMA never envisioned the post-Cold War military as 
presently constructed and utilized. Today's force is 43 percent 
smaller than the military of 1980 and is constantly engaged in 
ways never predicted during the Cold War. Repeated overseas 
combat deployments strain the more traditional warfighting 
career fields, as new military domains require entirely 
different officer skills.
    Designing a personnel system capable of adapting to the 
unique concerns of hundreds of different officer specialties 
and career fields means moving away from a ``one-size-fits-
all'' construct for officer management. Those officers subject 
to frequent overseas deployments may benefit from the 
opportunity to opt out of competing for promotion to free up 
time to pursue an unusual career opportunity. Officers in the 
burgeoning cyber and information warfare career fields are very 
likely to be best served by specially designed promotion and 
management policies.
    As the all-volunteer force has matured over the last forty 
years, new policies have thoroughly changed the demographics of 
the officer corps, with women and married servicemembers 
comprising a much larger percentage of the military than in 
1980. Over 11 percent of married officers are in a dual-
military marriage, which means those families must balance the 
demands of two full-time military careers. These changes have 
strengthened the officer corps but have never been seriously 
considered as a factor when designing suitable officer 
management policy.
    To respond to these demographic realities, the committee 
recommends a number of provisions to emphasize individual merit 
and to provide opportunities for more individually-tailored 
career paths. In today's competitive labor market, it is 
crucial to balance military necessity with the ability of 
servicemembers to have greater influence over their careers. In 
the vast majority of circumstances both interests can be 
achieved without sacrificing the unique concerns of a 
servicemember or the legitimate demands of a military career.
    Up-or-out remains an important foundation for officer 
personnel management. Not every officer can or should be 
retained for a full career. However, today the up-or-out 
promotion system has largely been replaced with an unofficial 
up-and-stay system. Though each military Service still 
routinely separates officers who fail to promote to the rank of 
major or lieutenant commander, the promotion rate to this rank 
has steadily increased to the point where only a few officers 
are not promoted. For example, in 2017, the Air Force announced 
a 100 percent promotion opportunity to the rank of major, and 
since 2001, the Army's average promotion rate to major has been 
88 percent. Each Service generally allows officers who reach 
major or lieutenant commander to remain on Active Duty until 
reaching retirement eligibility. Additionally, each of the 
Services often utilizes selective continuation authority to 
retain the relatively few officers who fail to promote to major 
or lieutenant commander.
    The committee continues to believe that up-or-out is an 
important principle for a large portion of the officer corps. 
However, not every officer career field should be forced to 
resemble a pyramid, with a large number of junior officers 
ultimately feeding fewer mid-level officers and fewer still 
senior ranking officers. Rather, some career fields would be 
best served with a structure that provides for a relatively 
small number of junior officers while supporting a larger 
number of mid-level officers. DOPMA and other policies make 
this a difficult outcome to achieve. The committee therefore 
recommends provisions that would provide additional flexibility 
to adjust the shape of the officer corps by discontinuing the 
authorized officer strength table, which caps the number of 
mid-level officers.
    The committee emphasizes that these updates to officer 
management are not motivated by the performance of currently-
serving officers. The officer corps continues to provide strong 
and effective leadership for the all-volunteer force. However, 
this committee believes that in many cases, the military 
produces high-quality officers despite the current personnel 
system rather than because of it. Moreover, the challenges 
facing the military demand a modernized officer personnel 
system to ensure the military can harness the talent of the 
next generation of competent, agile leaders. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a series of proposals that would provide 
necessary updates to officer management while also protecting 
the fundamental requirements of a military career.
Repeal of codified specification of authorized strengths of certain 
        commissioned officers on active duty (sec. 501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 523 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Congress to annually authorize the number of officers serving 
in the grades of major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel in the 
Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps or lieutenant commander, 
commander, and captain in the Navy. This provision would repeal 
the authorized officer strength table, including all of the 
previous exceptions to the officer strength table.
    The committee notes the officer strength table was 
originally included as a fundamental feature of the Defense 
Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA) (Public Law 96-513). 
The strength table was designed to serve as an effective 
limitation on the number of mid-grade officers within each 
service. The House report to accompany the legislation (H. 
Rept. 96-1462) explained that the table would be adjusted over 
time to align with emerging officer manpower requirements. 
However, in practice the authorized strength table has rarely 
been updated and is no longer linked to strategy or actual 
officer requirements.
    As of the end of fiscal year 2017, each service is largely 
unaffected by the limitations imposed by the strength table. 
For example, the Army finished fiscal year 2017 at 
approximately 78 percent of their authorization for officers 
serving in the grade of major. Majors in the Air Force and 
Marine Corps were respectively at 88 percent and 86 percent of 
authorized levels. While each service operates more closely to 
the strength table limit for progressively higher grades (e.g., 
the Air Force was manned at approximately 96 percent of 
authorized lieutenant colonel end strength), none of the 
services are effectively limited by the table as envisioned by 
the original DOPMA legislation.
    The committee authorizes annual end strength levels for the 
overall active and reserve component and numerous other subsets 
of total force manpower. This allows end strength to fluctuate 
to meet strategic and budgetary necessities. Similarly, this 
provision would require each military service to annually 
justify required mid-grade officer manpower needs to support an 
annual authorization from Congress. This provision provides 
greater flexibility to the military, while also ensuring 
Congress continues to perform its vital oversight role in 
ensuring the officer corps is effectively managed.
Annual defense manpower requirements report matters (sec. 502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 115a of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Annual Defense Manpower Requirements Report be submitted on the 
same day as the date on which the President submits the budget 
request for the next fiscal year to Congress.
    The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
to include two new elements in the Annual Defense Manpower 
Requirements Report. These new elements are: (1) The 
anticipated promotion opportunity for officer promotion boards 
expected to occur during the upcoming fiscal year; and (2) The 
number of officers required to serve during the upcoming fiscal 
year in the rank of major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel for 
the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps and lieutenant commander, 
commander, and captain for the Navy.
    The Annual Defense Manpower Requirements Report is a 
crucial tool for effective congressional oversight of military 
personnel. The report requirement was the result of fundamental 
concern when drafting the Defense Officer Personnel Management 
Act (DOPMA) (Public Law 96-516). As the committee stated in the 
House report accompanying the legislation (H. Rept. 96-1462) 
``Although the committee is generally satisfied with the 
assessment of grade requirements, significant uncertainty 
exists in justifying the need for some of these requirements.'' 
The Annual Defense Manpower Requirements Report was designed to 
provide coherent justification of manpower needs to the 
Congress.
    The committee notes with disapproval that the Department of 
Defense has habitually disregarded the statutory deadline for 
the Annual Defense Manpower Requirements Report. In fiscal year 
2018, the Department submitted the report over six months late. 
The fiscal year 2019 report is expected to be submitted nearly 
three months late. The Department's disregard for a long-
standing legal requirement inhibits Congress's ability to 
provide effective oversight of the military's most valuable 
resource, which is the people who volunteer to serve.
Repeal of requirement for ability to complete 20 years of service by 
        age 62 as qualification for original appointment as a regular 
        commissioned officer (sec. 503)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 532 of title 10, United States Code, to repeal the 
requirement that original officer appointments may only be 
granted to individuals who are able to complete 20 years of 
commissioned service prior to reaching age 62.
Enhancement of availability of constructive service credit for private 
        sector training or experience upon original appointment as a 
        commissioned officer (sec. 504)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 533 and 12207 of title 10, United States Code, to 
authorize service secretaries to award constructive credit to 
newly-appointed active and reserve component officers for 
special training or experience not to exceed the amount of 
constructive credit required for appointment in the grade of 
colonel in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps or captain in 
the Navy. This provision would also repeal the temporary 
authority to award constructive credit for critically necessary 
cyberspace-related experience.
    The committee notes that this provision explicitly 
authorizes service secretaries to award constructive credit for 
any special experience, to include cyberspace-related 
experience, directly supportive the operational needs of each 
service. This provision is intended to allow the military 
departments to recruit individuals more easily from the private 
sector with relevant knowledge that may be in short supply 
within a given service. However, a manpower shortage is not the 
only reason to utilize expanded constructive credit authority. 
This provision may also be used to increase the diversity of 
experience within the officer corps, particularly in career 
fields that closely resemble occupations outside of the 
military (e.g., program management, financial management, 
prosecutors, etc.).
    Traditionally, officer personnel management resembles the 
structure of a pyramid, with large numbers of junior officers 
required to fill smaller numbers of mid-grade and senior 
officer requirements. This may no longer be the ideal construct 
for all officer career fields. The committee envisions some 
career fields requiring relatively few junior officers, while 
still requiring larger numbers of mid-grade and senior 
officers. This provision would allow the Services to recruit 
those mid-grade and senior officers from the civilian labor 
pool by offering the incentives of a higher initial rank along 
with a more competitive compensation package.
    The committee notes the Army already structures some 
officer specialties with more senior-ranking than junior-
ranking officers through its Voluntary Branch Transfer 
Incentive Program. This program allows lieutenants, captains, 
and majors to transfer out of occupational specialties with 
fewer mid-grade officer requirements (e.g., infantry) into 
other occupational specialties that require more senior 
officers (e.g., financial management). While the Army's program 
is a useful retention tool, in some cases it may be more 
effective to recruit individuals with private-sector experience 
to fill these mid-grade officer ranks.
    This provision encourages the sort of rapid adaptability 
envisioned by the National Defense Strategy. By allowing the 
Services to recruit talented Americans at later stages of a 
career, the military can quickly build and shape new units to 
respond to emerging threats.
Standardized temporary promotion authority across the military 
        departments for officers in certain grades with critical skills 
        (sec. 505)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 35 of title 10, United States Code, by adding a new 
section to authorize each military service to award temporary 
promotions to the grade of O-4, O-5, and O-6 for officers 
serving in specified positions. This provision would also 
repeal a similar authority, which was previously only 
applicable to the Navy.
    The temporary promotion authority that would be provided by 
this provision must be utilized to fill positions requiring 
certain critical skills. This authority is designed to help the 
Services fill the gap between operationally challenging billets 
and the officers who are available to fill those assignments. 
Additionally, this authority would offer a valuable retention 
tool by incentivizing certain high-performing officers in low-
density career fields to volunteer for challenging assignments 
with the promise of an earlier promotion.
    The committee notes a similar authority has existed in the 
Navy for decades. The Navy has utilized ``temporary spot 
promotions'' to fill critical lieutenant commander billets in 
the nuclear engineering and special warfare communities. This 
provision would allow the other services to utilize similar 
authority as currently provided to the Navy and also expand the 
program to temporarily promote officers to the rank of captain, 
lieutenant colonel, and colonel in the Army, Air Force, or 
Marine Corps or lieutenant, commander, and captain in the Navy.
    While the temporary promotions authorized by this provision 
are designed to occur earlier in an officer's career than would 
normally be the case, the committee notes that this provision 
also requires a promotion board to select an officer for a 
temporary promotion, thereby providing an effective control 
measure to ensure only high-performing and skilled officers are 
selected for these prestigious appointments.
    As the committee continues to look for opportunities to 
provide flexibility within the officer management system, this 
provision is an important tool to allow service secretaries to 
shape their officer corps to respond to rapid changes in 
officer requirements. Temporary spot promotions could be used 
to fill vacancies in numerous officer career fields where the 
demand for mid-grade officers frequently exceeds the available 
supply. For example, the Air Force currently has mid-grade 
officer shortages in logistics and information operations, the 
Army continues to seek mid-grade officers for information 
warfare and other technical specialties, the Navy would be able 
to expand its existing program for higher-level assignments in 
nuclear and special warfare, and the Marine Corps could utilize 
this authority to fill shortages in technically-oriented career 
fields like financial and program management. While these are 
examples meant to illustrate the utility of temporary spot 
promotion authority, the committee looks toward the military 
departments to develop creative uses for this authority.

Authority for promotion boards to recommend officers of particular 
        merit be placed higher on a promotion list (sec. 506)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 616 and section 14108 of title 10, United States Code, 
to authorize service secretaries to allow officer promotion 
selection boards to place officers of particular merit higher 
on a regular or reserve promotion list.
    In recommending this provision, the committee emphasizes 
that officer performance should be the most important factor in 
promotion determinations. This provision would allow high-
performing officers to be promoted earlier than others, to 
include those officers who meet the promotion board after 
having already been passed over in a previous board. A similar 
authority has been used extensively by the U.S. Coast Guard for 
the last 16 years with great success.
    The committee encourages service secretaries to take 
advantage of this authority wherever possible. Recognizing 
high-performing officers through earlier promotions would 
improve the military's ability to continue building an officer 
corps based on merit, character, and performance.

Authority for officers to opt out of promotion board consideration 
        (sec. 507)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 619 and section 14301 of title 10, United States Code, 
to authorize service secretaries, based on the request of an 
officer and only when deemed to be in the best interests of the 
military departments, to remove an officer from consideration 
by a selection board for promotion to the next higher grade.

Competitive category matters (sec. 508)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 621 of title 10, United States Code, to require that 
service secretaries establish competitive categories by 
grouping officers occupying similar qualifications, 
specialties, occupations, or ratings. The provision would also 
prohibit the practice of requiring service secretaries to 
provide consistent promotion timing or promotion opportunity 
among various competitive categories in each military Service.
    Under current law, service secretaries have broad authority 
to establish competitive categories for the purposes of officer 
promotion and management. As a result, each military Service 
has pursued a different approach, with the Navy utilizing 20 
different competitive categories, while the Marine Corps groups 
all of its officers into 2 competitive categories. Though the 
committee does not desire to mandate a specific number of 
competitive categories for each Service, in general, the 
committee believes service secretaries should make greater use 
of competitive category authority.
    The committee notes that within a given competitive 
category, service secretaries may tailor promotion timing, 
increase or decrease desired promotion opportunity, and 
customize guidance to promotion boards. These are important 
tools in managing the wide variety of officer careers in 
today's military. Furthermore, as today's force grows 
increasingly specialized and technical, competitive categories 
must be built to achieve specific career outcomes for 
individual officer career fields.
    Lastly, the committee is aware of Department of Defense 
instructions encouraging the Services to strive for consistent 
promotion timing and opportunity among various competitive 
categories. At a time when officer careers can be radically 
different, it makes little sense to strive for consistency of 
career outcomes. Officer career fields must be allowed to be 
customized based on the unique demands of a given specialty.

Promotion zone matters (sec. 509)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 623 of title 10, United States Code, to require service 
secretaries to align officer promotion zones with desired 
officer management outcomes described in the Annual Defense 
Manpower Requirements Report. The provision would also prohibit 
service secretaries from determining the number of officers in 
a promotion zone on the basis of the year in which officers 
receive their original appointment to their current grade, a 
practice commonly referred as ``year group management.''
    During the committee's review of officer personnel 
management policy, it was discovered that some military 
departments structure officer promotion zones according to year 
group while other departments form promotion zones to achieve a 
certain promotion rate or opportunity. While the year group 
methodology allows for increased predictability for officer 
promotion timing, it frequently results in larger 
inefficiencies and a lack of predictability in the actual 
likelihood of an officer being promoted. For example, when an 
individual year group is small, promotion rates increase beyond 
what might be advisable. Alternatively, when an individual year 
group is large, promotion rates drop precipitously, thereby 
unfairly punishing some officers who might otherwise have been 
promoted if they had been commissioned a year earlier or later. 
This provision would require service secretaries to form 
promotion zones to achieve more consistent promotion rates that 
are aligned with the needs of the service, rather than 
consistent promotion timing.

Alternative promotion authority for officers in designated competitive 
        categories of officers (sec. 510)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
an alternative promotion process for officers in certain, 
service secretary-designated, competitive categories. This 
provision would also create a term-based selective continuation 
process for officers not selected for promotion.
    Under the authorities provided by this provision, officers 
serving in designated competitive categories would have up to 
five opportunities to be selected for promotion to the next 
highest grade. The provision would remove below-the-zone and 
above-the-zone distinctions within the promotion process, 
thereby allowing all eligible officers to compete for promotion 
purely on the basis of performance with limited regard for 
cumulative time served.
    In directing a competitive category to make use of the 
promotion process described in this provision, service 
secretaries must determine the number of promotion 
opportunities to be offered to each grade within the 
competitive category. For example, a service secretary may 
determine it is desirable to offer five opportunities to 
compete for promotion to major, while promotion to lieutenant 
colonel should require only three opportunities. Service 
secretaries may only make adjustments to the number of 
promotion opportunities once every 5 years. If the number of 
promotion opportunities is adjusted downward (e.g., from five 
to four opportunities), all officers with remaining promotion 
eligibility under the previous policy would have one more 
opportunity to compete for promotion.
    For many officers the Defense Officer Personnel Management 
Act (DOPMA) (Public Law 96-513) officer promotion system 
functions adequately. However, for some officers, DOPMA is 
unnecessarily constraining and does not achieve desired 
personnel outcomes. The alternative promotion authority 
included in this provision is intended to remove some of the 
most restrictive constraints, while preserving the underlying 
strengths of the officer promotion process.
    The committee also notes that one of the weaknesses of 
DOPMA is its excessive reliance on tenure as the primary 
determining factor in officer promotions. Additionally, the law 
effectively prejudices any officer who competes for promotion 
outside of the specified promotion zone. For example, early 
promotions known as ``below-the-zone'' are routinely in the low 
single-digit percentages even though the law allows for up to 
10 percent of promotions for below-the-zone officers. While 
officers previously not selected for promotion remain eligible, 
they are effectively stigmatized by promotion boards because a 
previous board did not select them. Consequently, promotion 
boards frequently and artificially limit their ability to 
select the most talented officers eligible for promotion so as 
to not harm those officers who are currently ``in the promotion 
zone.'' This effectively limits the promotion board's ability 
to select the most talented officers, regardless of tenure, and 
also limits individual officer career flexibility.
    The requirement to compete for promotion according to 
predetermined timelines places an enormous amount of stress on 
officer careers. While the Services determine necessary career 
milestones for continued promotion, under DOPMA the Services 
have a limited ability to adjust when an officer must compete 
for promotion. As new requirements are levied on officer 
careers (e.g., joint assignments, advanced education, 
deployments, etc.) officers are forced to change assignments 
much more frequently than might be advisable in order to 
complete all required milestones prior to competing for 
promotion. Promotion timelines mandated by DOPMA and other 
supporting policies reinforce an officer personnel management 
system that prioritizes breadth of experience rather than depth 
of experience.
    No matter the process or policy, some officers will not be 
selected for promotion. The committee believes it is important 
to retain the up-or-out concept for officer management, but 
there must be some exceptions when the needs of the military 
will be best served by retaining an officer. The current 
selective continuation process is too imprecise to ensure only 
those officers who are most able to contribute to a unit's 
success are retained. The Services routinely continue nearly 
all officers not selected for promotion, effectively 
disregarding the ``selective'' aspect of the continuation 
process. This provision would institute a term-based officer 
continuation process to allow officers not selected for 
promotion to continue serving only if they are able to 
contribute to a specific mission or assignment.
    Term-based selective continuation would allow officers to 
continue serving for renewable 3-year terms in specific 
predetermined assignments. As personnel management technology 
continues to advance, the committee envisions assignments for 
selectively continued officers will be individually matched on 
the basis of an officer's unique knowledge, skills, and 
behavior.
    To ensure the successful implementation of the alternative 
promotion and continuation process contained in this provision, 
the Secretary of Defense is required to submit a report to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act with his assessment of the effect of this 
provision on officer personnel. The committee encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to work with the military departments in 
drafting the required report.
    Over the last several years, each military department has 
acknowledged a heightened competition for talent. Competition 
breeds innovation, which will be required to ensure the future 
officer corps is an attractive and effective profession. While 
the authorities contained in this provision are entirely 
permissive, the committee encourages the military departments 
to experiment with the alternative promotion process by 
crafting novel competitive categories of officers who would be 
best served by a more flexible promotion policy.

Applicability to additional officer grades of authority for 
        continuation on active duty of officers in certain military 
        specialties and career tracks (sec. 511)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 637a of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
service secretaries to allow officers in the grade of O-2 or 
above serving in certain specified military specialties to 
remain on Active Duty until reaching 40 years of active 
service.
    The committee intends this provision be used to allow the 
military to retain officers with vital knowledge, skills, and 
experience who may not be interested in or competitive for 
further promotion. This authority could be utilized in 
conjunction with other policies to build viable ``technical 
tracks'' for certain officer careers, which each military 
department has expressed an interest in pursuing. These 
technical tracks would generally be constructed to allow junior 
officers to remain in selected positions for an extended period 
of time to build greater depth of technical experience than 
ordinarily permitted by law or policy. Officers serving in 
aviation, cyber, maintenance, and special forces are examples 
where a technical track may be an effective personnel 
management option.
    While there will likely be few junior officers who remain 
on Active Duty for 40 years, the committee recognizes that it 
is sometimes counterproductive to force officers to separate or 
retire at an arbitrary point in time. The manpower needs of 
each military service should be the primary concern in 
determining when an officer's career should be involuntarily 
ended.

                         Part II--Other Matters

Matters relating to satisfactory service in grade for purposes of 
        retirement grade of officers in highest grade of satisfactory 
        service (sec. 516)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1370 of title 10, United States Code, to: (1) Authorize 
a conditional determination of an officer's retired grade when 
the officer is under investigation for alleged misconduct at 
the time of retirement; (2) Authorize reopening of a 
determination or certification of an officer's retired grade 
under specified conditions; and (3) Provide that determinations 
of satisfactory service in grade for purposes of determining an 
officer's retired grade take into account the officer's service 
throughout a military career.
    The committee recommends this provision authorizing 
conditional retirement of an officer who is under investigation 
in light of the fact that an officer remains subject to the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice in retired status and thus can 
still be held accountable for misconduct occurring prior to the 
officer's retirement.

Reduction in number of years of active naval service required for 
        permanent appointment as a limited duty officer (sec. 517)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 5589(d) of title 10, United States Code, to offer 
permanent appointments to limited duty officers who have 
completed at least 8 years of active naval service.

Repeal of original appointment qualification requirement for warrant 
        officers in the regular Army (sec. 518)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 3310 of title 10, United States Code, which requires 
original Regular Army warrant officer appointment be made from 
persons who have served at least 1 year on Active Duty in the 
Army.

Uniform grade of service of the Chiefs of Chaplains of the Armed Forces 
        (sec. 519)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to specify a common grade across the 
military services for the positions of Chief of Chaplains.

Written justification for appointment of Chiefs of Chaplains in grade 
        below grade of major general or rear admiral (sec. 520)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
service secretaries to submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
that provides written justification in the event an individual 
holding a rank below major general or rear admiral is appointed 
to the position of Service Chief of Chaplains.

                Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

Authority to adjust effective date of promotion in the event of undue 
        delay in extending Federal recognition of promotion (sec. 521)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 14308(f) of title 10, United States Code, to allow 
service secretaries to adjust the effective date of promotion 
for officers in the reserve component if the secretary 
concerned determines there was an undue delay in the federal 
recognition process and the delay is not attributable to the 
action, or inaction, of the officer concerned.

Authority to designate certain reserve officers as not to be considered 
        for selection for promotion (sec. 522)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 14301 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
service secretaries to defer promotion consideration for 
reserve component servicemembers in a non-participatory, 
membership-only status.
    Current law requires all servicemembers identified on the 
Reserve Active Status List (RASL) to be considered for 
promotion to the next higher grade. This includes certain 
categories of reservists on the RASL who are in the Individual 
Ready Reserve (IRR) and the Standby Reserve, who remain 
eligible for promotion consideration but are not actively 
participating.
    Most officers upon release from the active component are 
transferred to the IRR without affiliating with a reserve unit 
that allows for participation. In some instances, these trained 
individuals have chosen to temporarily suspend their military 
career and voluntarily transferred to the IRR for a variety of 
reasons; others may have secured a civilian opportunity 
requiring transfer to the Standby Reserve where they are 
ineligible for participation.
    After deciding to resume their active service, some 
servicemembers learn of their ineligibility due to being twice 
deferred for promotion, during their time in a non-
participatory reserve status. Others, who received their first 
deferment while in the IRR, potentially lack sufficient time 
upon returning to participation status--due to timing prior to 
their next promotion consideration--to demonstrate the 
potential to serve in the next higher grade and thus are 
discharged upon receipt of their second deferral for promotion, 
in accordance with current law. This serves as an obstacle to 
achieving permeability between the active and reserve component 
by reducing opportunities to re-affiliate trained and 
experienced servicemembers should they seek to return to active 
status.

Expansion of personnel subject to authority of the Chief of the 
        National Guard Bureau in the execution of functions and 
        missions of the National Guard Bureau (sec. 523)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 10508 of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
authority of the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to employ 
persons under certain provisions of title 5, United States 
Code, in furtherance of meeting the requirements of section 
1053 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2016 (Public Law 114-92), as amended by section 1084 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) and section 1083 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91).

Repeal of prohibition on service on Army Reserve Forces Policy 
        Committee by members on active duty (sec. 524)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 10302 of title 10, United States Code, to permit the 
Army National Guard of the United States and United States Army 
Reserve officers serving on Active Duty to serve on the Army 
Reserve Forces Policy Committee.

                Subtitle C--General Service Authorities

Assessment of Navy standard workweek and related adjustments (sec. 531)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to conduct a comprehensive assessment of 
the Navy standard workweek and make related adjustments to how 
workload is used in shipboard manpower planning.
    The committee notes the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) published a report on May 18, 2017, titled ``Actions 
Needed to Ensure Proper Size and Composition of Ship Crews'' 
(GAO-17-413), which recommended ``the Navy (1) Reassess the 
standard workweek, (2) Require examination of in-port workload, 
(3) Require reassessment of the factors used to develop 
manpower requirements, and (4) Identify the personnel costs 
needed to man a larger fleet.''
    The committee further notes this GAO report states, ``In 
2014, the Navy conducted a study of the standard workweek and 
identified significant issues that could negatively affect a 
crew's capabilities to accomplish tasks and maintain the 
material readiness of ships, as well as crew safety issues that 
might result if crews sleep less to accommodate unaccounted for 
workload. The Navy study found that sailors were on duty 108 
hours a week, exceeding their weekly on-duty allocation of 81 
hours.''

Manning of Forward Deployed Naval Forces (sec. 532)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to maintain manning of ships assigned to 
the Forward Deployed Naval Forces at levels not less than the 
levels established for each ship class.

Navy watchstander records (sec. 533)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to require key watchstanders on Navy 
surface ships to maintain a career record of watchstanding 
hours and specific operational evolutions.

Qualification experience requirements for certain Navy watchstations 
        (sec. 534)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on the adequacy of individual training for 
certain Navy watchstations, including any planned or 
recommended changes in qualification standards.

Repeal of 15-year statute of limitations on motions or requests for 
        review of discharge or dismissal from the Armed Forces (sec. 
        535)

    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.

Treatment of claims relating to military sexual trauma in correction of 
        military records and review of discharge or dismissal 
        proceedings (sec. 536)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1552 and 1553 of title 10, United States Code, to 
clarify the treatment of claims for review of a discharge or 
dismissal relating to military sexual trauma in correction of 
military records and review of discharge or dismissal 
proceedings.

                  Subtitle D--Military Justice Matters

Punitive article on domestic violence under the Uniform Code of 
        Military Justice (sec. 541)

    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 on domestic violence in the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Inclusion of strangulation and suffocation in conduct constituting 
        aggravated assault for purposes of the Uniform Code of Military 
        Justice (sec. 542)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 928 of title 10, United States Code (article 128 of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice), to include strangulation and 
suffocation in conduct constituting aggravated assault for 
purposes of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Authorities of Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, 
        Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces 
        (sec. 543)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 546 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public 
Law 113-291) to authorize the Defense Advisory Committee on 
Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in 
the Armed Forces (Advisory Committee) to hold hearings and to 
require other Federal agencies to provide information requested 
by the Advisory Committee. These authorities are similar to 
authorities provided to the prior congressionally-mandated, 
sexual assault-related Response Systems Panel and Judicial 
Proceedings Panel.

Protective orders against individuals subject to the Uniform Code of 
        Military Justice (sec. 544)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
military judges and military magistrates to issue military 
protective orders.

Expansion of eligibility for Special Victims' Counsel services (sec. 
        545)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1044e of title 10, United States Code, to expand 
eligibility for Special Victims' Counsel services to victims of 
domestic violence and other aggravated violent offenses.

Clarification of expiration of term of appellate military judges of the 
        United States Court of Military Commission Review (sec. 546)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 950f of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
expiration of the term of an appellate military judge of the 
United States Court of Military Commission Review.

Expansion of policies on expedited transfer of members of the Armed 
        Forces who are victims of sexual assault (sec. 547)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to expand eligibility for expedited 
transfer to servicemembers who are victims of sexual assault 
and physical domestic violence.

Uniform command action form on disposition of unrestricted sexual 
        assault cases involving members of the Armed Forces (sec. 548)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a uniform command action 
form, applicable across the Armed Forces, for reporting the 
final disposition of certain sexual assault cases.

Inclusion of information on certain collateral conduct of victims of 
        sexual assault in annual reports on sexual assault involving 
        members of the Armed Forces (sec. 549)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
inclusion of information on certain collateral misconduct of 
victims of sexual assault in annual reports on sexual assault 
involving members of the Armed Forces.

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

Consecutive service of service obligation in connection with payment of 
        tuition for off-duty training or education for commissioned 
        officers of the Armed Forces with any other service obligations 
        (sec. 551)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2007(b) of title 10, United States Code, to require an 
Active-Duty service obligation incurred by an officer for the 
acceptance of tuition assistance for off-duty training or 
education be served sequentially with any other service 
obligation already incurred by the officer.

Consecutive service of active service obligations for medical training 
        with other service obligations for education or training (sec. 
        552)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 2114(d) and 2123(b) of title 10, United States Code, 
to require that commissioned service obligations incurred as a 
result of participation in a military intern, residency, or 
fellowship training program shall be served consecutively with 
other commissioned service obligations incurred for education 
or training. This provision would apply to individuals 
beginning participation in medical training programs on or 
after January 1, 2020.

Clarification of application and honorable service requirements under 
        the Troops-to-Teachers Program to members of the Retired 
        Reserve (sec. 553)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1154(d)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code, to 
require that members transferred to the Retired Reserve who 
wish to submit applications to participate in the Troops-to-
Teachers program must do so not later than 3 years after the 
date of the transfer. This provision would apply the same 
application submission requirement to members transferred to 
the Retired Reserve in the same way the requirement currently 
applies to eligible members who are retired, separated, or 
released from Active Duty.

Prohibition on use of funds for attendance of enlisted personnel at 
        senior level and intermediate level officer professional 
        military education courses (sec. 554)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated for the 
Department of Defense for the purpose of the attendance of 
enlisted personnel at senior level and intermediate level 
officer professional military education courses. The provision 
would also repeal section 547 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91).

Repeal of program on encouragement of postseparation public and 
        community service (sec. 555)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 1143a of title 10, United States Code, to strike all 
references to the Department of Defense's program to encourage 
members and former members of the Armed Forces to enter into 
public and community service jobs after discharge or release 
from Active Duty.
    The committee is aware that the only servicemembers to use 
the program were those members with less than 20 years of 
Active-Duty service who retired between October 23, 1992, and 
September 1, 2002. Furthermore, the committee believes that 
through the Transition Assistance Program, the Department of 
Defense and its interagency partners continue to fulfill the 
original intent and responsibility of this program.

Expansion of authority to assist members in obtaining professional 
        credentials (sec. 556)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2015 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of the Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to enable members of the Armed Forces to obtain professional 
credentials that do not relate to military training if the 
Secretary concerned determines it is in the best interests of 
the United States.

Enhancement of authorities in connection with Junior Reserve Officers' 
        Training Corps programs (sec. 557)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 102 of title 10, United States Code, by requiring the 
Secretary of Defense to offer to convert closing Junior Reserve 
Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) detachments into National 
Defense Cadet Corps organizations. This provision would also 
provide flexibility to service secretaries in setting JROTC 
instructor hiring and compensation policy. Additionally, the 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to standardize 
JROTC detachment data collection methods and policy across the 
military departments.

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

             Part I--Defense Dependents' Education Matters

Continuation of authority to assist local educational agencies that 
        benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and 
        Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 561)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$40.0 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.

Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 562)

    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 the Secretary's 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).

Department of Defense Education Activity policies and procedures on 
        sexual harassment of students of Activity schools (sec. 563)

    The committee recommends a provision that would equally 
apply the provisions contained in title IX of the Education 
Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), with respect to 
education programs and activities receiving Federal financial 
assistance, to the education programs and activities 
administered by the Department of Defense Education Activity 
(DODEA). The provision would require DODEA to establish 
policies and procedures, not later than March 31, 2019, to 
protect students at DODEA schools who are victims of sexual 
harassment.
    The committee understands that student victims of sexual 
harassment in DODEA schools do not have the same rights and 
protections as those available to students attending U.S. 
public schools. The committee believes that DODEA's current 
policies and procedures for response to sexual harassment cases 
fail to respect the rights of victims and lead to inadequate 
and insufficient responses to complaints of sexual harassment 
in its schools.

               Part II--Military Family Readiness Matters

Improvement of authority to conduct family support programs for 
        immediate family members of the Armed Forces assigned to 
        special operations forces (sec. 566)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify 
section 1788a of title 10, United States Code, pertaining to 
the authority for the Commander, U.S. Special Operations 
Command to conduct support programs for immediate family 
members of members of the Armed Forces assigned to special 
operations forces. The modification is intended to clarify the 
types of support services that are authorized under this 
program. The committee notes that when this program was 
codified by section 555 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), the intent was 
that the types of support activities provided previously under 
the pilot program were to continue under the permanent 
authority.

Expansion of period of availability of Military OneSource program for 
        retired and discharged members of the Armed Forces and their 
        immediate families (sec. 567)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations to extend 
eligibility for the Military OneSource program of the 
Department of Defense of an eligible individual retired, 
discharged, or otherwise released from the Armed Forces and 
their eligible family members to the 1-year period beginning on 
the date of retirement, discharge, or release of the 
individual.

Expansion of authority for noncompetitive appointments of military 
        spouses by Federal agencies (sec. 568)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3330d of title 5, United States Code, to authorize the 
head of a Federal agency to appoint non-competitively either a 
spouse of a member of the Armed Forces on Active Duty or a 
spouse of a disabled or deceased member of the Armed Forces.

Improvement of My Career Advancement Account program for military 
        spouses (sec. 569)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to take appropriate actions to ensure that 
military spouses eligible for participation in the My Career 
Advancement Account (MyCAA) program are made aware of the 
program. The provision would require the Comptroller General of 
the United States to submit a report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives within 
180 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, providing 
recommendations regarding mechanisms: (1) To increase awareness 
of the program among eligible military spouses; and (2) To 
increase participation in the program. Additionally, the 
provision would require the service secretaries to take actions 
to ensure career counselors at military installations receive 
appropriate training and current information on eligibility and 
benefits utilization under the MyCAA program, including 
financial assistance for the costs associated with portability 
of occupational licenses, professional credentials exams, and 
professional re-certification.

Access to military installations for certain surviving spouses and 
        other next of kin of members of the Armed Forces who die while 
        on active duty or certain reserve duty (sec. 570)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, acting jointly with the Secretary of 
Homeland Security, to establish procedures whereby an eligible 
surviving spouse and certain other next of kin of members of 
the Armed Forces may obtain access without escort, as 
appropriate, to military installations to receive benefits to 
which they may be entitled by law or policy. This provision 
would require establishment of such procedures not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Department of Defense Military Family Readiness Council matters (sec. 
        571)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
paragraphs (1)(B) and (2) of subsection (b) of section 1781a of 
title 10, United States Code, to: (1) Authorize a change in 
membership of the Military Family Readiness Council (MFRC); and 
(2) Change the term of service from 3 years to 2 years for 
military family organizations serving on the MFRC. The 
provision would also amend subsection (d), paragraph 2, of such 
section to require the MFRC to review and make recommendations 
to the Secretary of Defense to improve collaboration, 
awareness, and promotion of accurate and timely military family 
readiness information and support services by policy makers, 
service providers, and targeted beneficiaries. Finally, the 
provision would amend subsection (e) of such section to change 
the submission date for the MFRC's annual report from February 
1 to July 1 of each year.

Multidisciplinary teams for military installations on child abuse and 
        other domestic violence (sec. 572)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
service secretaries to establish and maintain multidisciplinary 
teams on child abuse and other domestic violence at military 
installations to: (1) Share information among teams and other 
appropriate personnel regarding the progress of investigations 
and the resolution of incidents of child abuse and other 
domestic violence involving members of the Armed Forces 
stationed at or assigned to installations; (2) Provide for and 
enhance collaborative efforts among teams and other appropriate 
personnel of the installations regarding investigations into 
and resolution of incidents; (3) Enhance the social services 
available to military families at the installations in 
connection with incidents, including through the enhancement of 
cooperation among specialists and other personnel providing 
services to military families in connection with incidents; and 
(4) Conduct other duties regarding the response to child abuse 
and other domestic violence at the installations as the 
Secretary concerned considers appropriate. The provision would 
prescribe the composition, expertise and training, and ongoing 
responsibilities (including coordination and collaboration with 
non-military services or resources on child abuse or other 
domestic violence) of teams. Additionally, the provision would 
require each Secretary concerned to submit a report to 
Congress, not later than March 1, each year through 2022, on 
the activities of multidisciplinary teams under their 
jurisdiction during the preceding year.

Provisional or interim clearances to provide childcare services at 
        military childcare centers (sec. 573)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to implement a policy to permit the 
issuance of clearances, on a provisional or interim basis, for 
the provision of supervised childcare services by personnel at 
military childcare centers. This provision would provide that 
any clearance issued under the policy shall be temporary and 
contingent upon the satisfaction of the requirements for 
issuance of a clearance on a permanent basis. The committee 
believes this provision would help shorten the hiring process 
and improve the availability of childcare services at military 
childcare centers, thereby enhancing military family readiness.

Pilot program on prevention of child abuse and training on safe 
        childcare practices among military families (sec. 574)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Defense Health Agency, 
to conduct a pilot program at military installations to assess 
the feasibility and advisability of universal home visits to 
provide eligible covered beneficiaries and their families 
training on safe childcare practices aimed at: (1) Reducing 
child abuse and fatalities due to abuse and neglect; (2) 
Assessing risk factors for child abuse; and (3) Connecting 
families with community resources to meet identified needs.
    The provision would prescribe the scope and elements of the 
pilot program, including the requirement for home visits of 
eligible beneficiaries by a team led by a nurse, whenever 
practicable. The Secretary would be required to inform all 
eligible beneficiaries of the program and participation in the 
program would be at the election of the beneficiary. In 
conducting the pilot program, the Secretary would carry out not 
fewer than five implementation assessments to assess the 
feasibility of the elements and requirements of the program. 
These assessments would occur at not less than 5 military 
installations and conclude not later than 2 years after the 
date of the enactment of this Act.
    The Secretary would submit an initial report to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, which describes how the Department would 
carry out the program. The Department would then submit a final 
report to the same committees not later than 180 days after 
completion of the pilot program. Finally, the provision would 
require the Secretary to implement the pilot program at all 
military installations if he determines that any element of the 
program is effective.

Pilot program on participation of military spouses in Transition 
        Assistance Program activities (sec. 575)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program, at not fewer 
than five military installations, to assess the feasibility and 
advisability of permitting military spouses to participate in 
activities under the Transition Assistance Program. The 
Secretary would carry out the pilot program during the 5-year 
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act. The 
provision would require the Secretary to submit an initial 
report describing the pilot program to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives within 
6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act. In 
addition, the Secretary would submit a final report to the same 
committees within 6 months after completion of the pilot 
program.

Small business activities of military spouses on military installations 
        in the United States (sec. 576)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress providing 
an assessment of the feasibility and advisability of permitting 
military spouses to engage in small business activities on 
military installations in the United States in partnership with 
commissaries, exchange stores, and other morale, welfare, and 
recreation facilities of the Armed Forces.

                   Subtitle G--Decorations and Awards

Authorization for award of the Distinguished Service Cross for Justin 
        T. Gallegos for acts of valor during Operation Enduring Freedom 
        (sec. 581)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to award the Distinguished Service 
Cross to Staff Sergeant Justin T. Gallegos for acts of valor 
while serving in Afghanistan on October 3, 2009.

Award of medals or other commendations to handlers of military working 
        dogs (sec. 582)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of each military department to establish a program 
for awarding one or more medals or other commendations to 
handlers of military working dogs.

                       Subtitle H--Other Matters

Authority to award damaged personal protective equipment to members 
        separating from the Armed Forces and veterans as mementos of 
        military service (sec. 591)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 152 of title 10, United States Code, to allow the 
Secretary of a military department to award personal protective 
equipment of the member or veteran that was damaged during 
deployment to veterans or members separating from the Armed 
Forces.

Standardization of frequency of academy visits of the Air Force Academy 
        Board of Visitors with academy visits of boards of other 
        military service academies (sec. 592)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 9355 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
United States Air Force Academy Board of Visitors to visit the 
Air Force Academy at least annually. This provision would align 
United States Air Force Academy Board of Visitor meeting 
requirements with other military service academies.
    The committee notes that the United States Naval Academy 
and the United States Military Academy Boards of Visitors 
annually convene at least three in-person meetings, with two 
such meetings occurring on the grounds of the respective 
academy. In standardizing Board of Visitor meeting requirements 
throughout the military service academies, the committee 
expects the Air Force Academy to align its Board of Visitor 
policy to the practices of the other military service 
academies.

Redesignation of the Commandant of the United States Air Force 
        Institute of Technology as President of the United States Air 
        Force Institute of Technology (sec. 593)

    The committee recommends a provision that would re-
designate the Commandant of the United States Air Force 
Institute of Technology as the President of the United States 
Air Force Institute of Technology.

Limitation on justifications entered by military recruiters for 
        enlistment or accession of individuals into the Armed Forces 
        (sec. 594)

    The committee recommends a provision that would restrict 
military recruiters from changing the reasons for an individual 
entering into the Armed Forces to anything other than that 
individual's stated reason. The committee remains concerned 
that marketing and advertising metrics related to recruiting 
efforts continue to lack the ability to demonstrate the 
effective use of resources.

National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service matters 
        (sec. 595)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 551 and 555 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to revise certain 
definitions and procedural requirements related to the National 
Commission on Military, National, and Public Service.

Burial of unclaimed remains of inmates at the United States 
        Disciplinary Barracks Cemetery, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas (sec. 
        596)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 985 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
burial at the United States Disciplinary Barracks Cemetery at 
Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, of the remains of military prisoners 
unclaimed by a person authorized to direct disposition of the 
remains or by other persons legally authorized to dispose of 
the remains.

Space-available travel on Department of Defense aircraft for veterans 
        with service-connected disabilities rated as total (sec. 597)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2641b of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
veterans with a permanent service-connected total disability 
rating to travel on military aircraft on a space-available 
basis. The committee notes that this provision would also 
ensure the primary purpose of space-available travel remains 
transporting servicemembers and their dependents.

                       Items of Special Interest

Administrative separation protections for members of the Armed Forces

    The committee supports the existing protections against 
wrongful discharges enshrined in Department of Defense 
Instruction 1332.14. This directive states, ``Separation for 
personality disorder, or other mental disorder not constituting 
a physical disability, is not appropriate nor should it be 
pursued when separation is warranted on the basis of 
unsatisfactory performance or misconduct. In such 
circumstances, the enlisted Service member should not be 
separated under this paragraph regardless of the existence of a 
personality disorder.'' The committee acknowledges that non-
disability mental health discharges against combat veterans 
have dropped significantly since these requirements were put in 
place. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
apply these same standards of protection for all separations.

Assessment of Department of Defense Education Activity's policies and 
        procedures on student misconduct

    The committee remains deeply concerned about recent media 
articles, published by the Associated Press, which indicate 
that the Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) and 
the Services fail to ``protect or provide justice to the 
children of servicemembers when they are sexually assaulted by 
other children'' in Department of Defense (DOD) schools and on 
military bases. It is disturbing to learn that the DOD's 
policies and procedures may prevent efforts to help child 
victims of misconduct, including sexual harassment and sexual 
assault, and to rehabilitate and hold child offenders 
accountable.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Department of Defense 
Inspector General to conduct a comprehensive assessment of 
DOD's and DODEA's policies and procedures regarding misconduct, 
including sexual misconduct, to help child victims of 
misconduct and to rehabilitate child offenders, including 
whether the Department took corrective actions to hold 
offenders accountable when appropriate. This assessment shall 
examine the authority of DODEA officials and military 
commanders to hold offenders accountable for criminal acts and 
include a review of services available to military families to 
address the mental health and other needs of victims of 
misconduct. The assessment shall also evaluate the adequacy of 
DODEA's policies to address allegations of serious misconduct 
occurring in areas and programs that fall within DODEA's area 
of responsibility, including reporting requirements, and 
referrals to criminal investigators as well as military and 
civilian child services. The Inspector General shall provide 
the report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives not later than December 1, 
2018.

Assessment of relocation of family members

    The committee shares the Department of Defense's commitment 
to supporting servicemembers and their families whenever they 
are experiencing a crisis, to include incidents of sexual 
assault, domestic violence, or child abuse. The committee notes 
that family members are often located away from their primary 
support systems, which may make it more difficult to handle 
these painful situations, heal, and in some circumstances 
participate in criminal adjudications.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to assess whether current statutory and regulatory authorities 
authorize servicemembers and their families to relocate in an 
efficient and effective manner. The assessment should examine 
the ability of the Department to expand current policies in 
order to allow for family members (whether abused by a 
servicemember with a familial relationship or not) to relocate 
to a location of their choosing in an expedited manner at 
government expense, similar to the expedited transfer policy 
for active duty servicemembers. The committee directs the 
Secretary to provide its findings to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives no later 
than November 1, 2018.

Comptroller General report on Department of Defense original 
        appointment and scrolling processes

    As the committee continues to look for opportunities to 
make military personnel management policy more adaptable, the 
ability of the military to quickly and repeatedly transition 
servicemembers between the active and reserve components is an 
important step toward building a true continuum of service. The 
committee understands that under current policy and practice, 
transferring an officer from one component to another can take 
up to 4 months. This extended timeline is likely a contributing 
factor in declining reserve component affiliation rates and the 
limited numbers of reserve component officers able to return to 
the active component.
    The committee also understands the current original 
appointment policy contributes significantly to delays in 
processing original appointments and promotions for both the 
active and reserve component. In particular, military 
department officials have repeatedly stated concerns related to 
the ``scrolling'' process used to process officer original 
appointments. This process may also affect the time required to 
gain federal recognition of National Guard promotions. Despite 
the recurring concerns, Department of Defense (DOD) and 
military officials have been unable to articulate aspects of 
the current process that may be accelerated either by policy or 
legislative changes.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to conduct a review of DOD's original 
appointment process and to provide preliminary observations to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives by the end of February 2019. At that time, a 
final product due date will be determined. The review shall 
include: (1) An explanation of current original appointment 
processes within all relevant organizations, including the 
military departments, National Guard Bureau, Office of the 
Secretary of Defense, the White House Military Office, and the 
Senate; (2) An explanation of the necessity for hard copy 
scroll documents; and (3) A discussion of opportunities to 
accelerate the original appointment process.

Comptroller General study of dependency determinations for 
        incapacitated adult children of military members

    The committee has learned about potential problems 
associated with dependency determinations made by the 
Department of Defense for incapacitated adult children. In some 
instances, adult children lose dependency status if they are 
placed in group homes or other institutional settings. In other 
cases, an adult child may not earn wages because those earnings 
would impact a dependency determination.
    As a result, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to conduct a study of the Department's 
policies, procedures, and processes for determining dependency 
status of incapacitated adult children. In the conduct of this 
study, the Comptroller General shall answer the following 
questions:
    (1) To qualify as a military dependent, the servicemember's 
contribution to the incapacitated adult child's monthly living 
expenses must be greater than half of the dependent's actual 
living expenses. What additional criteria does the Department 
use to determine dependency status of an incapacitated adult 
child?
    (2) How many servicemembers requested incapacitated adult 
child dependency determinations over the last 5 years? How many 
dependency determinations did the Department grant, by year, 
over that time period?
    (3) For a servicemember with an incapacitated adult child 
in a group home or other institutional setting, what options 
does the servicemember have to keep the family together 
geographically in the event of a permanent change of station?
    (4) What assistance does the Department provide to families 
as they navigate the dependency determination process?
    The Comptroller General shall brief the preliminary results 
of such study to the committee not later than February 1, 2019. 
At that time, the committee and the Comptroller General shall 
determine a mutually agreeable date for submission of the final 
report.

Dependent care flexible savings accounts

    Congress authorized dependent care flexible spending 
accounts for federal workers in 2003, but the uniformed 
services have not yet developed a plan to offer such accounts. 
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 
(Public Law 111-84) stated in a Sense of Congress that 
uniformed servicemembers should be afforded access to pre-tax 
flexible spending accounts. Additionally, Congress expressed 
its desire that the Services and government agencies consider 
life events of members of the uniformed services that are 
unique to them as members of the uniformed services, including 
changes relating to permanent changes of duty station and 
deployments to overseas contingency operations.
    Therefore, the committee strongly encourages the Secretary 
of Defense, with respect to members of the Army, Navy, Marine 
Corps, and Air Force, the Secretary of Homeland Security, with 
respect to members of the Coast Guard, the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services, with respect to commissioned officers of 
the Public Health Service, and the Secretary of Commerce, with 
respect to commissioned officers of the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, to implement flexible spending 
arrangements with respect to basic pay and compensation for 
dependent care on a pre-tax basis in accordance with 
regulations prescribed under sections 106(c) and 125 of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

Facilitation of separation process and State veterans affairs offices

    The committee is aware that Department of Defense policy 
allows separating servicemembers to include an email address in 
the remarks section of the DD Form 214, and that the Department 
has been working toward electronic delivery of member service 
and separation data that will allow authorized stakeholders, 
including State veterans affairs offices, full access to data 
that will provide faster and better access to benefits for 
servicemembers.
    To this end, the committee believes there is utility in 
servicemembers providing their email addresses, but is 
concerned that many choose not to. The committee encourages 
service secretaries to ensure that separating servicemembers 
are made aware, during their transition counseling, of the 
benefits of providing an email address in the remarks block of 
their DD Form 214. An email address is useful in facilitating 
receipt of and access to veterans benefits, and to ensure a 
continued contact with veterans if service-connected injuries 
or other service-related issues arise post-military service, as 
they often do.

Improvements to licensure and credentialing for military spouses

    The committee remains concerned about the employment 
difficulties military spouses face as a result of the rigors 
and requirements of military life. Whether their 1st or 20th 
move, many military spouses repeatedly encounter a costly and 
lengthy process to meet the professional licensure and 
credentialing requirements of their new State before they can 
seek meaningful employment in their chosen field.
    Depending on the profession and the requirements in each 
State, military spouses can spend upwards of thousands of 
dollars to become credentialed or licensed every time they 
relocate. This cost alone may make it prohibitive for military 
spouses to continue or pursue their own careers. For many, it 
is not only the cost, but the time involved. A 2-year 
assignment does not give a military spouse much time to find a 
job if the licensing process in a given State takes 12 months.
    In the Blue Star Families Military Family Lifestyle Survey 
from 2017, 28 percent of military spouses reported they were 
unemployed and actively seeking work while 55 percent of 
employed military spouses stated they were underemployed. When 
compared to the current national unemployment rate of 4.1 
percent, it is clear that military spouses experience greater 
impediments when seeking full-time employment than their 
civilian counterparts.
    While Department of Labor (DOL) and Department of Defense 
(DOD) resources exist to aid military spouses in finding 
employment or obtaining licensure and credentials after a move, 
the committee believes that States are less engaged with their 
military spouse populations than they should be and are often 
unaware of the employment hardships military spouses endure. 
The committee believes that States would benefit from better 
understanding the significant and unique economic benefits 
military spouses bring to local communities, which might 
incentivize States to remove credentialing and licensure 
barriers faced by military spouses.
    The DOL and DOD resources, CareerOneStop and Military 
OneSource respectively, offer varying and disparate levels of 
information on the States' requirements for credentials and 
licensure. CareerOneStop provides more helpful information, 
while Military OneSource offers a more user-friendly 
experience. On both web sites, information appears incomplete 
and outdated. With military families moving every few years, 
having easily accessible, accurate, and current information on 
military spouse employment might make the difference between a 
single-income military family and a dual-income one.
    The committee notes there is unfortunately no one-stop 
resource for military spouses to find the information each 
State requires on professional credentials and licensure, and 
therefore directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation and 
coordination with the Secretary of Labor, to update the 
Military OneSource spouse licensure map on its internet web 
site and to provide a certification letter to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
that the information on the web site is current, accurate, and 
complete for each State and each profession requiring licensure 
or certification. Further, the committee directs that this web 
site be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure its 
continuing accuracy and usefulness to military families.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor and the 
National Governors Association, to review existing obstacles to 
greater military spouse licensure and credentialing portability 
across the States and to consider solutions to increase such 
portability and the feasibility of these solutions. The 
Secretary shall submit a report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by no 
later than March 1, 2019, on the results of this review. The 
report, at a minimum, shall include: (1) An analysis of the 
prevalence of military spouses in each State, which would 
include the total number of military spouses and the percentage 
of the overall population in the State that are military 
spouses; (2) The estimated impact of employment of military 
spouses on State economies; (3) An assessment of the economic 
impact of establishing licensing compacts or occupational 
licensing boards to reduce occupational licensing burdens and 
to remove certification impediments for military spouses; (4) A 
summary of economic and other benefits to States relating to 
increasing occupational licensing reciprocity for military 
spouses; and (5) A summary of industry association and local 
business views with respect to the facilitation of greater 
credentialing and licensure portability for military spouses.

Inclusion of the study of hybrid warfare in professional military 
        education

    The 2018 National Defense Strategy correctly noted that 
Professional Military Education (PME) in the Department of 
Defense is ``stagnated, focused more on the accomplishment of 
mandatory credit at the expense of lethality and ingenuity.'' 
The committee agrees with this sentiment and further notes PME 
curriculum must be capable of adapting and teaching 
servicemembers about new methods and forms of warfare. 
Specifically, the emergence of hybrid warfare, where 
adversaries often employ nonmilitary tools to pursue their 
interests, is a subject frequently excluded from traditional 
PME curriculum.
    The committee supports the Department of Defense's renewed 
focus on PME and therefore directs 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 December 
1, 2018, explaining how the Department will emphasize what the 
National Defense Strategy calls ``intellectual leadership and 
military professionalism in the art and science of 
warfighting.'' In particular, the report should explain how the 
Department is integrating hybrid warfare concepts into in-
residence and distance learning PME curriculum to include the 
study of past and present hybrid warfare campaigns.

Military childcare subsidies

    The committee directs the Department of Defense to include 
in its assessment of use of subsidized, off-Installation 
childcare services, required by subsection (a) of section 575 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91), an assessment on modifying the rate of use 
of subsidized, off-installation childcare services by military 
families in light of the full implementation of 
MilitaryChildCare.com, including whether the availability of 
off-installation childcare services for military families could 
be increased by altering policies of the Armed Forces on 
capping the amount of subsidies for military families for such 
services based on the cost of living for families and the 
average cost of civilian childcare services.

National Guard Federal promotion delays

    The committee recognizes that soldiers and airmen in the 
National Guard are unique because their appointments and 
promotion to a higher rank are governed by their states and are 
subsequently reviewed and approved for Federal recognition by 
the Federal Government. The committee continues to believe that 
a thorough review of officer character and conduct is 
necessary, but is concerned about reports that bureaucratic 
obstacles in the scrolling process are unduly slowing Federal 
recognition of National Guard promotions.
    Delays in Federal recognition can have negative 
consequences for National Guard officers, who often assume a 
more senior role while waiting for their promotion to be 
federally recognized, still receiving the pay and benefits of a 
more junior grade. Delays impact time in grade, or can result 
in officers being assigned to lesser positions than they are 
qualified to perform. It also means that National Guard 
officers may not be assigned to positions of additional 
responsibility, such as command, when working hand-in-hand with 
their Active-Duty counterparts on a Federal mission.
    Therefore, the committee has included a provision that 
would provide service secretaries with discretion to adjust the 
date of rank of National Guard officers when promotions are 
unduly delayed. The committee urges the service secretaries to 
use this authority to expeditiously identify and proactively 
address National Guard officers whose promotions have been 
unfairly subjected to bureaucratic delay.

National Guard mental health pilot program

    The committee remains concerned with the high suicide rate 
present in the National Guard and endorses efforts by the Chief 
of the National Guard Bureau to increase access and resources 
for behavioral health treatment and support for members of the 
National Guard. The committee is supportive of the efforts 
taken by the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to establish 
the National Guard Warrior Resilience and Fitness Program, an 
integrated approach to using embedded behavioral health models 
to leverage enhanced screening tools and predictive analytics 
to identify mental health risk and provide early, targeted 
intervention. Not later than December 1, 2018, the Chief of the 
National Guard Bureau shall provide a letter report to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives on the Warrior Resilience and Fitness Program, 
including its impact on readiness, resiliency and suicide 
prevention.

Permanent change of station frequency and impact on military families

    The committee applauds military spouses for being 
adaptable, resilient, innovative problem solvers with an 
unwavering commitment to our nation and our military 
servicemembers. Yet frequent moves to accommodate 
servicemembers military careers--on average every 3 or 4 
years--take a significant toll on spouses ability to maintain 
viable career paths. By the time military spouses find a home, 
secure childcare services, and get settled into a new job, it 
is often time for them to start thinking about the next move. 
The tempo of these constant moves has multiple effects: (1) 
Employers are reluctant to hire military spouses knowing there 
is a good chance they will move soon; (2) Military spouses are 
left to multiple instances of underemployment or unemployment; 
and (3) State-approved credentials may not transfer.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives setting forth an 
assessment of the effects of the frequency of permanent changes 
of station (PCS) of members of the Armed Forces on stability of 
employment among military spouses. The report shall include the 
following: (1) An assessment of the effects of the frequency of 
PCS of members of the Armed Forces on stability of employment 
among military spouses, including the contribution of frequent 
PCS to unemployment or underemployment among military spouses; 
(2) An assessment of the effects of unemployment and 
underemployment among military spouses on force readiness; and 
(3) Such recommendations as the Secretary considers appropriate 
regarding legislative or administrative action to achieve force 
readiness and stabilization by minimizing the impacts of 
frequent PCS on stability of employment among military spouses.

Public-private partnerships on military installations

    The committee is concerned that installation commanders 
lack clear and consistent guidance on the process and 
authorities available to them to seek and receive proposals to 
enter into public-private partnerships with local 
organizations, which would benefit military communities, 
servicemembers, and their families. These partnerships range 
from installation infrastructure and management services 
(including fire, public safety, emergency medical, and other 
emergency services), to services for servicemembers, families, 
retirees, and Department of Defense (DOD) civilians (including 
morale, welfare, and recreation activities), to mission-type 
functions (including training opportunities with civilian 
agencies).
    RAND Corporation's 2016 report, Military Installation 
Public-to-Public Partnerships, identified numerous barriers to 
successful implementation of these types of cooperative 
efforts. The committee is concerned that DOD is not doing 
enough to overcome these obstacles, and that the Department's 
policies and procedures are not clearly defined and 
disseminated to installation commanders and their staff, 
further inhibiting successful cooperation. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to review Department-level 
policies and procedures to remove obstacles where they are 
present and to ensure that all installation commanders and base 
support staffs have received clear guidance outlining approved 
processes to enter into public-private partnerships.

Reimbursement for certain costs incurred by states during domestic 
        emergencies

    The committee recognizes that the National Guard is an 
essential force providing effective emergency response 
capabilities in the Homeland. However, during some complex 
emergency responses, states are forced to assume fiscal risk 
that can jeopardize their ability to accomplish the emergency 
response deployment, and further place individual 
servicemembers in conditions of compromised individual 
protection, family protection, and compensation.
    The committee notes that a mechanism exists in current law 
where the Federal Government can reimburse a state that orders 
its National Guard to State Active Duty to respond to certain 
domestic emergencies. The committee understands that when the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is authorized to 
reimburse states for National Guard utilization during a 
domestic emergency, such reimbursement may take over a year to 
reach the state. The committee further notes that exceedingly 
long periods for reimbursement reduces states' ability to 
respond to follow-on domestic emergencies or ones of extended 
duration. For extended duration emergencies, such as those 
suffered by states during the 2017 hurricane season, funding 
requirements can extend beyond the current state fiscal year. 
The committee also notes that states acting under the Emergency 
Management Assistance Compact to provide mutual aid to another 
state during a domestic emergency must obligate their own funds 
to do so. These states are especially harmed by long 
reimbursement timelines. Finally, the committee understands 
these delays in reimbursement can harm military readiness.
    Therefore, no later than 180 days after the enactment of 
this Act, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security, in 
consultation with FEMA and the states, to report to the 
congressional defense committees on suggested ways to expedite 
the reimbursement process. The consultations should include 
consideration of the process for requesting specific orders 
status, the average time for the Federal Government to answer a 
request from a state, and the criteria required to approve the 
request.

Responding to cases of traumatic brain injury sustained in intimate 
        partner violence event

    Survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) are at 
increased risk of traumatic brain injuries (TBI), but these 
injuries often go undiagnosed, which can lead to serious short- 
and long-term health problems. Currently, there are few 
research studies available on the relationship between IPV and 
TBI, and it is uncommon for medical providers to screen or 
treat for IPV-related TBI in emergency departments. The 
committee is concerned, therefore, that TBIs resulting from IPV 
may not be adequately evaluated, diagnosed, and treated in 
military treatment facilities. As a result, the committee 
strongly encourages training of all military first responders 
to help them understand the occurrence of TBI in association 
with IPV and to recognize those injuries early to expedite 
further evaluation and treatment. Moreover, victim advocates, 
law enforcement personnel, prosecutors, and counselors must 
understand the cognitive and behavioral effects of TBI in 
association with IPV, such as loss of memory, confusion, or 
agitation, and know how those effects can impact IPV survivors 
during an investigation.

Senior Military Acquisition Advisor eligibility

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
requested an amendment to section 1725 of title 10, United 
States Code, which established the position of Senior Military 
Acquisition Advisor within each military department. The 
requested modification would reduce the minimum required 
commissioned service time for these positions from 30 years to 
26 years of active commissioned service.
    Typically, current law requires officers who are not 
selected for promotion to general or flag officer retire upon 
reaching 30 years of active commissioned service, therefore 
making it nearly impossible to select an officer to fill the 
Senior Military Acquisition Advisor position in the required 
rank of colonel, or in the case of the Navy, captain. The 
committee understands this restriction and has taken steps 
elsewhere in this title to allow for officers to continue 
serving beyond 30 years of service.
    Specifically, as part of the committee's efforts to 
modernize officer personnel management, this title includes a 
provision to authorize service secretaries to allow officers in 
the grade of O-2 or above to remain on Active Duty until 
reaching 40 years of active service. This provision would 
provide the legal relief requested by the Department, while 
also ensuring officers assigned to these critical acquisition 
roles have the experience desired by the committee when it 
created the Senior Military Acquisition Advisor position.

Specialized workshops for transitioning servicemembers

    The committee maintains an ongoing interest that 
transitioning servicemembers receive the specific training they 
need to transition successfully to civilian life, whether they 
choose to pursue higher education, a career in a technical 
field, or entrepreneurship. Under current law, the Department 
of Defense must ensure that transitioning servicemembers 
participate in the Transition Assistance Program (TAP). In 
response to this requirement, the Department has published 
regulations and issued instructions that require eligible 
servicemembers to complete TAP and that require commanding 
officers ensure that servicemembers complete the program.
    Beyond TAP's mandatory core curriculum, servicemembers are 
also given the option to participate in a more specialized, 2-
day workshop in one or more of the following areas: (1) Higher 
education; (2) Technical and skills training; or (3) 
Entrepreneurship. The committee is concerned that, while the 
core curriculum is necessary, it may be insufficient to enable 
transitioning service-members to successfully transition to 
civilian careers. While transitioning servicemembers may 
supplement the core curriculum with at least one of the 2-day 
workshops, these optional activities are rarely utilized. A 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, published in 
November 2017, titled ``DOD Needs to Improve Performance 
Reporting and Monitoring for the Transition Assistance 
Program'' (GAO-18-23), stated that fewer than 15 percent of 
transitioning enlisted servicemembers participated in one of 
the 2-day workshops in fiscal year 2016. In the report, GAO 
also noted that, at four of the seven military installations it 
surveyed, commanders ``were less inclined to allow 
servicemembers to attend theses classes because they were 
considered optional.''
    The committee is concerned that requiring transitioning 
servicemembers to opt into a 2-day workshop signals to both 
servicemembers and their commanders that the workshops may be 
superfluous, thereby discouraging participation. Therefore, the 
committee encourages the Department to make certain that all 
TAP-eligible servicemembers participate in one of the 2-day 
workshops with waivers for servicemembers who expressly decline 
such participation or whose participation would conflict with 
imminent readiness requirements.

Training requirement for background check submissions

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense 
Inspector General has reported multiple, widespread failures to 
comply with reporting requirements to send servicemembers' 
criminal data to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The 
shooter who murdered worshipers in Sutherland Springs, Texas 
was able to purchase a firearm despite his criminal record 
because the Air Force failed to submit his information to the 
FBI. Unfortunately, this is not the only case of a lapse in the 
incorporation of military criminal records into the FBI's 
background check databases.
    As such, the committee encourages the Department to ensure 
all personnel of military criminal investigation services who 
are responsible for assembly or submittal of information to the 
FBI receive specific training on the requirements, procedures, 
and processes on how to submit relevant information into the 
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The 
committee acknowledges that clear, thorough training for 
military criminal investigation services personnel and other 
relevant Department personnel will save lives by ensuring all 
procedures and requirements are followed when reporting and 
flagging criminal records to NICS.

Understanding military family experiences of intimate partner violence 
        and child abuse and neglect

    The committee remains concerned about the rates of violence 
within military families, which harm those families and impact 
military family readiness. For fiscal year 2016, there were 
13,916 reports of suspected child abuse and neglect to family 
advocacy programs across the Services with 6,998 of those 
incidents confirmed. Although rates of reported child abuse 
have remained flat over the last ten years, the youngest 
children remain the most vulnerable to lethal forms of abuse. 
The Department of Defense (DOD) reported 18 child abuse-related 
fatalities for fiscal year 2016. All of these victims were 
under 5 years old and 50 percent of them were 1 year old or 
younger. In five cases, the victim or offender was previously 
known to Family Advocacy Program (FAP) officials.
    Moreover, intimate partner violence is also a significant 
issue within the Services with 8,673 reported incidents that 
``met criteria'' in fiscal year 2016. DOD reported eight spouse 
abuse fatalities and one intimate partner fatality related to 
abuse for fiscal year 2016. In six cases, the victim or 
offender was known to the FAP. In addition, DOD reported an 
increase in the occurrence of sexual abuse in intimate partner 
incidents.
    Even though DOD cites the rate of reported child abuse and 
neglect in the military at about half of the reported rate for 
the civilian community, there are no data available to estimate 
the actual prevalence of intimate partner violence and child 
abuse and neglect in the military. DOD does not conduct a 
survey of family members and therefore lacks these prevalence 
rates.
    As a result, the committee urges the Department to work 
with a federally funded research and development center to 
conduct anonymous surveys of family members to understand 
better the prevalence of intimate partner violence and child 
abuse and neglect in the military. The surveys should include 
questions pertaining to perpetration of intimate partner 
violence, victimization, specific incidents and types of 
physical violence, sexual violence, stalking, psychological 
aggression, economic abuse and/or interference with military 
benefits, risk factors, and the unique stressors faced by 
military families.

Use of data analytics to facilitate assignment matching and military 
        family stability

    As the military migrates toward a talent management 
personnel paradigm, the committee recommends each service 
utilize advanced data analytics and new assignment matching 
technologies to better match servicemembers to available 
assignments. These technologies make assignment matching more 
efficient and effective by aligning servicemember skills, 
knowledge, and behavior with the unique demands of each 
position. In some cases, it may be in the best interest of the 
servicemember and the mission to allow an individual to remain 
in a single location or unit for an extended period of time. 
Extending assignments often comes with the added benefit of 
providing stability to military families, who frequently 
describe constant relocations as a major detractor from their 
overall satisfaction with military life. The committee 
encourages the Department of Defense to continue developing 
advanced assignment matching systems and policies based on data 
analytics.

Use of reserve personnel for the Cyber Mission Force

    As the military departments continue to formalize their 
contribution to the U.S. Cyber Command Cyber Mission Force by 
acquiring, training, and managing personnel with cyber-related 
capabilities, the committee encourages creative utilization of 
personnel who serve in the reserve component. The private 
sector requirement for relevant cyber knowledge and experience 
continues to grow, which means the reserve component may be the 
ideal source of personnel who possess the skills necessary to 
bolster the Cyber Mission Force.
    The committee encourages service secretaries to use all 
personnel authorities at their disposal to attract and retain 
personnel for the Cyber Mission Force. In particular, the 
committee is interested in novel approaches to the use of the 
reserve component for this vital mission. As innovative 
personnel policies are developed, the committee urges service 
secretaries to identify legal constraints and to propose 
changes to current law to improve the military's ability to 
make itself an attractive employer for the nation's cyber 
workforce.

Warm handoff for transitioning servicemembers suffering from post-
        traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury

    The committee notes that traumatic brain injury (TBI) and 
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are often considered the 
``signature wounds''' of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
More than 379,000 servicemembers have received a first-time 
diagnosis for TBI since 2000, and data from the Department of 
Veterans Affairs (VA) show that 11-20 percent of veterans who 
served in Iraq and Afghanistan experience PTSD every year. 
Research indicates that TBI and PTSD are often associated with 
other psychiatric or neurodegenerative conditions, including 
mood and anxiety disorders, cognitive difficulties, and 
increased rates of substance abuse and suicidal ideation, which 
can inhibit recovery.
    While initial diagnosis and treatment of PTSD and TBI often 
occur within the military health system, the VA provides 
ongoing care for separating servicemembers, including many who 
have received one or both diagnoses. The committee recognizes 
efforts by the Departments of Defense and VA in recent years to 
support the transfer of severely wounded servicemembers with 
ongoing complex care needs, including establishment of the 
Interagency Care Coordination Committee to ensure a ``warm 
hand-off'' between agencies. However, the committee remains 
concerned that individuals without visible injuries, including 
those who are experiencing cognitive or psychiatric 
difficulties as a result of service-acquired TBI or PTSD, may 
not be appropriately identified for similar complex care 
management.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretary of VA, to establish policies 
and procedures, no later than December 1, 2018, to ensure 
continuity of care for any servicemember who has a diagnosis of 
moderate or severe PTSD or TBI and who enrolls in care through 
the VA upon transition from Active Duty to veteran status. The 
Secretary shall submit a report to the Committees on Armed 
Services and Veterans Affairs of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives within 30 days after establishing such policies 
and procedures, describing the actions taken to facilitate 
better transitions for this population.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Fiscal year 2019 increase in military basic pay (sec. 601)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
pay raise of 2.6 percent for all members of the uniformed 
services effective January 1, 2019.
Repeal of authority for payment of personal money allowances to Navy 
        officers serving in certain positions (sec. 602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 414 of title 37, United States Code, to eliminate 
additional personal money allowance to certain naval officers 
serving as President of the Naval Postgraduate School, 
Commandant of Midshipmen at the Naval Academy, President of the 
Naval War College, Superintendent of the Naval Academy, or 
Director of Naval Intelligence.
    Under current law, certain lower-ranking naval flag 
officers are entitled to a greater personal money allowance 
than the Chief of Naval Operations or Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff. Additionally, similar positions in the other 
military services (e.g., Superintendent of the United States 
Military Academy) are not entitled to the same additional 
personal money allowance as naval officers. This provision 
establishes consistent personal money allowance across the 
Services for general and flag officers of the same rank and 
position.

Department of Defense proposal for a pay table for members of the Armed 
        Forces using steps in grade based on time in grade rather than 
        time in service (sec. 603)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a proposal for a time in grade-
based pay table for military personnel. This provision would 
also require the Comptroller General to review the proposal and 
assess its effect on recruitment and retention.

Financial support for lessors under the Military Housing Privatization 
        Initiative during 2019 (sec. 604)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to pay up to 2 percent of the 
calculated Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) rate to specific 
lessors who provide on-base housing as part of the Military 
Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI).
    The committee notes that payments authorized by this 
provision must be approved on a case-by-case basis. The 
Secretary of Defense should approve payments to individual 
lessors based on an assessment of the lessor's financial 
status, condition of housing associated with the lessor, and 
whether earnings from other privatized housing projects owned 
by the lessor are sufficient to pay for costs at the specified 
housing area. Prior to issuing any payment to a lessor, the 
Secretary of Defense must notify the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
    On March 13, 2018, the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) published a report titled ``Military Housing 
Privatization: DOD Should Take Steps to Improve Monitoring, 
Reporting, and Risk Assessment'' (GAO-18-218). Due to a lack of 
consistent and timely data provided by both the Department of 
Defense and individual privatized housing lessors, GAO was 
unable to determine whether recent reductions to Basic 
Allowance for Housing have had any negative effect on the long-
term viability of individual privatized housing projects. 
Additionally, the decentralized approach pursued by each 
service for on-base privatized housing agreements makes it 
difficult to implement a centralized, general policy to correct 
any identified funding shortfalls. The committee continues to 
believe, as stated in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) Conference Report 
(Conf. Rept. 115-404), ``This is a problem that the military 
services and their MHPI partners must solve together.''
    The committee directs the service secretaries, by no later 
than September 1, 2018, to report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the 
relative financial condition and future sustainability of each 
MHPI project under their jurisdiction and the impact of the BAH 
rate change on the future sustainability of those projects. 
Additionally, the service secretaries are directed to implement 
the recommendations of GAO-18-218 and provide an update to the 
congressional defense committees by no later than September 1, 
2018.

Modification of authority of President to determine alternative pay 
        adjustment in annual basic pay of members of the uniformed 
        services (sec. 605)

    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.

Eligibility of reserve component members for high-deployment allowance 
        for lengthy or numerous deployments and frequent mobilizations 
        (sec. 606)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 436 of title 37, United States Code, to authorize 
reserve component personnel ordered to Active Duty under 
section 12304b of title 10, United States Code, to receive a 
high-deployment allowance for frequent or lengthy deployments.

Eligibility of reserve component members for nonreduction in pay while 
        serving in the uniformed services or National Guard (sec. 607)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 5538(a) of title 5, United States code, that would 
include reserve component personnel ordered to Active Duty 
under section 12304b of title 10, United States Code, under 
existing protections preventing reduction in pay while absent 
from a position of employment with the Federal Government.

Temporary adjustment in rate of basic allowance for housing following 
        identification of significant underdetermination of civilian 
        housing costs for housing areas (sec. 608)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 403(b) of title 37, United States Code, to allow the 
Secretary of Defense to temporarily adjust current rates of 
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) for a military housing area 
if the Secretary determines that the actual costs of adequate 
housing in that military housing area differ from current BAH 
rates by more than 20 percent. This authority provided by this 
provision would expire on December 31, 2019.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

One-year extension of certain expiring bonus and special pay 
        authorities (sec. 611)

    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 aviation 
incentive pay and bonus authorities for officers, special bonus 
and incentive pay authorities for officers in health 
professions, and contracting bonus for cadets and midshipmen 
enrolled in the Senior Reserve 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 or proficiency bonus, and retention incentives for 
members qualified in critical military skills or assigned to 
high priority units.
    The provision would also extend for 1 year the authority to 
pay the nurse officer candidate accession bonus and education 
loan repayment for certain health professionals who serve in 
the Selected Reserve.
    The provision would also extend for 1 year the authority to 
pay the special bonus and incentive pay for nuclear officers.
    The provision would also extend for 1 year the authority to 
pay for income replacement for reserve component members 
experiencing extended and frequent mobilization for Active-Duty 
service.
    The provision would also 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.

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

Technical corrections in calculation and publication of special 
        survivor indemnity allowance cost of living adjustments (sec. 
        621)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1450(m) of title 10, United States Code, to allow the 
Department of Defense to make special survivor indemnity 
allowance cost of living adjustments consistent with the 
survivor benefit plan and military retired pay.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Rates of per diem for long-term temporary duty assignments (sec. 631)

    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 
by no later than 120 days after enactment of this Act providing 
a cost-benefit analysis of the long-term per diem policy rate 
change that became effective on November 1, 2014, consistent 
with the principles and requirements of Office of Management 
and Budget Circular A-94. If the Secretary fails to deliver 
this analysis within 120 days after enactment of this Act, or 
if the analysis demonstrates that the costs of this policy 
change outweigh the benefits, and will continue to outweigh the 
benefits, then the policy reverts to the policy in effect as of 
October 31, 2014.

Prohibition on per diem allowance reductions based on the duration of 
        temporary duty assignment or civilian travel (sec. 632)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 474(d)(3) of title 37, United States Code, to prohibit 
the Department of Defense from reducing per diem rates based on 
the duration of a temporary duty assignment or civilian travel.

                       Items of Special Interest

Defense Commissary Agency and small businesses

    The committee commends the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) 
for its efforts to achieve cost savings and to provide patrons 
with an improved shopping experience through its current 
transformation initiatives. DeCA strives to include small 
businesses in its acquisition of fresh fruits and vegetables, 
and these businesses can provide higher quality and fresher 
produce at competitive prices because of their close proximity 
to local commissaries. As DeCA's business transformation 
proceeds, the committee encourages DeCA to continue utilizing 
small businesses for the acquisition of fresh fruits and 
vegetables.

Privatized on-base lodging program

    The committee supports the ongoing efforts of the Secretary 
of Defense to make Department of Defense business operations 
more efficient. As the Secretary noted in his February 2017 
Memorandum, efficiencies will free up resources to enable ``a 
larger, more capable and more lethal Joint force.'' One 
possible area that should be considered in the Department's 
review of business operations is the on-base lodging program.
    The committee has watched with interest as the Army has 
privatized base lodging operations over the last several years. 
As the Army continues to express satisfaction with its program, 
the Department is encouraged to analyze the Army's privatized 
base lodging program and determine whether a similar model 
would be suitable for the other military departments. The 
Department should ensure that any expansion of the privatized 
base lodging program carefully considers cost, quality, and 
ability to support the military's unique mission.
    The committee looks forward to reviewing the Department's 
analysis as it considers options to consolidate and privatize 
base lodging for the Navy and Air Force, and urges the 
Department to keep the congressional defense committees 
informed before implementing any changes to existing on-base 
lodging programs.

Small business access to military exchange stores

    The committee encourages the Department of Defense (DOD) to 
work with the military exchange services to develop strategies 
for featuring small business products, particularly those from 
veteran-owned firms, in military exchange stores. The committee 
acknowledges that exchange stores, as non-appropriated fund 
instrumentalities of the DOD, are not required to give any 
preference to vendors and suppliers. However, the committee 
also recognizes that exchange stores are uniquely positioned to 
feature products from small businesses, especially veteran-
owned firms. Therefore, the committee urges the military 
exchange services to make a substantive effort to use small 
businesses as suppliers when possible.

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

           Subtitle A--Tricare and Other Health Care Benefits

Consolidation of cost-sharing requirements under TRICARE Select and 
        TRICARE Prime (sec. 701)
    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, 2019.
    The committee is aware that TRICARE beneficiaries enrolled 
in the TRICARE program prior to January 1, 2018, have 
experienced higher co-payments for medical services under 
TRICARE Prime and TRICARE Select than those beneficiaries 
enrolled after that date. This provision would correct an 
inequity in the TRICARE benefit among beneficiaries by 
establishing a single co-payment structure applicable to all 
TRICARE beneficiaries.
Administration of TRICARE dental plans through the Federal Employees 
        Dental Insurance Program (sec. 702)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 8951(8) of title 5, United States Code, to authorize 
eligibility of Active-Duty family members, non-activated 
National Guard/Reserve members, family members of National 
Guard/Reserve members, and certain survivors under the Federal 
Employees Dental Insurance Program (FEDVIP) beginning on or 
after January 1, 2022. This provision would also amend 
subsection (b) of section 1076(a) of title 10, United States 
Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to administer 
TRICARE's dental insurance plans, through an agreement with the 
Director of the Office of Personnel Management, to allow 
eligible beneficiaries to enroll in an insurance plan under 
chapter 89A of title 5, United States Code, in accordance with 
terms (to the extent practicable as defined by the Director 
through regulation) prescribed by the Secretary, including 
terms consistent with subsection (d) and, to the extent 
practicable in relation to chapter 89A, other provisions of 
this section.
    Section 715 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) authorized beneficiaries 
eligible for the TRICARE Retiree Dental Program to enroll in a 
dental insurance plan under the Federal Employees Dental and 
Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP). This provision would extend 
highly regarded dental insurance coverage, available through 
the FEDVIP, to eligible TRICARE Dental Program beneficiaries 
and would provide better choices of dental plans for improved 
dental health of those beneficiaries.
Contraception coverage parity under the TRICARE Program (sec. 703)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1074d(b)(3), 1075(c), 1075a(b), and 1074g(a)(6) of 
title 10, United States Code, to require coverage of 
contraception services for covered beneficiaries under the 
TRICARE program. The provision would prohibit cost-sharing for 
any method of contraception provided by a TRICARE network 
provider and for any prescription contraceptive on the uniform 
formulary provided by a network retail pharmacy provider or the 
mail order pharmacy program. The effective date of this 
provision would be January 1, 2020.
Pilot program on opioid management in the military health system (sec. 
        704)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Director of the Defense Health Agency to implement a 
comprehensive pilot program, for a period of not more than 3 
years, to minimize early opioid exposure in beneficiaries under 
the TRICARE program and to prevent misuse or abuse of opioid 
medications. The pilot program would begin within 180 days of 
the date of the enactment of this Act, and it would include 
elements to maximize opioid safety across the entire continuum 
of care, consisting of patient, physician or dentist, and 
pharmacist. Additionally, the provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, 
not later than 180 days before the completion of the pilot 
program, describing the conduct of the program. Finally, the 
provision would authorize the Director to implement the pilot 
program on a permanent basis if the Director determines that 
the pilot program successfully reduces early opioid exposure in 
TRICARE beneficiaries and prevents progression to misuse or 
abuse of opioid medications.

  Pilot program on treatment of members of the Armed Forces for post-
 traumatic stress disorder related to military sexual trauma (sec. 705)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program, not to 
extend beyond 3 years after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, to assess the feasibility and advisability of using 
intensive outpatient programs to treat members of the Armed 
Forces suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder resulting 
from military sexual trauma, including treatment for substance 
use disorder, depression, and other issues related to those 
conditions. Under this provision, the pilot program would be 
carried out through partnerships with public, private, and non-
profit health care organizations or institutions that: 1) 
Provide health care to members of the Armed Forces; 2) Provide 
evidence-based treatment for psychological and neurological 
conditions common to members of the Armed Forces; 3) Provide 
health care, support, and other benefits to family members of 
members of the Armed Forces; and 4) Provide health care under 
the TRICARE program. The provision would establish pilot 
program activities and would require the Secretary to install 
evaluation metrics before commencement of the program. In 
addition, the provision would require the Secretary to submit 
an initial report describing the pilot program to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act. The Secretary would then submit a final 
report to the same committees not later than 180 days after 
completion of the pilot program.

                 Subtitle B--Health Care Administration

Improvement of administration of Defense Health Agency and military 
        medical treatment facilities (sec. 711)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1073c(a) of title 10, United States Code, to improve 
and enhance the administration of the Defense Health Agency and 
military medical treatment facilities (MTFs). Under this 
provision, the Defense Health Agency (DHA) would have the 
following additional authorities to: (1) Direct, control, and 
serve as the primary rater of the performance of commanders or 
directors of MTFs; (2) Direct and control any intermediary 
organizations between the Defense Health Agency and MTFs; (3) 
Determine the scope of medical care provided at each MTF to 
meet the military personnel readiness requirements of the 
senior military operational commander of the military 
installation; (4) Determine total workforce requirements at 
each MTF; (5) Direct joint manning at MTFs and intermediary 
organizations; (6) Establish training and skills sustainment 
venues for military medical personnel; (7) Address personnel 
staffing shortages at MTFs; and (8) Approve service nominations 
for commanders or directors of MTFs. The provision would also 
amend section 1073c(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code, to 
require the DHA Director to ensure that the DHA meets the 
military personnel readiness requirements of the senior 
military operational commanders of military installations.
    In Conference Report 115-404, accompanying the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91), the conferees expressed concerns with the Department of 
Defense's original plan to implement section 702 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) and voiced a strong commitment to reform the 
organization and governance of the military health system. Even 
with this clear direction from the conferees, the Department 
has again failed to provide a credible, detailed plan to 
implement section 702. As a result, the committee believes that 
this provision would further clarify the intent of section 702 
and lead to enhanced operational medical force readiness and 
total force readiness, improved access to care, improved 
quality of care, and a better experience of care that soldiers, 
sailors, airmen, and marines (and their families) deserve.

Organizational framework of the military healthcare system to support 
        medical requirements of the combatant commands (sec. 712)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the 
Defense Health Agency (Director), to commence implementation, 
not later than October 1, 2018, of an organizational framework 
of the military health system that: (1) Effectively implements 
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code; (2) Maximizes 
interoperability; and (3) Fully integrates the medical 
capabilities of the Armed Forces to enhance joint military 
medical operations in support of combatant command 
requirements.
    The provision would authorize the Director to conduct a 
phased implementation, in compliance with section 1073c of 
title 10, United States Code, of a new organizational framework 
with full implementation required not later than October 1, 
2020. The provision would establish no more than three health 
readiness regions in the continental United States, and each 
region would be led by a commander or director appointed to a 
grade no higher than major general or rear admiral. Each 
military department would nominate qualified individuals to 
serve in those positions, and the Director would select those 
individuals to serve as health readiness regional commanders or 
directors under the authority, direction, and control of such 
Director.
    Under this provision, the Director would establish a 
regional hub at a major military medical center in each region 
to provide complex, specialized medical services. Each regional 
hub would be geographically located to maximize medical support 
to combatant commands. The provision would authorize the 
Director to establish or maintain additional medical centers in 
locations with large beneficiary populations or locations that 
serve as the primary readiness platforms of the Armed Forces. 
In addition, this provision would authorize the Director to 
establish up to two health readiness regions outside the 
continental United States. The provision would prescribe 
certain additional duties and responsibilities of the Director 
related to readiness, operational medicine support, and 
beneficiary healthcare delivery.
    Moreover, the provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense, through the service secretaries, to disestablish the 
medical departments of the Services, and any subordinate 
commands or organizations, not later than October 1, 2019, and 
to establish operational medical force readiness organizations 
in each service, led by the Services' Surgeons General. These 
organizations would have no command authority. Finally, the 
provision would prescribe the responsibilities of the Services' 
operational medical force readiness organizations.
    In March 2018, the committee received the Department's 
third interim report, which described its most recent plan to 
implement section 702 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). After careful review 
of this interim report, however, the committee remains 
frustrated with the Department's plan to reform the military 
health system. In the committee's view, the plan fails to 
maximize interoperability as it does not fully integrate the 
medical capabilities of the Services to enhance joint medical 
operations. The plan maintains the Services' medical 
departments and establishes new, stove-piped service commands 
whose responsibilities would be to oversee medical force 
readiness and to provide administrative support to military 
medical personnel, a function that could otherwise be 
effectively provided by other units reporting directly to the 
Services' line commanders.
    In addition, the plan would not fully eliminate duplicative 
activities carried out by the Defense Health Agency and the 
Services' medical departments. For example, the plan would 
reduce total medical headquarters personnel by only 165 full-
time equivalent positions--out of 6,400 total positions--
through 2023. Clearly, the plan demonstrates that the Services 
intend to maintain many, if not most, existing medical 
headquarters functions and current staffing levels while 
disregarding the call for innovation and efficiency included 
throughout the Department's National Defense Strategy.
    To address these concerns and many others, this provision 
would thoughtfully prescribe a centralized organizational 
framework for the military health system that more clearly 
focuses the entire system on: (1) Improving total force 
readiness; (2) Meeting the actual medical requirements of 
combatant commanders; (3) Improving proficiency training for 
military medical providers in a fully integrated, joint 
training environment; and (4) Ensuring greater efficiencies in 
the delivery of healthcare services, while providing high 
quality, safe medical care and improving the experience of care 
for all beneficiaries.

Streamlining of TRICARE Prime beneficiary referral process (sec. 713)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to streamline the process under section 
1095f of title 10, United States Code, by which TRICARE Prime 
beneficiaries are referred to the civilian provider network for 
inpatient and outpatient care under the TRICARE program. The 
provision would prescribe certain objectives for the 
streamlined referral process and require implementation in 
calendar year 2019. Additionally, the provision would require 
the Secretary to conduct an annual evaluation of the referral 
process and make improvements to the process as a result of the 
annual evaluation.
    Currently, TRICARE Prime beneficiaries must undergo an 
exhaustive 10-step process to obtain a referral for medical 
care in the civilian provider network. This burdensome referral 
process unnecessarily delays medical evaluation and treatment, 
frustrating beneficiaries and creating dissatisfaction with the 
TRICARE program. The committee believes that the Defense Health 
Agency must quickly re-engineer the referral process to 
eliminate inefficient and unnecessary steps to improve the 
experience of care for TRICARE Prime beneficiaries.

Sharing of information with State prescription drug monitoring programs 
        (sec. 714)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1074g of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish and maintain a program 
comparable to prescription drug monitoring programs operated by 
the States, including programs approved by the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services under section 3990 of the Public 
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 280g-3). This program would apply 
to designated controlled substance prescriptions under the 
Department of Defense's pharmacy benefits program. Under this 
provision, the Secretary would establish appropriate procedures 
for bi-directional sharing of patient-specific information 
regarding prescriptions for designated controlled substances 
between the program and State prescription drug monitoring 
programs, including any program operated by a county, 
municipality, or other subdivision within that State, to 
prevent misuse or diversion of opioid medications and other 
designated controlled substances. The provision would also 
authorize the Secretary to treat the disclosure of patient-
specific information as an authorized disclosure for purposes 
of the health privacy regulations promulgated under the Health 
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public 
Law 104-191).

Improvement of reimbursement by Department of Defense of entities 
        carrying out state vaccination programs in connection with 
        vaccines provided to covered beneficiaries under the TRICARE 
        program (sec. 715)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 719(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328; 10 U.S.C. 1074g note) to 
require the Secretary of Defense to reimburse an entity 
carrying out a State vaccination program for making 
vaccinations available to TRICARE covered beneficiaries. The 
provision would also stipulate that subparagraph (B) of section 
719 should not apply to amounts assessed by entities providing 
independent verification that the assessments of such entities 
are below the costs of the private sector in making vaccines 
available.

                 Subtitle C--Reports and Other Matters

Extension of authority for Joint Department of Defense-Department of 
        Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund (sec. 721)

    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, 2019, to 
September 30, 2020.

Increase in number of appointed members of the Henry M. Jackson 
        Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine (sec. 722)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 178(c)(1)(C) of title 10, United States Code, to 
increase the number of appointed members of the council of 
directors of the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the 
Advancement of Military Medicine from four to six members.

Cessation of requirement for mental health assessment of members after 
        redeployment from a contingency operation upon discharge or 
        release from the Armed Forces (sec. 723)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1074m of title 10, United States Code, to eliminate the 
requirement to provide a mental health assessment (MHA) to a 
servicemember after redeployment if the individual has been 
discharged from military service. Under current law, there is 
no requirement to provide an MHA to a servicemember 90 to 180 
days after redeployment if the individual has been discharged; 
however, the cessation of the requirement to provide an MHA 
after a member has been discharged does not currently apply to 
MHAs required at 180 days to 18 months after redeployment and 
18 months to 30 months after redeployment.

Pilot program on earning by special operations forces medics of credits 
        towards a physician assistant degree (sec. 724)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to conduct a 
pilot program, for a period not greater than 5 years, to assess 
the feasibility and advisability of partnerships between 
special operations forces and institutions of higher education, 
and health systems if determined appropriate by the Assistant 
Secretary, through which special operations forces medics earn 
credit towards a master's degree of physician assistant for 
military operational work and training. The provision would 
require the Secretary of Defense to submit an initial report, 
within 180 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, that describes: (1) A comprehensive framework 
for the military education to be provided under the program; 
(2) Metrics to be used to assess the effectiveness of the 
program; and (3) Mechanisms to be used by the Department, 
medics, or both to cover the costs of education received by 
medics.
    In addition, the Secretary of Defense would submit a final 
report, not later than 180 days after completion of the pilot 
program, to the same committees, which provides an: (1) 
Evaluation of the pilot program using the metrics of assessment 
set forth in the initial report; (2) Assessment of the utility 
of funding mechanisms as set forth in the initial report; (3) 
Assessment of the effects of the program on recruitment and 
retention of special operations forces medics; and (4) 
Assessment of the feasibility and advisability of extending any 
authorities for joint professional military education under 
chapter 107 of title 10, United States Code, to warrant 
officers or enlisted personnel.

Pilot program on partnerships with civilian organizations for 
        specialized medical training (sec. 725)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program, for a period 
of not more than 3 years, to assess the feasibility and 
advisability of establishing partnerships with public, private, 
and non-profit organizations and institutions to provide short-
term specialized medical training to advance the medical skills 
and capabilities of military medical providers. Prior to 
commencement of the pilot program, the Secretary would 
establish metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. 
The provision would require the Secretary to submit an initial 
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives 180 days prior to initiation of 
the pilot program that includes a description of the program, 
the metrics used to evaluate the program, and any other matters 
relating to the program that the Secretary considers 
appropriate. Not later than 180 days after the completion of 
the pilot program, the Secretary would submit a final report to 
the same committees that includes an assessment of the 
effectiveness of the program. The committee considers this 
provision to be an important element in helping military 
medical providers advance their skills and capabilities in 
specialties such as orthopedic surgery that would improve the 
medical readiness of the total force.
    The budget request included $32.5 billion in Defense Health 
Program, Operations and Maintenance. The amount authorized to 
be appropriated in Operations and Maintenance, line number 060, 
includes the following changes from the budget request.

                    [Changes in millions of dollars]
 
 
 
Specialized Medical Training Pilot Program............              +2.5
 

Registry of individuals exposed to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances 
        on military installations (sec. 726)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a registry for 
individuals who have been exposed to per- and polyfluoroalkyl 
substances.

Inclusion of gambling disorder in health assessments for members of the 
        Armed Forces and related research efforts (sec. 727)

    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 conducted by the Department of Defense for members 
of the Armed Forces. The provision would also require the 
Secretary to incorporate gambling disorder questions into 
ongoing research efforts, including by restoring such questions 
into health-related behavior surveys of Active-Duty and reserve 
component personnel. Finally, the provision would require the 
Secretary to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees, within 2 years of the date of the enactment of this 
Act, which describes efforts made to comply with this provision 
and provides findings of assessments and surveys with respect 
to prevalence of gambling disorder among members of the Armed 
Forces.

Comptroller General review of Defense Health Agency oversight of 
        TRICARE managed care support contractors (sec. 728)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General of the United States to submit to the 
congressional defense committees, not later than 180 days of 
the date of the enactment of this Act, a report reviewing the 
Defense Health Agency's oversight of the transition of TRICARE 
managed care support contractors. The provision would require 
the Comptroller General to conduct subsequent reviews of any 
transition of managed care support contractors of the TRICARE 
program and to submit reports to the same committees.

                       Items of Special Interest

Critical gaps in military physician specialties

    The Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a 
report titled ``Military Personnel: Additional Actions Needed 
to Address Gaps in Military Physician Specialties'' (GAO-18-77) 
on February 28, 2018, which described the Department of 
Defense's (DOD) gaps in physician authorizations (funded 
positions) and end strengths (number of physicians on hand). 
The report discussed how DOD's approach to address physician 
specialty gaps ``does not include targeted and coordinated 
strategies to address key physician shortages.'' Additionally, 
the GAO established that all of the Services' components 
(active and reserve) had several physician specialties at 
levels below 80 percent of authorized levels and that many of 
those gaps were in critically short wartime specialties, such 
as critical care/trauma medicine, aviation medicine, and 
cardiac/thoracic surgery.
    Currently, the Services primarily rely on the Armed Forces 
Health Professions Scholarship Program (AFHPSP) and the 
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) to 
access physicians. While the Services ``generally meet their 
AFHPSP and USUHS recruitment goals,'' they continually 
experience gaps in critical specialties because the Services do 
not ``channel students into residencies for the specialties in 
most critical need.'' Moreover, the GAO concluded that most 
medical students met minimal qualifications for acceptance into 
the AFHPSP and the USUHS but the DOD does not consistently 
track data on its students, ``potentially hindering 
opportunities to improve the quality of its accession 
programs.'' Finally, the GAO found that the USUHS has not 
determined the costs of educating its medical students, which 
may hinder ``DOD's ability to understand its full funding needs 
for its primary accession programs.''
    The committee is concerned about the Department's failure 
to comprehensively address the long-standing gaps in critical 
military physician specialties across the Services. As a 
result, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense and the 
service secretaries to provide a report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, 
by January 1, 2019, that provides a comprehensive plan 
addressing all of the recommendations in the GAO report. In 
addition, the plan should include the Department's 
recommendations for changes to its physician accession 
programs, which may be required to ensure recruitment and 
retention of highly qualified physicians to address gaps in 
critical wartime medical specialties.

Emerging technologies to mitigate and prevent traumatic brain injury

    The committee applauds the Department of Defense for its 
ongoing efforts to develop mitigation/prevention strategies for 
traumatic brain injuries (TBI). These efforts include 
exploration of emerging technologies that show promise in 
greatly reducing the occurrence of TBI. The committee 
understands that Walter Reed National Military Medical Center 
has successfully tested various innovative technologies to 
prevent TBI. To the committee's knowledge, however, these 
efforts have not yet led to the rapid fielding of these new 
technologies in military training or combat environments.
    Therefore, the committee strongly urges the Secretary of 
Defense to establish an inter-service work group to develop a 
joint strategy to identify material solutions to mitigate and 
prevent TBI. The committee believes that this strategy should 
include a detailed review of the recent findings from 
successful testing of emerging technologies, followed by 
development of a comprehensive plan for rapidly identifying, 
testing, and fielding new technologies to mitigate and prevent 
TBI.

Expedited development and approval of medical products for emergency 
        use on the battlefield

    The committee is aware that a top priority for the 
Department of Defense's Combat Casualty Care Research Program 
is to optimize survival and recovery from combat-related 
injuries by advancing and improving damage control 
resuscitation of traumatic hemorrhage, forward surgical and 
intensive critical care, casualty transport, and care for 
traumatic brain injury and other neurological trauma. Pathogen 
inactivation of blood products can facilitate the collection of 
blood in austere operating areas because it can eliminate the 
need for laboratory testing in such settings while still 
ensuring blood safety. To accomplish goals of optimizing 
survival and recovery, the Department needs to develop and 
transition to pathogen-inactivated blood products, including 
whole blood, platelets, plasma, and red blood cells that are 
ultimately authorized or approved for use under the Federal 
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or the Public Health Service Act 
in treating U.S. military forces. The committee encourages the 
Defense Health Agency to use Congressionally Directed Peer-
Reviewed Medical Research Program funding to expedite the 
development and approval of medical products for use on the 
battlefield.

Explore feasibility of implementing a combat readiness assessment tool

    To ensure a more deployable, resilient force, the Services 
need a tool to validate the physical fitness of the warfighter 
and to aid in the determination of combat readiness. The 
committee is aware of technology using machine learning and 
force plate measurements that can help develop personalized, 
evidence-based training programs to prevent injuries in 
athletes. This technology could provide: (1) Accurate, 
actionable insights regarding the physical condition of each 
warfighter; and (2) A customized fitness program for each 
warfighter to help minimize injuries during combat. The 
committee encourages the Department of Defense to explore the 
feasibility of using this technology to assess the physical 
fitness of the warfighter.

Extended Care Health Option respite care services

    The committee remains concerned about limitations in the 
Department of Defense's respite care benefit under the Extended 
Care Health Option (ECHO) program. Congress established the 
ECHO program to substitute for State Medicaid Waiver Program 
services, which are often unavailable to highly mobile military 
families. The committee believes that the services provided by 
State Medicaid Waiver Programs should serve as the benchmark 
for ECHO-covered services. Therefore, the committee strongly 
encourages the Department to expand ECHO respite care services 
to align with the average number of respite hours provided by 
State Medicaid Waiver Programs.

Health risk surveillance of servicemembers in the United States Special 
        Operations Command

    The committee commends the efforts of the United States 
Special Operations Command to develop an information system to 
track the health status of Special Operations Forces personnel 
with the goal of proactively identifying, studying, and 
mitigating health risk. This effort is a cooperative endeavor 
involving the John P. Murtha Cancer Center at Walter Reed 
National Military Medical Center, the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), and the Oncology 
Research Information Exchange Network, a network of major 
academic centers that has developed a uniform protocol for 
long-term patient surveillance. The committee encourages the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), in 
coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, to continue 
assisting the United States Special Operations Command in 
adapting this protocol for use in addressing risk and improving 
the overall health of military populations.

MHS GENESIS

    The committee recognizes the importance of implementing a 
modern electronic health record system that is interoperable 
between the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of 
Veterans Affairs (VA). An interoperable system will ensure 
sharing of servicemembers' health records with private sector 
healthcare systems and individual providers and will ease 
servicemembers' transition to the VA healthcare system upon 
separation from military service.
    On May 17, 2018, VA signed a contract with Cerner 
Corporation officially ensuring deployment of DOD and VA 
electronic health records systems on the same operational 
platform in the future. This historic overhaul of the health 
record systems of the two largest government agencies requires 
transparency, accountability, and oversight. To ensure 
efficient and responsible implementation, the Secretary of 
Defense shall use existing and future inter-agency governance 
structures and collaboration between VA and DOD health record 
program offices to make certain a continued commitment to full 
DOD-VA interoperability and to share lessons learned and best 
practices associated with the deployment and sustainment of MHS 
GENESIS.

Mild traumatic brain injury screening tests

    The committee remains concerned that servicemembers who 
have suffered head injuries resulting in concussions or mild 
traumatic brain injuries (mTBI) may not be receiving the 
optimal level of available screening. Concussions can result in 
a prolonged recovery period with individuals reporting 
persistent symptoms over long periods of time. Individuals 
exposed to repetitive concussive events, especially those 
lacking early and accurate screening, are at high risk for 
long-term negative consequences to brain health, including the 
development of chronic neuro-degenerative disease. The 
committee is aware of approaches to screening for concussions 
and mTBI that assess rapid eye movements. Professional, 
collegiate, and amateur sports leagues have widely adopted 
these screening techniques in concussion screening protocols. 
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to assess the 
feasibility of including eye movement screening tests in the 
existing mTBI protocols for injured servicemembers.

Procurement of telehealth solutions and services

    The committee recognizes the growing importance of 
telehealth in delivering accessible, quality healthcare to 
military servicemembers and their families. The committee is 
concerned that the Department of Defense (DOD) has relied on 
limited competition awards for telehealth services and has not 
always implemented the most effective telehealth solutions. The 
committee expects the DOD to use commercial-off-the-shelf 
technology solutions and non-developmental items and to limit 
excessively restrictive specification standards that may 
restrict or eliminate fair and open competition to provide the 
most effective telehealth services available.

Prostate cancer incidence among Active-Duty servicemembers

    The committee recognizes that prostate cancer is the most 
prevalent cancer in men and the second leading cause of cancer 
mortality. In men younger than age 65, the prostate cancer 
mortality rate for African-Americans is 3.1 times greater than 
in Caucasians. In Americans age 65 and older, the mortality 
rate for African-American males is 2.3 times greater than 
Caucasians. More research is needed to better understand the 
incidence of prostate cancer rates by race among Active-Duty 
servicemembers, as well as any existing disparities in the 
diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer in this population.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to evaluate and provide a report to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives within 180 
days that: (1) Examines the incidence of prostate cancer by 
race among Active-Duty servicemembers, including information 
detailing disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of 
prostate cancer with a focus on African-American men; and (2) 
Describes a plan for addressing any disparities and expanding 
access to diagnosis and treatment options for Active-Duty 
servicemembers.

Rapid cerebral therapeutic hypothermia

    The committee is aware of the benefits of therapeutic 
hypothermia for traumatic brain injury, as well as its 
applications for various conditions including cardiac arrest, 
severe blood loss due to combat injury, and heat stroke. Recent 
evidence indicates that rapidly applied brain cooling can 
reduce or prevent brain damage even in cases of mild injury, 
such as concussion. The current evidence-based recommendation 
is to initiate therapeutic hypothermia as soon as possible, as 
brain damage can occur immediately after an incident. The 
committee encourages the Department to explore non-invasive, 
lightweight devices that rapidly initiate localized cerebral 
cooling at the point of the injury.

Regenerative medicine research and development

    The Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine (AFIRM) 
delivers new technologies that will lead to functional and 
aesthetic recovery from severe injuries incurred in military 
service. AFIRM has advanced the development of restorative 
therapies for battlefield trauma, and this important work has 
led to 18 clinical trials with 3 trials already completed. Many 
technical challenges remain, however, before the Department of 
Defense (DOD) can realize the full potential of regenerative 
medicine in restoring the health and performance of wounded 
warfighters.
    The committee is aware of the many emerging breakthrough 
treatments for severely wounded servicemembers that have 
resulted from AFIRM's public-private consortium approach to 
regenerative medicine research and development. The committee 
encourages the DOD to sustain the pace of scientific advances 
and military-relevant technology development in regenerative 
medicine through another multiyear public-private consortium 
modeled on AFIRM's two previous research and development 
consortium efforts.

TRICARE access study

    Not later than 180 days from the date of the enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Commissioner of 
the Social Security Administration, shall submit to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, the Committee on Finance of the Senate, and 
the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives 
a report on the number of individuals who: (1) Are retired from 
the Armed Forces under chapter 61 of title 10, United States 
Code; (2) Are entitled to hospital insurance benefits under 
part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act pursuant to 
receiving benefits for 24 months as described in subparagraph 
(A) or (C) of section 226(b)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
426(b)(2)); and (3) Because of such entitlement, are no longer 
enrolled in TRICARE Prime or TRICARE Select (as those terms are 
defined in section 1072 of title 10, United States Code) under 
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code.

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

             Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

Permanent Supply Chain Risk Management Authority (sec. 801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would permanently 
extend the authority provided in section 806 of the Ike Skelton 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public 
Law 111-383) regarding the management of supply chain risk and 
would clarify the Secretary of Defense's ability to make 
determinations under the authority to apply throughout the 
Department of Defense.
Commercially available market research (sec. 802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2431a of title 10, United States Code, to define the 
market research requirement of major defense acquisition 
program acquisition strategies. This provision is intended to 
improve the Department of Defense's capacity to conduct market 
research by diversifying the sources and methods used.
    The committee notes that a growing share of the 
Department's spending is on information technology products and 
services and believes robust market research is critical to 
acquisition planning. The committee believes that sufficient 
attention is not being given to market research and is 
concerned that the Department's sources of data for market 
research are limited and lack diversity.
    The committee therefore encourages the Department's 
contracting officers to use commercially available detailed 
third-party market research, which should include any 
disclosures of a third-party's interests and which should be 
considered by contracting officers in the context of all 
available data sources, to ensure that they have the best and 
most complete information available in developing and executing 
their acquisition strategies.
Comptroller General assessment on acquisition programs and related 
        initiatives (sec. 803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 131 of title 10, United States Code, to establish an 
annual assessment by the Comptroller General of the United 
States of Department of Defense acquisition programs and 
initiatives.
    The committee notes that the Comptroller General's annual 
assessment of selected weapons programs has been a highly 
valued product supporting the defense committees' oversight for 
over 15 years. The Comptroller General's reviews over the past 
decade on major automated information systems, and defense 
business systems have similarly facilitated such oversight.
    The committee notes with concern that the Department of 
Defense's warfighting, business, and enterprise capabilities 
are increasingly reliant on or driven by software and 
information technology. The Department of Defense 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 along with associated training, tools, and 
infrastructure.
    The committee believes that, given the role of software and 
information technology in acquisition programs and initiatives 
across the Department both to conduct its missions as well as 
to balance its books, the Comptroller General's assessments 
must continue to keep pace.
    Further, the committee notes that recent years have seen 
the most significant reform of the Department's acquisition 
function since the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 
2009 (Public Law 111-23), to include expansion of acquisition 
authorities, organizational realignments, delegation of 
acquisition execution to the Services, and rapid acquisition 
and prototyping authorities and offices.
    The committee notes that, in past work on weapons systems, 
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has developed 
criteria for analysis and oversight over programs. The 
committee expects that similar work from other areas within the 
organization can lead to similar methodologies for software and 
alternative acquisition pathways. Accordingly, this provision 
directs the Comptroller General to consolidate separate 
reporting on these initiatives, leveraging assessment criteria 
from across the GAO and outside experts, in order to provide a 
cohesive analysis that recognizes the complexity of the 
acquisition system. The provision also repeals an obsolete GAO 
reporting requirement.

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

Department of Defense contracting dispute matters (sec. 811)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out a study of the frequency and 
effects of bid protests involving the same Department of 
Defense contract award or proposed award that have been filed 
at both the Government Accountability Office and the Court of 
Federal Claims, and establish a data collection system to 
better track and analyze bid protest trends in the future.
    The committee notes that the Rand study on the bid protest 
process (``Assessing Bid Protest of U.S. Department of Defense 
Procurements''') mandated by the Fiscal Year 2017 National 
Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 114-328) recommended that 
policymakers and Department of Defense leadership should 
``consider implementing an expedited process for adjudicating 
bid protests of procurement contracts with values under $0.1 
million.'' The committee believes that this type of expedited 
process, akin to a traffic court, would help resolve smaller 
and generally simpler cases commensurate with their value while 
preserving the right to an independent protest.
Continuation of technical data rights during challenges (sec. 812)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2321(i) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify 
that the government may continue to exercise rights in 
technical data and noncommercial computer software during the 
course of a challenge with an incumbent contractor under 
section 2321(d) of title 10, United States Code, or under 
procedures established by the Department of Defense, to meet 
Department of Defense mission requirements and readiness needs 
during the course of the challenge.
Increased micro-purchase threshold (sec. 813)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1902(a)(1) of title 41, United States Code, to align 
the micro-purchase threshold for the Department of Defense to 
the micro-purchase threshold for all government agencies at 
$10,000.
Modification of limitations on single source task or delivery order 
        contracts (sec. 814)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2304a(d)(3)(A) of title 10, United States Code, to 
clarify the applicable standard for task or delivery order 
contract awards.
Preliminary cost analysis requirement for exercise of multiyear 
        contract authority (sec. 815)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2306b(i)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code, to 
require that the preliminary findings of the agency head be 
supported by a preliminary cost analysis by the Director of 
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE).
    Currently, section 2306b(i)(2)(B) of title 10, United 
States Code, requires preliminary findings of the agency head 
to be made after the completion of a cost analysis performed by 
the Director of CAPE.
    The intent of this provision is to streamline the multiyear 
procurement contract legislative proposal process through the 
Director of CAPE and the agency head's conducting cost analysis 
simultaneously, rather than sequentially, to enable timely 
submission and ample consideration of such legislative 
proposals by the congressional defense committees.
Inclusion of best available information regarding past performance of 
        subcontractors and joint venture partners (sec. 816)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Federal 
Acquisition Regulatory Council and the Administrator for 
Federal Procurement Policy, within 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, to develop policies for the Department 
of Defense (DOD) to ensure the best information regarding past 
performance of certain subcontractors and joint venture 
partners is available when awarding DOD contracts.
Modification of criteria for waivers of requirement for certified cost 
        and price data (sec. 817)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make a 
technical change to section 817 of the Bob Stump National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-
314; 10 U.S.C 2306a note).
Subcontracting price and approved purchasing systems (sec. 818)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 893 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383) to clarify that, 
for Department of Defense contracts with contractors that have 
approved purchasing systems as defined by section 44.101 of the 
Federal Acquisition Regulations, a contracting officer must 
have a written approval from his or her program manager prior 
to withholding consent based solely on disagreement with the 
proposed subcontract price.

Comptroller General of the United States report on progress payment 
        financing of Department of Defense contracts (sec. 819)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General of the United States to submit a report, no 
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, to the congressional defense committees on the results of 
an analysis of the effects of current financing levels of 
defense contracts on defense contractors and Defense budgets.

Authorization to limit foreign access to technology through contracts 
        (sec. 820)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to 
include in the terms of any contract provisions that would 
limit access by select persons or organizations to sensitive 
technology, and authorize the potential forfeit of intellectual 
property rights if these terms were violated.

Briefing requirement on services contracts (sec. 821)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to 
brief the congressional defense committees no later than 180 
days after the date of enactment of this Act, and every 180 
days thereafter, on the progress of Department of Defense 
efforts to meet the requirements of section 23239(b) of title 
10, United States Code, including relevant information on the 
methodology and implementation plans for future compliance.

Sense of Congress on awarding of contracts to responsible companies 
        that primarily employ American workers and do not actively 
        transfer American jobs to potential adversaries (sec. 822)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should award 
contracts to responsible companies that primarily employ United 
States workers or are partners in the national technology and 
industrial base and do not actively transfer United States jobs 
to potential adversaries.

 Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Program cost, fielding, and performance goals in planning major 
        acquisition programs (sec. 831)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2448a of title 10, United States Code, to clarify that 
the designated milestone decision authority is the individual 
responsible for ensuring the accomplishment of the stated goals 
for a major defense acquisition program.

Implementation of recommendations of the Independent Study on 
        Consideration of Sustainment in Weapons Systems Life Cycle 
        (sec. 832)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to implement certain recommendations from 
the Independent Study on Consideration of Sustainment in Weapon 
Systems Life Cycle, which was conducted as required by section 
844 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017 (Public Law 114-328).
    The report's findings highlight that the Department of 
Defense has not given proper consideration to sustainment 
issues during the development and acquisition process. In 
particular, the report found that specific issues related to 
technical data rights and intellectual property were not 
properly considered during development and acquisition for 
certain programs and types of programs. Furthermore, the report 
observed that once systems are in sustainment, the non-
consideration of these issues limits the ability of the 
Department to effectively modernize systems.
    The committee believes that it is critically important to 
consider the findings and recommendations of this report.

Pilot program to accelerate major weapons system programs (sec. 833)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
pilot program for the Secretary of Defense to reform and 
accelerate the contracting and pricing processes associated 
with major weapons systems programs through basing price 
reasonableness determinations on actual cost and pricing data 
for purchases of the same or similar products for the 
Department of Defense and reducing the cost and pricing data to 
be submitted in accordance with section 2306a of title 10, 
United States Code. This authority would expire on January 2, 
2021.
    The committee remains concerned with the continued 
challenges of cost overruns and long delays in acquiring major 
weapons system programs, many of which are caused by the overly 
bureaucratic way in which the Department of Defense does 
business. This provision would allow the Secretary of Defense 
to explore, through a pilot program, alternative ways to 
transform the Department's business model to solve the 
recurring problem of obtaining the correct information in a 
timely manner to expedite negotiations and deliver major 
weapons systems on time and within budget.

        Subtitle D--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce

Permanent authority for demonstration projects relating to acquisition 
        personnel management policies and procedures (sec. 841)

    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.

Establishment of integrated review team on defense acquisition 
        industry-government exchange (sec. 842)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Chairman of the Defense Business Board to convene an integrated 
review team with members of the Defense Innovation Board and 
Defense Science Board to undertake a study on the exchange of 
defense industry personnel on term assignments within the 
Department. The study shall review: (1) Legal, ethical, and 
financial disclosure requirements for industry-government 
exchanges; (2) Existing or previous industry-government 
exchange programs; and (3) How the military departments address 
legal, ethical, and financial requirements for reserve 
component servicemembers who also maintain civilian employment 
in the defense industry. The team shall also produce 
recommendations to reduce barriers to industry-government 
exchange while ensuring financial and ethical integrity to 
protect the best interests of the Department.
    The committee is aware of benefits garnered from the 
exchange of government employees with private industry and 
academia. However, the committee is aware that private sector 
employees may face barriers to participating in exchange 
programs with the Department of Defense. The committee believes 
that reciprocal exchanges provide value for both parties and 
encourage the flow of ideas and best practices.

Exchange program for acquisition workforce employees (sec. 843)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish an exchange program that 
would temporarily assign civilian personnel working in the 
defense acquisition workforce, as defined by chapter 87 of 
title 10, United States Code, to a rotational program that 
would broaden the skills and expertise of participants and 
improve communication within and integration of the acquisition 
community.
    The committee notes that section 1723 of title 10, United 
States Code, directs the Secretary of Defense to encourage the 
acquisition workforce's self-development and develop key work 
experiences for the acquisition workforce. The committee 
believes that the exchange program authorized in this provision 
would support the Department of Defense's ongoing efforts to 
enhance the acquisition workforce and improve acquisition 
outcomes.

          Subtitle E--Provisions Relating to Commercial Items

Report on commercial item procurement reform (sec. 851)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition to conduct a 
review no later than March 1, 2020 of commercial item 
procurement reform, including recommendations by the 
independent panel created by Section 809 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-
92) (Section 809 Panel) and provisions from recent National 
Defense Authorization Acts, and an analysis of the treatment of 
commercial services contracts as compared to commercial 
products. The Assistant Secretary shall provide an interim 
briefing on the methodology, goals, expected timeline for 
completion, and composition of the team conducting the review 
to the congressional defense committees no later than 180 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act.
    The committee remains committed to pursuing ongoing reforms 
to commercial item procurement including through implementation 
of recommendations from the Section 809 Panel, among other 
entities. The committee is encouraged by the discussion of this 
important topic. However, the committee believes that 
Department of Defense leadership should be engaged in this 
discussion.

                  Subtitle F--Industrial Base Matters

National technology and industrial base application process (sec. 861)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
process for consideration of products to be included within the 
scope of the National Technology and Industrial Base. The 
committee believes that this process will allow decision makers 
to take a more strategic and comprehensive view and apply 
rigorous military requirements and economic-based analysis to 
the maintenance of robust and critical manufacturing 
capabilities for the Department of Defense.

Report on defense electronics industrial base (sec. 862)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
report by the Secretary of Defense, no later than January 31, 
2019, that would examine the health of the defense electronics 
industrial base both domestically and within the national 
technology and industrial base. The committee remains concerned 
about the erosion of the domestic electronics supply chain, and 
encourages the Department to leverage existing resources, 
including the Executive Agent for Printed Circuit Board and 
Interconnect Technology, to ensure the availability and 
integrity of military electronics. To that end, the committee 
supports broadening the Department's microelectronics 
initiatives to include the broader electronics industrial base 
in order to more comprehensively address gaps across the 
electronics supply chain.

Support for defense manufacturing communities to support the defense 
        industrial base (sec. 863)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense with authority to establish a program to 
make long-term investments in critical skills, infrastructure, 
research and development, and small business support in order 
to strengthen the national security innovation base, working in 
coordination with the defense manufacturing institutes.

                     Subtitle G--Other Transactions

Change to notification requirement for other transactions (sec. 871)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
congressional notification requirements for the use of Other 
Transactions.

Data and policy on the use of other transactions (sec. 872)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and 
the Service Acquisition Executives of the military departments 
to collect data on the use of other transactions. The data 
should be stored in a manner that affords to the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition access at any time. The 
provision would also require the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition to analyze and leverage these data to update 
policy and guidance related to the use of other transactions.

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

Clarifications regarding proprietary and technical data (sec. 881)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2321(f) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
application of rights in technical data relating to major 
weapons systems. This provision would also amend section 2320 
of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the application of 
licensing of appropriate intellectual property to support major 
weapons systems with regard to preferences for specially 
negotiated licenses.
    The committee notes that both government and industry 
stakeholders continue to express concern over conflicting legal 
interpretations based on changes to rights in technical data 
made by section 813 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) and changes to rights 
in proprietary data made by section 835 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91). 
Therefore, the committee recommends a return to previous law 
and encourages the Department of Defense to give clear guidance 
on the use of technical data and intellectual property in 
support of major weapons systems in conjunction with the 
recommendations provided by the government-industry advisory 
panel created by section 813 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92).

Implementation of recommendations of the final report of the Defense 
        Science Board Task Force on the Design and Acquisition of 
        Software for Defense Systems (sec. 882)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to implement certain recommendations of 
the Defense Science Board Task Force in their report on the 
Design and Acquisition of Software for Defense Systems.
    The report contained seven recommendations on how to 
improve software acquisition in defense systems, to include the 
idea of the software factory, which underpins all other actions 
the Department of Defense might take in this area. The 
committee agrees with the report's emphasis on shifting the 
Department of Defense's treatment of software as solely a 
development activity to understanding that it is enduring and 
that, therefore, traditional models of hardware sustainment are 
not suited to the treatment of software in the acquisition 
process. Further recommendations pertained to iterative 
development, how to incorporate metrics in program management 
for software, risk reduction activities, the role of machine 
learning and autonomy in programs, and necessary competency 
within the acquisition workforce.
    The committee believes that it is critically important to 
consider the findings and recommendations of this report.

Implementation of pilot program to use agile or iterative development 
        methods under section 873 of the National Defense Authorization 
        Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (sec. 883)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
additional direction to the Secretary of Defense in 
implementing the pilot program established under section 873 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91).
    The committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense 
has established the pilot program as directed under section 
873. However, the committee is disappointed that, despite being 
directed to identify four major software-intensive warfighting 
systems and between four to eight defense business systems, 
only one system has been identified for realignment.
    Accordingly, the committee is selecting the systems and 
directing the Secretary of Defense to consider them as 
candidates in accordance with section 873.
    The committee notes that some of the systems have recently 
begun transition to agile methods or have committed to doing so 
and, as such, their inclusion in the pilot program will allow 
the Department of Defense to use lessons learned for other 
systems that have not yet started realignment under the pilot 
program.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee recommends funding 
reductions for several of the systems, with the expectation 
that cost savings will result from realignments under the 
pilot.

Enabling and other activities of the Cloud Executive Steering Group 
        (sec. 884)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Cloud Executive Steering Group (CESG) to conduct certain 
activities to enable the Department of Defense (DOD) to 
continue its efforts to transition its data, systems, and 
applications to commercial cloud environments.
    The committee notes the important role that the CESG has in 
supporting efforts to make optimal use of cloud computing 
technologies and services across the DOD. The committee 
encourages the active engagement of the members, to continue to 
ensure that cloud technologies are technically suitable, 
appropriately tested for security and reliability, and 
integrated with other DOD information technology efforts, so as 
to optimize effective and efficient procurement of such 
technologies and services and their performance in support of 
DOD missions.
    The committee notes that the CESG's activities have been 
focused on the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure 
initiative and that much attention has been paid to whether the 
DOD will make a single award or multiple awards following the 
competition for this contract for commercial cloud services. 
The committee is concerned that this focus has displaced 
necessary attention that would otherwise be paid to key 
enablers and preconditions for commercial cloud services, such 
as establishing modern commercial networks and conducting 
workload analysis.
    The committee emphasizes the importance, to the DOD's cloud 
transition and enterprise efficiency goals, of modernizing 
networks by adopting advanced commercial capabilities. Network 
modernization is essential for cybersecurity, supporting 
service-level agreements for cloud services, ensuring efficient 
cloud access, and consolidating networks.
    The committee notes that workload and migration analysis 
are critical to understanding feasibility and costs associated 
with the use of commercial cloud services. Workload analysis 
will reveal that some workloads performed by the DOD's systems 
and applications face significant barriers to migration due to 
technical, intellectual property, and data rights issues whose 
scope and implications are not yet understood. Such barriers 
have the potential to fundamentally limit the potential utility 
of commercial cloud services to the Department.
    Further, the committee believes that such enabling 
activities must inform the Department's decision as to whether 
a single or multiple award is in the best interest of the 
government, as is required under federal acquisition 
regulation.

                       Subtitle I--Other Matters

Prohibition on certain telecommunications services or equipment (sec. 
        891)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of Defense's procurement of telecommunications 
equipment or services from Huawei Technologies Company or ZTE 
Corporation, any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities, or 
any entity controlled by the government of the People's 
Republic of China. The provision would also prohibit entry into 
a contract with any entity that uses equipment, as a critical 
component of any system, from Huawei Technologies Company, the 
ZTE Corporation, any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities, 
or any entity controlled by the government of the People's 
Republic of China.

Limitation on use of funds pending submittal of report on Army 
        Marketing and Advertising Program (sec. 892)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit a report on the recommendations 
contained in the Army Audit Agency of the Army's Marketing and 
Advertising Program. The report would include: (1) Mitigation 
and oversight measures to improve contract management; (2) The 
establishment of a review process to evaluate the effectiveness 
of marketing efforts; (3) The increase of acquisition and 
marketing experience within the Army Marketing and Research 
Group (AMRG); (4) An analysis of the workforces within AMRG; 
(5) The establishment of an Army Marketing and Advisory Board; 
and (6) The status on the implementation of new contracting 
practices recommended by the Army Audit Agency.
    Additionally, the provision would prohibit the Secretary of 
the Army from obligating 50 percent of funds available for the 
AMRG in fiscal year 2019 until the report is submitted to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives.

Permanent SBIR and STTR authority for the Department of Defense (sec. 
        893)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 638 of title 15, United States Code, to provide a 
permanent authority for the Small Business Innovation Research 
program (SBIR) and the Small Business Technology Transfer 
program (STTR) in the Department of Defense.

Procurement of telecommunications supplies for experimental purposes 
        (sec. 894)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2373 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries to buy 
telecommunications supplies for experimental or test purposes.

Access by developmental and operational testing activities to data 
        regarding modeling and simulation activity (sec. 895)

    The committee recommends a provision that would ensure the 
Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, and other 
developmental testing organizations be given access to all data 
associated with certain modeling and simulation activities 
supporting the acquisition of military capabilities.

                       Items of Special Interest

Analysis of technical and security issues in Department of Defense 
        business systems

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
faces many challenges in maintaining modern business systems to 
support critical defense missions and activities. The committee 
further notes that Secretary Mattis has made Defense business 
reform a key tenet of his management agenda. The committee is 
concerned that there may be real or perceived technical or 
security issues associated with moving away from large 
enterprise scale business systems and moving to smaller 
systems, including those that can better leverage commercial or 
government cloud computing services.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to initiate an independent technical analysis of technical and 
security barriers to incorporating more modern information 
technology in business systems. The analysis should document 
case studies and lessons learned from government applications 
that already have used and operated with modern information 
technology development practices, standards, and services, as 
well as to determine the feasibility of using these practices, 
standards, and services for new capabilities or new starts for 
DOD business systems. The committee notes that, to optimize 
both cost and performance of these systems, experts have 
identified attributes for system suitability and quality, 
including changeability, stability, scalability, testability, 
effectiveness, security, documentation, developer base, and 
ease of installation. The committee believes that analysis of 
DOD's ability to produce systems with these kinds of attributes 
should be a key element of this analytic effort. The committee 
directs that this analysis should be delivered to the 
congressional defense committees no later than 1 year after the 
date of enactment of this Act.

Assessment of Superior Supplier Incentive Programs

    The committee observes that the Department of Defense has 
undertaken various efforts to identify and reward high 
performing contractors, to include a Preferred Supplier Program 
and the recent direction to the Military Departments to 
implement Superior Supplier Incentive Programs. Not later than 
March 1, 2019, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with 
the Service Acquisition Executives of the military departments, 
to assess the implementation of such programs in achieving 
their original objectives.

Incorporation of agile methods for testing in prototyping and 
        streamlined fielding initiatives

    The committee notes the Department of Defense has taken 
seriously the acceleration of development and deployment of 
capabilities to the warfighter, which the committee believes 
are needed to keep up with rapidly changing technologies and 
threats. The committee is encouraged that such efforts are 
drawing inspiration from the successful private sector use of 
agile acquisition and other iterative development methods that 
are connecting development and operations, often referred to as 
``DevOps,'' especially for software systems.
    One key tenet of these successful programs is the ability 
to deliver functioning, viable products to market so as to 
satisfy the needs of customers, whether they are commercial or 
military. This ability is based on the robust and practically 
continuous testing of systems as part of development, so as to 
discover and address technical and operational issues within 
the development cycle and with minimal cost.
    The committee is concerned that an emphasis on rapid 
fielding without such explicit consideration of testing may 
result in deployment of systems that are not effective, secure, 
scalable, or interoperable and that the Department of Defense's 
efforts to date have not yet included appropriate mechanisms to 
involve the testing community. The committee directs the 
Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and Under Secretary of 
Defense for Research and Engineering to jointly ensure that 
policies, procedures, and guidance reflect early involvement 
and integration of the test community into these accelerated 
development and fielding efforts, including mechanisms to make 
test and evaluation resources available as soon as initiatives 
are started in order to field rapidly.
    The committee directs that this activity be conducted in 
conjunction with the rapid capabilities office, the Services, 
the Strategic Capabilities Office, and organizations tasked 
with similar prototyping efforts.

Master plan for organic industrial base infrastructure

    The committee notes the importance of the organic defense 
industrial base in restoring and maintaining readiness for the 
military services. The committee further notes that 
sequestration coupled with multiple years of continuing 
resolutions has required the Department to take risk in a 
multitude of mission essential areas to include facilities 
infrastructure. The committee is concerned that the Department 
does not have a facilities infrastructure master plan for its 
depots, air logistics centers, and fleet readiness centers 
similar to the congressionally mandated Navy Shipyard 
Infrastructure Optimization Plan as well as the Long-Range 
Facilities and Construction Planning at Army Ammunition Plants 
and Arsenals.
    The committee notes that the 20-year plan the Navy has 
developed for its public shipyards improves not only its 
equipment and facilities, but also the overall layout and 
configuration of its facilities and equipment leading to 
reduced man days and cost. Furthermore, the Navy states that it 
will be able to conduct additional maintenance leading to 
higher readiness rates once projects are completed on a rolling 
basis. At this time, the committee believes that existing 
organic facilities may not be ideally designed, placed, sized, 
or configured to support the current work processes, leading to 
inefficiencies. The committee believes that such a plan for the 
other organic facilities would not only reduce costs and 
maintenance backlog but lead to higher readiness rates across 
the services and provide a better strategy for future planning.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army, Secretary of the Navy, and Secretary of the Air Force, in 
consultation with their respective service chiefs, to submit 
individual service reports by February 1, 2019, on an 
engineering master plan for the optimal placement and 
consolidation of facilities and major equipment to support 
depot level repair functions of its government-owned and 
government-operated facilities and an investment strategy to 
address the facilities, major equipment, and infrastructure 
requirements at organic facilities under the jurisdiction of 
the respective service. The report shall include, but not be 
limited to, the following elements: (1) A review of current and 
projected workload requirements to assess efficiencies in the 
use of existing facilities including consideration of new 
weapon system 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 master plan for each facility 
incorporating the results of a review of industrial processes, 
logistics streams and workload distribution; and (4) An updated 
investment strategy planned for each public facility, including 
timelines to complete the master plan for each facility, a list 
of projects and brief scopes of work, and cost estimates 
necessary to complete projects for mission essential 
facilities.

Serviceability and control of technical data

    The committee is concerned about issues presented by 
machine learning technology relating to U.S. government and 
vendor ownership, use rights, documentation, and 
transportability of data, algorithms, and derivative technical 
data, such as models and other outputs created in the 
performance of machine learning services under a contract or 
other agreement, excluding the vendor's preexisting algorithm 
in its original state, prior to its evolution based on 
processing of the government's data and exposure to the 
government's business processes. The issue of ownership and use 
rights extends to the vendor's future sales and applications of 
algorithms and models that were matured and derived from 
government data, especially where applications involve national 
security. The Department of Defense has a strong interest in 
obtaining government purpose rights for machine learning 
technology developed through government processes with 
government money, especially when there are national security 
reasons for the government to protect this technical data for 
government use and for the government to track where and if it 
is being used outside of the government in the future.
    The committee directs the Deputy Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a comprehensive assessment of these issues and develop 
policies and guidance for the Department. The committee urges 
the Deputy Secretary to use the Algorithmic Warfare Cross-
Functional Team, the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center that 
the Department recently announced it would create, the Defense 
Innovation Board, and the expertise of the Defense Science 
Board and the Defense Digital Service to assist in the 
development of policy and guidance.
    The committee directs the Deputy Secretary to complete the 
assessment and provide a briefing to the congressional defense 
committees within 180 days of the date of enactment of this 
Act, and to notify the committees when policies and guidance 
are issued.

Use of Federal Aviation Administration approval for Department of 
        Defense commercial derivative aircraft

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD) 
has long operated products that are identical to those in civil 
use, including aircraft, aircraft engines, and propellers. 
These commercial derivative products have been certified by the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which has an effective 
system for approving parts, repairs, and alterations. The FAA's 
existing certification process allows the DOD to maintain its 
commercial derivative fleet without duplicative review or 
approval. The committee believes leveraging existing FAA 
certifications can provide the DOD cost and schedule 
efficiencies that should be pursued to the greatest extent 
practicable.
    Therefore, the committee urges the Department to prioritize 
the use of non-developmental and commercially available items 
with existing FAA certifications as long as the use of those 
products do not compromise safety or security requirements 
established by the Department of Defense.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

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

Powers and duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
        Engineering in connection with priority emerging technologies 
        (sec. 901)
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD 
(R&E)) the authority to direct the military departments and 
other elements of the Department of Defense with regard to four 
priority emerging technologies-hypersonics, directed energy, 
space satellite architectures, and artificial intelligence. 
This authority will be limited to one year and require renewal 
by the relevant congressional defense committees.
    The committee recognizes the central importance of the USD 
(R&E) for achieving the technological superiority referenced 
within the National Defense Strategy and chose these specific 
technologies based on their paramount importance to the future 
fight. The provision would include a limitation on this 
authority in order to ensure its usage is consistent with the 
committee's intent. The committee urges coordination between 
the USD (R&E) and the military departments, instead of the 
usage of this authority, as the first resort for decisions 
about the development of these technologies.
Redesignation and modification of responsibilities of Under Secretary 
        of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (sec. 902)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 136 of title 10, United States Code, to redesignate the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness as the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel. This provision would 
also make the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel the 
Chief Human Capital Officer for the Department of Defense.
    The committee notes that over half of the annual defense 
budget goes toward human capital in the form of military, 
civilian, and contracted personnel. Yet despite its importance, 
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness continues to be subject to instability caused by 
rapid turnover of senior leaders and lack of a consistent 
mission. This committee continues to hear constant frustration 
from Department of Defense senior leaders that there is a great 
lack of strategic workforce planning within the Department, 
which results in there being no coherent consolidation of 
hiring policies and no guidance on pathways to expedite hiring, 
management, or movement of the Department's workforce in order 
to assist the Department in getting its most valuable 
resources, its people, on board and in the right positions to 
best help with the rapidly evolving mission of the Department. 
The Under Secretary for Personnel should be the Chief Human 
Capital Officer and the responsible official on these issues 
vital to the success of the Defense workforce.
    Additionally, while a senior civilian official in the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense must have responsibility for 
readiness policy and oversight, this Under Secretary is not in 
the optimal position to do so. The committee notes that neither 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, nor 
any of that official's subordinate leaders has been sought to 
testify on readiness in the numerous hearings that the 
congressional defense committees have held in recent years in 
their prioritization of military readiness recovery. The 
committee believes that readiness is a strategic issue that is 
better addressed by civilian officials who have responsibility 
for defense strategy, plans, and force development. Elsewhere 
in this legislation, the committee recommends a provision that 
realigns responsibility for readiness within the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense to improve and enhance oversight of this 
critical issue. The committee expects the Secretary of Defense 
to determine what activities, such as training policies, force 
education, and language instruction, which are currently 
addressed as readiness issues but would be better addressed as 
personnel issues for which responsibility should be retained by 
this Under Secretary.
    This provision would ensure that the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Personnel is clearly focused on his primary 
responsibility, managing the Department's human resources. 
Additionally, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel 
would be tasked with serving as the Department's Chief Human 
Capital Officer, responsible for setting workforce development 
strategy and aligning the Department's human resources 
policies, healthcare policies, and programs with the 
Department's mission, strategic goals, and performance 
outcomes. The committee expects that this role will not be 
delegated to a lower level.
    Further, the committee notes that section 907 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-404) reduced the total number of authorized Assistant 
Secretaries of Defense from 14 to 13, and eliminated specific 
titles for all but three. This change in law allows the 
Secretary of Defense more discretion to make effective use of 
the Assistant Secretaries of Defense within the Department. The 
committee notes that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Readiness, a position that since creation has not been filled 
by a Senate-confirmed nominee, is a position that may be best 
suited for another Under Secretariat in the Department. 
Alternatively, the Assistant Secretary position within the 
Personnel Under Secretariat should be repurposed to better 
serve the primary functions of that office by focusing on 
strategic workforce planning, eliminating egregious hiring lag 
times, and developing and implementing flexible workforce 
authorities to better enable the Department of Defense to 
recruit and retain the talent it needs for a complex mission.
Modification of responsibilities of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
        Policy (sec. 903)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
responsibilities of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy 
to express clearly that the primary duties of this senior 
official are the development of defense strategy and the 
translation of that strategy into detailed policy guidance for 
force development, operational planning, defense posture, joint 
force assessment, and readiness.
    The committee notes that the Office of the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Policy has become increasingly consumed by 
specific activities--such as interagency meetings, foreign 
travel, and regional issues--at the expense of higher priority 
functions, first among which is ensuring that the strategic and 
operational requirements for the joint force, both present and 
future, are sufficiently addressed and funded in the Department 
of Defense's Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution 
process. This is an indispensable role for which no other 
senior civilian below the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of 
Defense is responsible. In this way, it is the Under 
Secretary's unique duty to advise and assist the Secretary and 
Deputy Secretary of Defense in developing detailed policy 
guidance to direct and assess the development of the joint 
force, the employment and posture of the force, and the 
associated readiness requirements to execute the priorities of 
the National Defense Strategy, while providing the Secretary 
and Deputy Secretary of Defense with high-quality advice, based 
on rigorous strategic assessments, to inform their decisions on 
how to allocate resources to shape the joint force.
    The committee acknowledges that, to date, the statutory 
duties of the Under Secretary have been vaguely defined. The 
committee seeks to redress that oversight by clearly 
establishing in statute, through this provision, what it sees 
as the most important responsibilities of the Under Secretary 
and the criteria the committee will prioritize in evaluating 
the background, experience, and qualifications of nominees for 
this position in order to execute its advise and consent 
duties.
Report on allocation of former responsibilities of the Under Secretary 
        of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (sec. 
        904)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to report on decisions taken as part of 
the reorganization of the Office of the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to allocate 
the responsibilities that are referenced in United States Code.
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, Assessments, 
        Readiness, and Capabilities (sec. 905)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the duties and responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Strategy, Plans, Assessments, Readiness, and 
Capabilities effective as of February 1, 2019.
    One of the committee's highest priorities in recent years 
has been improving the ability of the Department of Defense to 
develop and implement strategy. The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) 
replaced the Quadrennial Defense Review with a framework for a 
more focused, coherent, and prioritized National Defense 
Strategy. The committee applauds the Secretary of Defense's 
efforts in crafting the National Defense Strategy, which 
clearly addresses our eroding military advantage, prioritizes 
the threats posed by great power competitors, and acknowledges 
that the current joint force must change to meet those threats.
    However, the committee recognizes that the ultimate success 
of the National Defense Strategy will depend on implementation 
guided by strong civilian leadership in the Department of 
Defense determined to make the difficult choices that are 
required to align policies, authorities, organizations, 
requirements, and investments with the National Defense 
Strategy, informed by a realistic assessment of available 
resources.
    The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy has 
long been responsible for developing strategy and providing 
associated policy guidance for force development, operational 
planning, and defense posture. However, the committee has grown 
concerned that these policy functions have atrophied over many 
years and do not always receive sufficient attention from 
senior policy leaders. One such function that has become 
particularly moribund is the performance of detailed joint 
force assessments at the campaign, operational, and mission 
levels that are essential for better defining the capability, 
posture, planning, and readiness requirements that are needed 
to execute the National Defense Strategy. This is a different 
function than that performed by the Director of Cost Assessment 
and Program Evaluation, which is largely focused more narrowly 
on evaluating service program and budget requests.
    Similarly, the committee believes that responsibility for 
readiness policy and oversight is currently misaligned in the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense, where it is viewed as a 
personnel matter under the purview of the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, rather than as a strategic 
matter, focused on the proverbial question of ``ready for 
what?'' and addressed together with related operational issues, 
such as force planning. The committee believes that these 
organizational problems help to explain why joint force 
readiness and modernization have both experienced mounting 
crises, despite sufficient warning of growing external threats 
and internal shortcomings.
    In recommending this provision, the committee seeks to 
ensure that the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense are 
better supported on matters of defense strategy, force 
planning, and readiness. This provision would align the 
critical functions necessary to exert strong civilian 
leadership in the development of defense strategy and its 
translation into detailed policy to guide investments in 
necessary capabilities, readiness, and posture for the future 
joint force. Many of these functions are currently assigned to 
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and 
Capabilities in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Policy. This provision would add to these functions 
strategic readiness responsibilities, a renewed emphasis on 
producing rigorous joint force assessments, and any additional 
policy and oversight duties for strategic capabilities, as 
determined by the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
    In reallocating responsibility for readiness in the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense, the committee is assigning to the 
Assistant Secretary responsibility for readiness as a strategic 
matter, currently lacking in the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense: namely, the production of detailed policy guidance to 
define the strategic, campaign, and operational objectives that 
the joint force must be ready to achieve, the implementation of 
the National Defense Strategy and associated campaign and 
contingency planning guidance, and the formulation of criteria 
that would be used to assess whether the joint force is, in 
fact, ready to achieve these results. As part of these duties, 
this Assistant Secretary would be responsible for conducting 
rigorous assessments of joint force performance through 
modeling and simulations, such as war games, and the 
observation of service and joint exercises.
    The Assistant Secretary's unique responsibility in matters 
of readiness is defining and assessing readiness ``outcomes,'' 
not measuring or collating readiness ``inputs.'' The committee 
believes that the latter function is of limited utility without 
the former and should be performed by other civilian officials 
in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Many of those 
duties, such as training policies, force education, and 
language instruction, are more accurately viewed as personnel 
matters and should be handled as such. Similarly, the committee 
believes that the Assistant Secretary should not be responsible 
for collating readiness reporting data and related functions 
that attempt to measure inputs that generate readiness. The 
committee views functions such as these as subordinate to the 
strategic matters of defining ``readiness for what?'' and 
expects the Secretary of Defense to realign these subordinate 
functions, as well as responsibility for them, based on the 
policy guidance that the Assistant Secretary produces on behalf 
of the Secretary to implement the National Defense Strategy.
    The committee strongly believes that the responsibility for 
strategy, plans, assessments, readiness, and capabilities are 
best performed within the Office of the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Policy, considering the critical linkages they 
share with the regional and functional defense policy issues 
for which the Under Secretary is also responsible. However, if 
these so-called ``outside the building'' duties continue to 
take precedence over the so-called ``inside the building'' 
duties detailed in this provision, the committee will seriously 
reevaluate whether the functions being assigned to this 
Assistant Secretary of Defense should instead be removed from 
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and 
vested in a senior official who reports directly to the 
Secretary of Defense.
Clarification of responsibilities and duties of the Chief Information 
        Officer of the Department of Defense (sec. 906)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
responsibilities and duties of the Chief Information Officer 
(CIO) of the Department of Defense by specifically delineating 
its authorities from those assigned to the Chief Management 
Officer (CMO) in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91).
    Section 910 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) designated the CMO as the 
CIO of the Department for the purposes of Defense business 
systems (10 U.S.C. 2222). The provision assigned the CMO the 
responsibility of administering the duties and responsibilities 
specified in sections 11315 and 11319 of title 40, section 
3506(a)(2) of title 44, and section 2223(a) of title 10 for 
business systems and management. The provision also assigned 
the CMO with any responsibilities, duties, and powers relating 
to business systems or management that are exercisable by a 
chief information officer for the Department, other than those 
responsibilities, duties, and powers of a chief information 
officer that are vested in the Chief Information Officer of the 
Department of Defense by section 142 of title 10, United States 
Code.
Specification of certain duties of the Defense Technical Information 
        Center (sec. 907)
    The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 
duties of the Defense Technical Information Center to include 
execution of the Global Research Watch program and the 
development and maintenance of datasets and data repositories 
on research and engineering activities. The provision also 
requires a plan for the assumption of these duties.
Limitation on termination of, and transfer of functions, 
        responsibilities, and activities of, the Strategic Capabilities 
        Office (sec. 908)
    The committee recommends a provision that would restrict 
the ability of the Secretary of Defense to terminate or 
transfer the functions of the Strategic Capabilities Office 
(SCO) until specific conditions are met and certified to the 
congressional defense committees. These conditions include a 
certification that the key functions of SCO will be preserved 
and a plan to replicate these functions elsewhere. The plan 
would also require a justification if the entity or transferred 
functions were to be managed outside of the Office of the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.
Technical corrections to Department of Defense Test Resource Management 
        Center authority (sec. 909)
    The committee recommends a provision that would align the 
reporting relationship of the Test Resource Management Center 
to the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, 
as a conforming change reflecting the disestablishment of the 
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics.

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

Modification of certain responsibilities of the Chairman of the Joint 
        Chiefs of Staff relating to joint force concept development 
        (sec. 921)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
role of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in developing 
joint capabilities. The provision would require the Chairman to 
expand concept development efforts to include short term 
challenges that could be addressed by joint concepts, as well 
as the long term issues the Joint Staff has traditionally 
considered.
    The committee recognizes that not all capability gaps can, 
or should, be addressed by procurement or additional end-
strength. Some challenges are best met through concept 
development efforts-especially joint concept development 
efforts where the capabilities of different Services are 
brought together to solve an operational challenge.
    The committee also recommends the Joint Staff focus on 
identifying current capability gaps that prevent the joint 
force from achieving the objectives of the National Defense 
Strategy and determining which of these gaps could potentially 
be addressed by new concepts utilizing existing joint force 
capabilities. The Joint Staff should also ensure that these new 
joint concepts are tested, assessed, and, if appropriate, 
fielded to support the joint force.
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity 
        Conflict review of United States Special Operations Command 
        (sec. 922)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
Intensity Conflict (ASD SOLIC), in coordination with the 
Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM), to conduct 
a comprehensive review of SOCOM for the purpose of ensuring 
that the institutional and operational capabilities of special 
operations forces (SOF) are appropriate to counter future 
threats across the spectrum of conflict.
    The committee notes that the National Defense Strategy re-
orients the way the Department of Defense is to prioritize its 
efforts in an increasingly complex and dangerous global 
security environment. A rising People's Republic of China and 
an increasingly belligerent Russian Federation are now the 
Department's top strategic priorities, while the Islamic 
Republic of Iran, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, 
and countering violent extremism remain enduring lines of 
effort.
    Over the last 16-plus years, SOCOM has largely focused its 
efforts on executing operations in support of the global 
countering violent extremism effort. As a result, SOCOM's 
organization, training, tactics, techniques, procedures, and 
the development and acquisition of capabilities has prioritized 
this mission set. While countering violent extremism will 
remain a persistent mission for SOF, the severity of the threat 
posed by China, Russia, and other adversarial states across the 
spectrum of conflict and the release of the National Defense 
Strategy represent an inflection point for the future of SOF.
    As such, the committee believes that the ASD SOLIC, 
consistent with his responsibilities under section 138 of title 
10, United States Code, to ``exercise authority, direction, and 
control of all special-operations peculiar administrative 
matters relating to the organization, training, and equipping 
of special operations forces,'' should use the review required 
by this section as an opportunity to conduct a baseline 
assessment of the SOF enterprise and provide a strategic vision 
for the future of the force in order to ensure it remains a 
relevant and lethal component of the joint force to counter 
emerging and future threats facing the Nation.
Qualifications for appointment as Deputy Chief Management Officer of a 
        military department (sec. 923)
    The committee recommends a provision that would create 
qualification criteria for military department Deputy Chief 
Management Officers to include either significant experience in 
business operations and management in the public sector or 
significant experience managing an enterprise in the private 
sector.
    The committee urges this change in accordance with the 
qualification requirements instituted for the Department of 
Defense Chief Management Officer and the Under Secretary of 
Defense (Comptroller) in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) and as part of the 
committee's broader focus on ensuring attention to management 
expertise across the Department of Defense.

Expansion of principal duties of Assistant Secretary of the Navy for 
        Research, Development, and Acquisition (sec. 924)

    The committee recommends a provision that would expand 
principal duties of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for 
Research, Development, and Acquisition to include sustainment, 
including maintenance, of weapons systems.

Cross-functional teams in the Department of Defense (sec. 925)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish three cross-functional teams 
as directed in section 911 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). 
These teams will focus, respectively, on electronic warfare, 
personnel security, and the lethality of close-combat units. 
The provision also would require the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense to establish or designate an office as the Office of 
Primary Responsibility for implementing section 911.
    Section 911 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) provided for the adoption 
of cross-functional teams (CFTs), an innovative management tool 
aimed at enabling the Secretary of Defense to better integrate 
across the functional silos of the Department of Defense to 
address the most complex challenges.
    The intent of this legislation was to provide a powerful 
tool of small teams of experts reporting regularly and directly 
to the Secretary that could directly shape creative solutions 
to pressing challenges the Department faces. CFTs have been 
thoroughly studied in academia, and are widely employed in the 
private sector, where they are used to integrate diverse 
capabilities in pursuit of solutions to a cross-cutting 
problem. Within the Department, these teams would bring 
together the expertise that resides in the functional 
organizations but would not be burdened by the parochial 
interests and agendas of these separate bureaucratic 
stovepipes. These CFTs would be able to avoid the consensus-
seeking, lowest-common-denominator behavior that traditionally 
plagues the working groups, integrated product teams, and 
committees that the Department routinely forms to address 
cross-cutting issues. These CFTs would be uniquely capable of 
implementing the solutions to these issues, based on their 
ability to wield limited executive authority delegated directly 
by the Secretary to ensure compliance and effective execution 
of approved plans.
    The committee's vision was that CFTs would foster jointness 
between the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint 
Staff, the Services, and the combatant commands the way that 
the Goldwater-Nichols Act instilled jointness among the 
military Services and the combatant commands in the operational 
sphere. Achieving collaborative processes and culture and an 
integrated mission focus within the Department has been a goal 
of the committee since the time that the Goldwater-Nichols Act 
was conceived.
    However, the committee is increasingly concerned that the 
Department is lagging in its implementation of the legislation. 
According to a review published by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) on February 28, 2018, titled ``DOD 
Needs to Take Additional Actions to Promote Department-Wide 
Collaboration'' (GAO-18-194), the Department has established 
only one CFT and has not released its guidance for CFTs or 
provided CFT training to appointees, among other elements 
required by statute to be completed last year. The Department 
has missed additional reporting and compliance deadlines also 
enumerated in the GAO report. Finally, the Department has not 
implemented recommendations from the study on best practices 
for CFTs that it commissioned earlier this year, including 
designating an office of primary responsibility or studying 
potential inclusion of service on CFTs as a condition for 
promotion.
    The committee appreciates the magnitude of change that the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public 
Law 114-328) mandated for the Department but continues to 
believe in the importance of promoting the cultural change 
enabled by CFTs across the Department. Only by integrating 
diverse expertise will the Department be able to meet its most 
pressing challenges. Therefore, the committee is directing that 
electronic warfare, personnel security, and close combat 
lethality be managed by CFTs, because of their high priority 
for the Department, and the complex, multi-functional nature of 
each program.
    The committee remains concerned that electronic warfare is 
a warfighting area where the Nation's peer adversaries, such as 
China and Russia, are establishing asymmetric advantages over 
U.S. forces. The Defense Science Board identified numerous 
vulnerabilities in the May 2015 Electronic Warfare assessment, 
and the Department attempted to address these in the June 2017 
Department of Defense Electronic Warfare Strategy. However, the 
Department continues to approach the electronic warfare mission 
area and electromagnetic spectrum operations in an 
uncoordinated and insufficient manner that risks lagging 
further behind adversary efforts. A separate provision 
addresses the need for a designated senior official and this 
cross-functional team to address this growing challenge with a 
road-map that includes: a review of the vulnerabilities 
identified in the May 2015 Electronic Warfare assessment; an 
assessment of the capability of U.S. forces to conduct joint 
electromagnetic spectrum operations against near-peer 
adversaries; and a description of actions, performance metrics, 
and projected timelines for achieving key capabilities for 
electronic warfare and joint electromagnetic spectrum 
operations. The road-map would also include an analysis of any 
personnel, resourcing, capability, authority, or other gaps to 
be addressed in order to ensure effective implementation of the 
strategy across all relevant elements of the Department. The 
committee therefore believes the alignment of the electronic 
warfare mission is an ideal task for a CFT. The committee 
encourages the Secretary to select the most knowledgeable 
individuals from the Services, the Joint Staff, U.S. Strategic 
Command, and the Offices of the Under Secretaries for Policy, 
Acquisition, and Sustainment, Research and Engineering, and 
Personnel to work full-time on this CFT.
    The committee is also committed to the success of the 
Department's personnel security mission and believes that it is 
another area ripe for CFT engagement. With the transfer of the 
background investigation function to the Department in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91), the Department will need to conduct a review of 
existing policies and procedures for background investigations, 
and insider threat detection and prevention, in favor of new 
technologies like continuous evaluation. The only way for this 
transition to be successful is to have representation from all 
elements of the Department engaged and for this group to have 
significant leadership backing. Therefore, the committee 
recommends this as the second area for CFT attention, with 
special focus on the transfer of investigation responsibility, 
the integration of the National Background Investigation 
Services system into this process, and the resourcing of this 
responsibility within the Department. In addition, this team 
should be tasked to develop a plan to transition the remaining 
workload and resources of the National Background 
Investigations Bureau from the Office of Personnel Management 
to the Department of Defense.
    The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense has 
created a ``cross-functional task force for close combat 
lethality'' that bears all of the features of a cross-
functional team as defined in section 911 and in the 
Department's independent study of best practices on cross-
functional teams. Given this congruity, the committee is 
concerned that the Secretary did not designate this task force 
as a cross-functional team for the purpose of responding to 
section 911 and believes that it should be recognized and 
managed as such. The committee does not believe that this 
designation requires any changes in the Task Force's 
organization, management, authorities, mission, or activities, 
nor does it carry any implications for the duration of the Task 
Force.
    With respect to the substantive work of this close combat 
lethality cross-functional team, the committee concurs in the 
Secretary's judgment that the proliferation of technology has 
eroded the comparative advantage of the United States' infantry 
close combat formations. The committee agrees also that the 
lethality and survivability of close combat formations is 
critical given that infantry formations have historically borne 
the majority of U.S. causalities in major conflicts despite 
comprising less than 5% of Department of Defense personnel. In 
light of the re-emergence of great power competition, it is 
appropriate for the Secretary to devote special attention to 
investments and reforms in infantry squad-level formations, 
including in personnel policies, training methods, human 
performance, and equipment. The committee is encouraged by the 
initial impact and workings of the CFT.
    The committee understands that the Secretary's CFT is 
developing the concept of the infantry as an exceptionally 
managed career field as well as the increase in cohesion, 
stability and lethality resident in conceptualizing the ``squad 
as a platform.'' The committee request that the Secretary 
notify the committee when the CFT is prepared to provide a 
briefing on the attendant policy, authorities and resources 
that would be required to realize these concepts.

Deadline for completion of full implementation of requirements in 
        connection with organization of the Department of Defense for 
        management of special operations forces and special operations 
        (sec. 926)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
full implementation of the reforms contained in section 922 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
(Public Law 114-328) not later than 90 days after enactment of 
this Act. The committee notes that this section included a 
number of reforms designed to empower the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict 
(ASD SOLIC) to act as the ``service secretary-like'' civilian 
responsible for exercising ``authority, direction and control 
of all special operations-peculiar administrative matters 
relating to the organization, training, and equipping of 
special operations forces (SOF).''
    The committee further notes that section 922 established a 
new administrative chain of command to facilitate the exercise 
of these responsibilities that runs from Commander, U.S. 
Special Operations Command (SOCOM) through the ASD SOLIC to the 
Secretary of Defense, thereby mirroring the relationship 
between the Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries. 
This reform was, in part, intended to address the fact that the 
ASD SOLIC's organizational location within the Office of the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P)) has resulted in 
the ASD SOLIC dedicating the preponderance of his time and 
resources to policy and operational issues at the expense of 
his ``service secretary-like'' responsibilities. The committee 
understands that the Department continues to consider options 
for implementing this administrative chain of command but 
reiterates its intent that the ASD SOLIC is empowered to act 
independent of, but in coordination with, the USD(P) in matters 
related to the organization, training, and equipping of special 
operations forces. This administrative chain of command is not 
intended to impact the relationship between the ASD SOLIC and 
USD(P) on policy matters relating to the employment of special 
operations forces and related authorities.
    The committee is concerned that, despite passage of Public 
Law 114-328 nearly 18 months ago, the implementation of the 
reforms contained in section 922 remain incomplete. According 
to a report required by section 1074 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), the 
Deputy Secretary of Defense directed the development of 
recommendations for implementation of these reforms, but no 
substantive actions have been taken since. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, beginning on July 
1, 2018, and continuing on the first day of every month 
thereafter until full implementation of the ASD SOLIC reforms, 
to provide the congressional defense committees with monthly 
progress reports on specific actions taken to institutionalize 
the ASD SOLIC's role in:
    (1) SOF programs and requirements, including SOCOM's 
Strategic Planning Process; the Global Force Management 
process; the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development 
System; the military construction decision process; and the 
process for development of campaign and posture plans;
    (2) SOF acquisition, technology, and logistics enterprise, 
including acquisition program management; science and 
technology program management; innovation; procurement; 
Services program management; logistics; materiel readiness; 
depot management; agile/specialized acquisition management; and 
supporting activities;
    (3) The Department of Defense's budgeting processes for 
special operations;
    (4) SOF personnel and readiness, including management of 
military and civilian personnel; readiness reporting; SOF-
peculiar initiatives (e.g., training education, warrior care); 
awards and decorations; and casualty notifications;
    (5) SOF special access programs, including programming and 
budgeting, acquisition, security, and oversight; and
    (6) Other matters including, but not limited to, 
legislative affairs, public affairs, general counsel, and 
inspector general-type functions.
    The committee further directs that the required reports 
provide benchmarks for achieving full implementation of the ASD 
SOLIC reforms in each of the six areas described above and an 
assessment of when each benchmark will be achieved. Elsewhere 
in this Act, the committee recommends a provision related to 
civilian staffing of the ASD SOLIC Secretariat for Special 
Operations.

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

Limitation on availability of funds for major headquarters activities 
        of the Department of Defense (sec. 931)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 2 of title 10, United States Code, to limit the amount 
of funds available for major headquarters activities (MHA) 
within the Department of Defense (DOD). Beginning in fiscal 
year 2020, the provision would prohibit the DOD from spending 
more than 1.6 percent of the 10-year average of the DOD budget 
on MHA.
    Of the funds authorized to be spent on MHA, no more than 
0.4 percent of the Department's 10-year budget average shall be 
available for Office of the Secretary of Defense MHA entities. 
Additionally, within the total funds available for MHA, 1 
percent of the 10-year average of each military department 
budget shall be available for the MHA requirements of each 
military department concerned.
    Any remaining funds available for MHA requirements may be 
distributed to any MHA organization within the Department of 
Defense, with the exception of MHA organizations within the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense. Combatant command MHA 
requirements will be funded out of these remaining resources.
    The committee notes that this provision aligns the DOD with 
private sector best management practices. Managing overhead and 
headquarters through realistic budgetary percentage targets 
allows for appropriate flexibility and also ensures a 
predictable distribution of resources to various MHA entities. 
The budget percentage limitations included in this provision 
were deliberately selected to achieve two primary objectives. 
First, these percentages achieve the desired MHA reductions 
originally installed by section 346 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92). 
Second, the selected percentages are realistic targets based on 
historical MHA spending levels. A 10-year average of budget 
levels was utilized to insulate the Department from rapid year-
to-year swings in funding.

Responsibility for policy on civilian casualty matters (sec. 932)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to designate a senior 
civilian official of the Department of Defense at the level of 
Assistant Secretary of Defense or above to develop, coordinate, 
and oversee compliance with the policy of the Department 
relating to civilian casualties resulting from U.S. military 
operations. Additionally, the provision would require the 
senior civilian official so designated to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report that describes the 
policies developed under this section and the efforts of the 
Department to implement those policies.

Additional matters in connection with background and security 
        investigations for Department of Defense personnel (sec. 933)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to report on the number of denials or 
revocations of a security clearance that occurred separately 
from a periodic reinvestigation. The provision also includes a 
sense of Congress that adjudication decisions from personnel 
security investigations should be communicated in a transparent 
manner to ensure public trust.

Program of expedited security clearances for mission-critical positions 
        (sec. 934)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Director of National Intelligence to establish within 90 days 
of enactment of this Act a program for mission-critical 
positions, fulfilled by either government or contract 
employees, to complete the processing of an application for a 
clearance within a designated timeline.

Information sharing program for positions of trust (sec. 935)

    The committee recommends a provision that requires the 
Director of National Intelligence to establish within 90 days 
of enactment of this Act a program to share information, to 
include derogatory and suitability information, with 
appropriate safeguards for privacy, between and among 
government agencies and industry partners regarding individuals 
applying for and in positions of trust.

Report on clearance in person concept (sec. 936)

    The committee recommends a provision that requires the 
Director of National Intelligence to provide, within 90 days of 
enactment of this Act, a report on the requirements, 
feasibility, and advisability of implementing a ``clearance in 
person'' concept for maintaining access to classified 
information.

Strategic Defense Fellows Program (sec. 937)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish, within 1 year of the date of 
the enactment of this Act, the Strategic Defense Fellows 
Program within the Department of Defense (DOD) to provide 
leadership development and the commencement of a career track 
toward senior leadership in the Department. The provision would 
prescribe eligibility, application, selection, assignment, 
term, and certain pay and benefit requirements for prospective 
fellows. Additionally, the provision would require the 
Secretary to ensure fellows receive opportunities and support 
appropriate for commencement of a career track within the DOD 
that could lead to a future position of senior leadership 
within the Department.
    The budget request included $1.5 billion in the Operation 
and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (SAG 4GTN). The amount authorized to be 
appropriated for OMDW includes the following changes from the 
budget request.

                    [Changes in millions of dollars]
 
 
 
Strategic Defense Fellows Program.....................             +10.0
 

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Analysis of Department of Defense business management and operations 
        datasets to promote savings and efficiencies (sec. 941)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Chief Management Officer to develop a policy on the analysis of 
Department of Defense datasets on business management and 
operations and to pilot three to five of these previously non-
public datasets under that policy. These datasets would come 
from business operations-related systems.
    The committee believes that the Department of Defense 
should be seeking to effectively leverage analytic methods or 
techniques outside of the Federal Government in order to face 
its most pressing challenges. In discharging this project, the 
Secretary of Defense should exercise appropriate caution in 
excising any personal information or sensitive security 
information from public exposure.

Research and development to advance capabilities of the Department of 
        Defense in data integration and advanced analytics in 
        connection with personnel security (sec. 942)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence to conduct research 
and development efforts on continuous evaluation and personnel 
security.
    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense 
(DOD), through the Defense Security Service, has been 
researching continuous evaluation technologies and approaches 
for some time. Though DOD is exploiting some commercial 
technologies, these efforts have largely built upon government 
developed tools from entities like the Defense Manpower Data 
Center and Defense Personnel and Security Research Center. 
These efforts have occurred under significant time pressure 
given the impending transfer of responsibilities for personnel 
security investigations from the National Background 
Investigation Bureau to DOD and have been rightly focused on 
creating minimally viable products that can quickly scale.
    However, the committee urges DOD to direct some limited 
additional research and development resources toward this 
problem in order to leverage and incorporate leading-edge 
technologies that may exist only in the commercial sector. The 
committee appreciates the urgency surrounding this effort, but 
believes in the critical importance of going beyond a simple 
evolution of existing technology to instead seek a ``step 
change'' in capability that will radically improve the 
personnel security process. Access to these leading edge 
capabilities will be enhanced through collaboration with the 
Defense Digital Service and the Defense Innovation Board. The 
Director of National Intelligence, in the role of Security 
Executive Agent, should be involved in these efforts and made 
aware of changes to continuous evaluation or personnel security 
procedures proposed by DOD.

                       Items of Special Interest

Department of Defense personnel security resourcing plans and needs

    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Intelligence, in coordination with the Chief Management 
Officer, to submit a report on the resource and workforce 
requirements necessary for implementing section 925 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91). The committee seeks to understand, in particular, 
the investigative capacity needs that will be required to 
complete this mission. Accurate and reliable estimates of the 
current contract and government capabilities that can be tapped 
to execute these missions will become even more critical after 
these changes. The committee is concerned that the personnel 
security community has long lacked accurate estimates of 
capacity which has led to increased backlogs.
    Moreover, as the Department ramps up its efforts in 
continuous evaluation and insider threat capabilities, the 
workforce needs and skills required to complete background 
investigations will shift. This shift may require increased 
capacity from functions outside of traditional security, like 
human resources. Therefore, the report should also include a 
proposal for the Department of Defense's path forward in order 
to fully tap both government and industry capacity given 
advances in technology. The committee further directs the 
Department to include within this report information on the use 
of 1099s for federal background investigations.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Intelligence submit this report to the relevant congressional 
defense committees and intelligence committees not more than 
180 days after enactment of this Act.

Department of Defense security clearance responsibilities

    The committee understands that the administration has 
decided to transfer to the Department of Defense (DOD) the 
remaining responsibilities of the Office of Personnel 
Management's National Background Investigations Bureau for 
conducting background investigations for non-DOD Federal 
employees. Independent of this decision, the committee remains 
concerned by the backlog in background investigations and re-
investigations which creates security risks for the government, 
harms the government's ability to recruit high-quality 
personnel, and wastes resources annually as employees are 
sidelined waiting for clearances. At the same time, the 
committee fully recognizes the necessity for a consistent, 
reliable, judicious, and thorough investigation and 
adjudication process.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to present to the appropriate committees a plan for assuming 
all background investigation responsibilities for the federal 
government no later than 90 days after the enactment of this 
Act. The plan should explain how DOD will manage the transition 
while modernizing the investigation process and reducing the 
backlog. The plan should include an estimate of the time and 
resources required to eliminate the backlog and any additional 
authorities needed in order to carry out this mission.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Arctic

    The committee notes 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 zones of the United States and other 
potential threats and challenges to United States sovereignty.
    The committee notes that the Russian Federation has 
aggressively focused on the development of Arctic capabilities 
and has made significant investments in military infrastructure 
in the Arctic. The committee further notes that Secretary of 
Defense James Mattis has stated, ``The Arctic is key strategic 
terrain. . . Russia is taking aggressive steps to increase its 
presence there. . . I will prioritize the development of an 
integrated strategy for the Arctic. I believe that our 
interests and the security of the Arctic would benefit from 
increasing the focus of the Department of Defense on this 
region.''
    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, 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. Exacerbating the operational seam is the 
fact that, within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, there 
is no single person directly responsible for the coordination 
of Arctic security issues. The committee is concerned that no 
one combatant command nor one single entity within the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense is tasked with operationalizing the 
Department of Defense's 2016 Arctic Strategy.
    Therefore, the committee urges 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 
that 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. Not 
later than December 1, 2018, the committee directs the 
Secretary to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees on how the Department plans to delegate and address 
these responsibilities.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

General transfer authority (sec. 1001)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $4.5 billion of fiscal 
year 2019 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.
Inclusion of funds for Air Force pass-through items in Defense-wide 
        budget for the Department of Defense (sec. 1002)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to transfer Air Force pass-through budget 
items to the defense-wide budget for fiscal year 2020 and 
future budget requests.
    Each year, a significant portion of the Air Force budget 
contains funds that are passed on to, and managed by, other 
organizations with in the Department of Defense. This portion 
of the budget, called ``pass-through,'' cannot be altered or 
managed by the Air Force. It resides within the Air Force 
budget for the purposes of the President's budget request and 
apportionment, but is then transferred out of the Service's 
control. In fiscal year 2018, the Air Force pass-through budget 
amounted to approximately $22.0 billion, or just less than half 
of the total Air Force procurement budget. The committee 
believes that the current Air Force pass-through budgeting 
process provides a misleading picture of the Air Force's actual 
investment budget.
Report on shift in requests for funds for Department of Defense 
        activities from funds for overseas contingency operations to 
        funds through the base budget (sec. 1003)
    The Department of Defense and the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) have both stated their intentions to shift funding 
in the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) accounts to base 
funding starting in fiscal year 2020. According to the OMB, the 
Department will be shifting $53.0 billion of the $73.0 billion 
of OCO funding to base in fiscal year 2020. The shift of OCO to 
base funding is an attempt by the Department and the OMB to 
move enduring costs associated with overseas contingencies back 
to the base budget. The committee supports a shift of OCO to 
base if there is a comparable increase in the overall base 
topline and if it is done in a responsible manner that does not 
put at risk future funding for key programs, such as preferred 
munitions or the European Deterrence Initiative.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision requiring 
the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to submit a report 
that outlines the changes to the OMB OCO criteria and lists the 
exact figure amounts by project or activity that are shifted 
from OCO to base funding for the fiscal year 2020 budget 
request.
Ranking of auditability of financial statements of the organizations 
        and elements of the Department of Defense (sec. 1004)
    The committee recommends a provision that would reinstate a 
reporting requirement that the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Comptroller) rank the military departments, Defense Agencies, 
and Field Activities in terms of audit progress.
Transparency of accounting firms used to support Department of Defense 
        audit (sec. 1005)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to mandate that any firm under contract or 
consideration to support the Department of Defense's (DOD) full 
financial statement audit provide a statement documenting any 
relevant disciplinary proceedings currently in progress 
involving that firm.
    The committee notes that in order to complete the first 
full financial statement audit of DOD, the Department will be 
required to contract with accounting firms. However, the 
committee urges the Department to create policies on disclosure 
of any relevant proceedings that such firms are involved in, in 
order to ensure that the firms are best qualified and 
positioned to provide sound audit advice. The committee urges 
the Department to consider such results and to look for an 
unqualified peer review report when selecting a partner, in 
order to ensure effective counsel on quality control processes 
and audits.

                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

Date of listing of vessels as battle force ships in the Naval Vessel 
        Register and other fleet inventory measures (sec. 1011)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
date of listing of vessels as battle force ships in the Naval 
Vessel Register and other fleet inventory measures.
Annual reports on examination of Navy vessels (sec. 1012)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require an 
annual unclassified report from the President of the Board of 
Inspection and Survey that would provide an unclassified 
summary of inspection results for each fiscal year, including a 
narrative summary, vessels inspected, and material readiness 
trends.
Limitation on duration of homeporting of certain vessels in foreign 
        locations (sec. 1013)
    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
overseas homeport duration of certain ship classes to not more 
than 10 consecutive years.
    The committee notes the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) published a report on May 29, 2015, titled ``Sustainable 
Plan and Comprehensive Assessment Needed to Mitigate Long-Term 
Risks to Ships Assigned to Overseas Homeports'' (GAO-15-329), 
which concluded that ``overseas-homeported ships have had lower 
material condition since 2012 and experienced a worsening trend 
in overall ship readiness when compared to U.S.-homeported 
ships'' and ``because the Navy expects [overseas-homeported] 
ships to be operationally available for the maximum amount of 
time, their intermediate and depot-level maintenance is instead 
executed through more frequent, shorter maintenance periods, or 
deferred until after the ship returns to a U.S. homeport, 
according to Navy officials.''
    The committee further notes this GAO report states, 
``According to Navy officials, forward-deployed ships are 
typically homeported overseas for a period of 7 to 10 years 
before being replaced with a ship of the same class from the 
United States'' and that the Chief of Naval Operations 
testified on January 18, 2018 before the Committee on Armed 
Services of the House of Representatives that his goal was 
overseas homeporting of not more than 8 years for a ship.
    The committee understands the USS Fitzgerald and USS John 
S. McCain were initially homeported in Yokosuka, Japan in 2004 
(13 years ago) and 1997 (20 years ago), respectively. The 
committee further understands other ships have exceeded the 
Navy's overseas homeporting goals, including the USS Curtis 
Wilber, which has been homeported in Yokosuka since 1996 (21 
years).

Specific authorization requirement for nuclear refueling of aircraft 
        carriers (sec. 1014)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
specific authorization by statute before funds may be obligated 
or expended for the procurement of a naval nuclear reactor 
power unit or associated reactor components for the nuclear 
refueling of an aircraft carrier.
    The committee notes that the procurement lead time for some 
nuclear components required to conduct a nuclear refueling 
precedes the authorization for the associated aircraft carrier 
refueling by several years.
    Accordingly, in order to maintain appropriate oversight of 
program execution, the committee believes that the Department 
of Defense should obtain a specific authorization for such 
nuclear components.

Dismantlement and disposal of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers (sec. 
        1015)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
report be submitted to the congressional defense committees 
prior to awarding a contract for dismantlement and disposal of 
a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier or providing funding to a 
naval shipyard for dismantlement and disposal of a nuclear-
powered aircraft carrier.
    The provision would also require additional information be 
provided on the dismantlement and disposal of nuclear-powered 
aircraft carriers with the materials submitted to the Congress 
by the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget of the 
President for each fiscal year.
    The committee notes that in response to the Senate report 
accompanying S. 1519 (S. Rept. 115-125) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) the 
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has briefed the 
committee on the Navy's considerations for the dismantlement 
and disposal of the ex-USS Enterprise nuclear-powered aircraft 
carrier.
    The committee further notes GAO's preliminary analysis 
indicates that the anticipated cost and schedule for 
dismantlement and disposal of the Navy's nuclear-powered 
aircraft carriers are comparable to large Department of Defense 
(DOD) acquisition programs, which have structured oversight to 
support transparency and accountability; however, ship 
dismantlement and disposal has no specific reporting 
requirements under DOD or Navy policy.
    The committee believes information provided on 
dismantlement and disposal as part of annual budget requests 
currently lacks sufficient detail to inform oversight of ship-
specific activities. As the Navy has yet to dismantle and 
dispose of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the committee 
further believes establishing formal requirements will set a 
precedent to enable sufficient oversight for these large-scale 
dismantlement and disposal efforts.

National Defense Sealift Fund (sec. 1016)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2218 of title 10, United States Code, to increase the 
number of used vessels, from two to seven, that the Secretary 
of Defense is authorized to purchase as part of a program to 
recapitalize the surge sealift capability in the Ready Reserve 
Force component of the National Defense Reserve Fleet and the 
Military Sealift Command's surge fleet. This proposal would 
also limit the time period during which such vessels could be 
purchased to fiscal years 2019 through 2030.
    Based on the Navy's fiscal year 2019 30-year shipbuilding 
plan, the committee understands that meeting the full sealift 
recapitalization requirement would entail procuring 26 used 
vessels through fiscal year 2031. The committee notes that 
authority to procure seven used vessels would be sufficient to 
meet sealift recapitalization requirements through fiscal year 
2025. In order to maintain oversight of this program while 
allowing the Department to plan for the entire future years 
defense program, the committee believes that authority to 
procure such vessels should not exceed seven years.

Limitation on use of funds for retirement of hospital ships (sec. 1017)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
use of funds for the purpose of retiring or preparing to retire 
a hospital ship.
    The committee notes the Navy plans to decommission the USNS 
Comfort hospital ship in fiscal year 2021, which would decrease 
the Navy's hospital ship capacity by 50 percent, without a plan 
programmed in the future years defense program to replace the 
associated medical capability and capacity.

                      Subtitle C--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. 1021)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2019, 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 of prohibition on use of funds to construct or modify 
        facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred 
        from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 
        1022)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2019, 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 of prohibition on use of funds for transfer or release of 
        individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo 
        Bay, Cuba, to certain countries (sec. 1023)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until December 31, 2019, 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 to close or relinquish control 
        of United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (sec. 
        1024)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until fiscal year 2019, 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. 1025)

    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 D--Miscellaneous Authorities and Limitations

Strategic guidance documents within the Department of Defense (sec. 
        1031)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 113(g) of title 10, United States Code, to identify and 
clarify three strategic guidance documents that support and 
implement the National Defense Strategy, as well as describing 
the elements to be included in each document. It would also 
require the Secretary of Defense to submit these strategic 
documents to the congressional defense committees.
    In 2016, the committee acted to revitalize the Department 
of Defense's strategy development process. The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) 
replaced the Quadrennial Defense Review with a framework for a 
more coherent and comprehensive National Defense Strategy. The 
committee applauds the Secretary of Defense's efforts in 
crafting the National Defense Strategy.
    The committee recognizes that the ultimate success of the 
National Defense Strategy will depend on how it is implemented 
by strong civilian leadership in the Department of Defense, and 
the rigorous oversight of the Congress. In order to ensure that 
the congressional defense committees have the necessary 
information to perform necessary oversight of the Department of 
Defense's implementation of the National Defense Strategy, the 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to submit, to 
the congressional defense committees, the three strategic 
guidance documents which contain the policy direction for 
executing the strategy: the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG), 
the Contingency Planning Guidance (CPG)/Guidance for the 
Employment of the Force (GEF), and the Global Defense Posture 
Report.
    The DPG establishes goals, priorities, and objectives, 
including fiscal constraints, to direct the preparation and 
review of the program and budget recommendations of all 
elements of the Department. The CPG/GEF provides policy 
guidance on the preparation and review of contingency and 
campaign plans, which drive requirements for the Department's 
program and budget requests. The Global Defense Posture Report 
includes a description of U.S. forces, capabilities, and 
equipment assigned and allocated outside of the United States 
required to execute the strategy.
    These strategic guidance documents set forth the Secretary 
of Defense's policy guidance as to what the Department should 
buy for the joint force, how the joint force is to be used, and 
where the joint force is to be postured around the world in 
order to execute the National Defense Strategy. These are 
fundamental issues subject to the oversight of the 
congressional defense committees. Therefore, the committee 
believes it is both necessary and appropriate that the 
Secretary of Defense should submit these documents to the 
congressional defense committees.

Guidance on the electronic warfare mission area and joint 
        electromagnetic spectrum operations (sec. 1032)

    The committee remains concerned that electronic warfare is 
a warfighting area where our peer adversaries, such as China 
and Russia, are establishing significant asymmetric advantages. 
The Defense Science Board identified numerous vulnerabilities 
in the May 2015 Electronic Warfare assessment, and the 
Department attempted to address these in the June 2017 
Department of Defense Electronic Warfare Strategy. However the 
committee assesses that the Department continues to approach 
the electronic warfare mission area and joint electromagnetic 
spectrum operations in an insufficient and uncoordinated manner 
that risks the joint force lagging further behind our peer 
competitor efforts.
    The provision would establish a senior designated official 
and an associated cross functional team to update the June 2017 
Department of Defense Electronic Warfare strategy and submit 
it, along with a road map of the referenced requirements and 
plans, not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act 
to the congressional defense committees. The road map would 
include: the efforts undertaken in support of the 2017 DOD 
Electronic Warfare strategy and any updates or changes to the 
strategy since its issuance; a review of the vulnerabilities 
identified in the May 2015 Electronic Warfare assessment; an 
assessment of the capability of the joint force to conduct 
joint electromagnetic spectrum operations against peer 
competitors; and a description of actions, performance metrics, 
and projected timelines for achieving key capabilities for 
electronic warfare and joint electromagnetic spectrum 
operations. The road map would also include an analysis of any 
personnel, resourcing, capability, authority, or other gaps to 
be addressed in order to ensure effective implementation of the 
strategy across all relevant elements of the Department.
    Additionally, in consultation with the Director of the 
Defense Intelligence Agency, the cross functional team would 
provide an assessment of the electronic warfare capabilities of 
Russia and China, a review of U.S. vulnerabilities with respect 
to electronic systems, and a study of the manner in which 
Russia and China develop electronic warfare doctrine, with 
order of battle across multiple domains, and long-term research 
trends of each country in connection with such warfare.
    The senior designated official would also be required to 
submit to the congressional defense committees an update 
describing the status of the efforts of the Department in 
accomplishing the tasks specified in the electronic warfare 
strategy and the road map every 90 days after the initial 
report is released.

Limitation on use of funds for United States Special Operations Command 
        Global Messaging and Counter-Messaging platform (sec. 1033)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
for United States Special Operations Command's (SOCOM) global 
messaging and counter-messaging (GMCM) platform until the 
Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense 
committees a report containing detailed information relating to 
the platform and SOCOM's military information support 
enterprise.
    The committee notes that the budget request includes $18.0 
million in Operations and Maintenance, Defense-wide, and $7.0 
million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for SOCOM's GMCM platform. 
The committee understands that the Secretary of Defense has 
identified SOCOM as the Department of Defense's (DOD) proponent 
for military information support operations (MISO) and directed 
the establishment of a centralized DOD MISO GMCM platform at 
SOCOM. Given SOCOM's transregional approach to matters within 
its purview, the committee believes the command is positioned 
to play an important role in supporting the GMCM activities of 
the other combatant commands by enabling facilities and 
contracting efficiencies, the capture and adoption of best 
practices, and messaging consistency across geographic 
boundaries. However, the budget request lacks sufficient detail 
on the plan for establishment of the GMCM capability, including 
the identification of budget, infrastructure and equipment 
requirements for the platform to reach full operational 
capability as well as an identification of long-term 
sustainment costs. Additionally, the committee requires greater 
understanding of how GMCM planning and activities will be de-
conflicted and, where possible, integrated with the planning 
and activities of the combatant commands as well as other 
relevant departments and agencies of the United States 
Government, including the Department of State's Global 
Engagement Center.
    Lastly, the committee is concerned that the doctrine, 
organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, 
personnel and facilities applicable to military information 
support capabilities has not kept pace with emerging challenges 
and opportunities in the information environment. Specifically, 
the committee believes the MISO enterprise remains too focused 
on tactical activities using traditional media and has not 
evolved to adequately counter adversary messaging through 
social media and other modern forms of communication. The 
committee notes that the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) ``Web 
Ops'' capability was established to counter online propaganda 
of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and is the predecessor 
to the proposed SOCOM GMCM platform. Despite the existence of a 
military information support military occupational specialty 
for decades, the MISO enterprise played only a minimal, 
supporting role in the activities of the CENTCOM Web Ops 
platform. The committee believes this situation is symptomatic 
of broader deficiencies in the MISO enterprise. Therefore, the 
recommended provision requires the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a review of the doctrine, organization, training, 
materiel, leadership and education, personnel and facilities 
applicable to military information support capabilities with a 
goal of improving the capabilities of the MISO enterprise to 
more effectively operate in the information environment against 
both state and non-state actors.

Sense of Congress on the basing of KC-46A aircraft outside the 
        continental United States (sec. 1034)

    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.

Relinquishment of legislative jurisdiction of criminal offenses 
        committed by juveniles on military installations (sec. 1035)

    The committee recommends a provision that, in the case of 
any military installation or portion of a military installation 
of which exclusive legislative jurisdiction of criminal 
offenses committed by juveniles is retained by the United 
States as of the date of the enactment of this Act, would 
require the relevant service secretary to seek to relinquish to 
the State, Commonwealth, territory, or possession concerned 
legislative jurisdiction of such offenses such that the United 
States and the State, Commonwealth, territory, or possession 
would have concurrent legislative jurisdiction of such 
offenses.

Policy on response to juvenile-on-juvenile abuse committed on military 
        installations (sec. 1036)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a policy, applicable across 
the military installations of the Department of Defense, on the 
response of the Department to allegations of juvenile-on-
juvenile abuse on military installations.

                    Subtitle E--Studies and Reports

Report on highest-priority roles and missions of the Department of 
        Defense and the Armed Forces (sec. 1041)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees concerning a re-evaluation of the highest 
priority missions for the Department of Defense, the roles of 
the Joint Force in the performance of such missions, and the 
capability requirements which stem from them. The required 
report, due February 2019, includes a series of questions 
further inquiring about the specific impacts of the National 
Defense Strategy on the Department of Defense.
    Over the years, the committee has received briefings and 
testimony describing the degrading state of U.S. military 
capabilities vis-a-vis peer adversaries. The reasons for this 
are numerous: unstable budgets, sustained high operational 
tempo, as well as increased investments in military 
capabilities of adversaries. The committee has been concerned 
about the state of U.S. overmatch for several years and 
believes that changing this trend is a high priority for the 
Department.
    For this reason, the committee believes that the National 
Defense Strategy correctly characterizes the leading strategic 
challenge facing the United States as the reemergence of great 
power competition. Furthermore, the NDS prioritizes the 
development of a more lethal joint force to deter, and if 
necessary, defeat aggression by peer-adversaries. The committee 
is supportive of efforts by the Department, to implement the 
NDS. However, as the Commission on the National Defense 
Strategy recommends, the Department must conduct further 
analytical work to identify the specifics of how the NDS will 
be implemented.
    The reporting requirement poses ten overarching questions 
that the committee believes are natural issues that arise from 
the change in priorities identified in the NDS. Those questions 
include such things as an update to the roles and missions of 
the military services, how the NDS impacts the military's end 
strength requirements, how the military will be conducting the 
counterterrorism mission, and how capability requirements and 
investments throughout the Joint Force are impacted by focusing 
on peer-adversaries and operating in a contested environment. 
These questions are key for the committee to better understand 
the implications of the NDS, and better facilitates the 
committee to perform oversight over budgetary authorizations.
    As related to this reporting requirement, the committee 
recommends several provisions that would limit the obligation 
and expenditure of authorized funding for various programs, 
until this reporting requirement is met.

Annual reports by the Armed Forces on Out-Year Unconstrained Total 
        Munitions Requirements and Out-Year inventory numbers (sec. 
        1042)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend title 
10 to require the Services provide an annual report to the 
Congress detailing the Armed Forces' annual total munitions 
requirements and out-year munitions inventory numbers. The 
details of the report would be based on the Department of 
Defense's munitions requirements process.

Comprehensive review of operational and administrative chains-of-
        command and functions of the Department of the Navy (sec. 1043)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to conduct a comprehensive review of the 
operational and administrative chains-of-command and functions 
in the Department of the Navy.

Military aviation readiness review in support of the National Defense 
        Strategy (sec. 1044)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a joint review of military 
aviation and deliver an accompanying report to the Committees 
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives no later than 1 year after the enactment of 
this Act.

Report on capabilities and capacities of Armored Brigade Combat Teams 
        (sec. 1045)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
report on the capabilities and capacity of Armored Brigades 
Combat Teams (ABCT) no later than 60 days after the enactment 
of this bill into law.
    The committee notes that the Army has taken action to 
improve readiness over the last several years, but the focus 
has been primarily on infantry brigade combat teams (IBCT). In 
light of requirements in the National Defense Strategy (NDS), 
the committee would like to know the total number of ABCTs 
required to support the NDS and how the Army will equip and 
field future ABCTs. Furthermore, if current levels of 
mechanized infantry are insufficient to maintain the combined 
arms nature of the ABCTs, the committee would like to 
understand how the Army will address the need for additional 
mechanized infantry companies. In addition, the committee would 
like to understand how the Army is improving battalion and 
brigade-level combined arms live-fire exercises both at home 
station and at the Combat Training Centers. The committee would 
like to know what training is being conducted for ABCTs in 
combined arms for air defense and counter unmanned aerial 
vehicles missions with organic weapons and tactics. The 
Secretary should also report plans for improving personnel 
preparedness by the reduction of non-deployable soldiers, 
combat vehicle crew stability, and the material readiness of 
key combat systems.
    The committee notes that several key combat systems, such 
as Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, Paladin howitzers, 
and M88 recovery vehicles, have unacceptably high non-mission 
capable rates due to the lack of repair parts and number of 
qualified mechanics. The Secretary is encouraged to provide a 
status update on the mission capable rates of these key combat 
systems and explain the Army's plan to repair these 
deficiencies. Finally, the report should outline plans to 
modernize ABCTs to fill capability gaps, improve key weapon 
systems and ensure effective, suitable and survivable mobile 
command, control and communications.

Improvement of annual report on civilian casualties in connection with 
        United States military operations (sec. 1046)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1057 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to clarify annual 
reporting requirements on civilian casualties in connection 
with United States military operations.

Report on Department of Defense participation in Export Administration 
        Regulations license application review process (sec. 1047)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report on the participation 
by the Department of Defense in the process for reviewing 
applications for export licenses under the Export 
Administration Regulations as a reviewing agency under 
Executive Order 12981. The provision would require that the 
report be submitted to the congressional defense committees not 
later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act and every 
180 days thereafter until the date that is 3 years after such 
date of enactment.

Automatic sunset for future statutory reporting requirements (sec. 
        1048)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
an automatic sunset of three years for future statutory 
reporting requirements of indefinite duration. The committee 
notes that excess reporting requirements impose costs on the 
Department of Defense that compound over time and three years 
would provide adequate time to determine the necessity of a 
reporting requirement and to request an extension for those 
requirements that continue to serve an important purpose to the 
committee's oversight role.

Repeal of certain Department of Defense reporting requirements that 
        otherwise terminate as of December 31, 2021 (sec. 1049)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
certain Department of Defense reporting requirements that are 
otherwise set to terminate as of December 31, 2021. The 
committee notes that the included reports have served their 
oversight purpose and will be repealed so as to reduce the 
burden placed on the Department of Defense by compounding 
reporting requirements, which drive up costs and distract 
offices from their primary missions.

Report on potential improvements to certain military educational 
        institutions of the Department of Defense (sec. 1050)

    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 December 1, 2019, reviewing educational 
institutions of the Department of Defense. The review would be 
conducted by an outside organization with expertise in 
analyzing matters in connection with higher education.

Recruiting costs of the Armed Forces (sec. 1051)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
on the costs of recruiting for the Armed Forces.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

Authority to transfer funds for Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup (sec. 1061)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds to the Secretary of 
State for the Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup in Vietnam. Since the 
normalization of U.S.-Vietnam relations in 1995, the United 
States and Vietnam have made remarkable progress in 
transcending the legacy of war and building a strategic 
partnership to defend shared interests and common values. The 
committee recognizes that the Bien Hoa dioxin cleanup--carried 
out with financial contributions from the Government of 
Vietnam, the Department of State, the Department of Defense, 
and other international partners--would be another significant 
milestone in the progress of U.S.-Vietnam relations and would 
support the continued advancement of a strategic partnership 
rooted in a shared vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific 
region that is peaceful, stable, and prosperous.

Improvement of database on emergency response capabilities (sec. 1062)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1406 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) to require the Department 
of Defense (DOD) to establish the database required under that 
section not later than one year after the date of enactment of 
this Act. Furthermore, the provision would require the database 
to include information on the emergency response capabilities 
of the National Guard of each U.S. Territory and information on 
the cyber capabilities of National Guard and Reserve units 
identified by the DOD as critical for response to domestic 
natural or man-made disasters. Finally, the provision would 
clarify that the Department may use an existing database or 
system to fulfill the requirement to establish a database under 
certain circumstances.

Acceptance and distribution by Department of Defense of assistance from 
        certain nonprofit entities in support of missions of deployed 
        United States personnel around the world (sec. 1063)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate regarding collaboration with and the 
provision of logistical support to covered non-Federal 
entities, including Spirit of America, to advance the military 
missions of the Armed Forces.
    The provision would also authorize the Department of 
Defense, consistent with applicable guidance, to accept from 
any covered non-Federal entity privately funded humanitarian, 
economic, and other nonlethal assistance; and respond to 
requests from covered non-Federal entities for the 
identification of the needs of local populations abroad for 
assistance, and coordinate with such entities in the provision 
and distribution of such assistance.

United States policy with respect to freedom of navigation and 
        overflight (sec. 1064)

    The committee recommends a provision that would state 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 provision would also describe the 
steps the Secretary of Defense should take in furtherance of 
that policy.

Prohibition of funds for Chinese language instruction provided by a 
        Confucius Institute (sec. 1065)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise 
made available for fiscal year 2019 under this Act to be 
obligated or expended for Chinese language instruction provided 
by a Confucius Institute.
    The provision would also prohibit funds authorized to be 
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal 
year 2019 under this Act to be obligated or expended to support 
a Chinese language program at an institution of higher 
education that hosts a Confucius Institute. The provision would 
allow the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness to waive this limitation if the Under Secretary 
provides a certification to the congressional defense 
committees that, among other elements, Confucius Institute 
employees and instructors will have no affiliation with the 
program, provide no instruction or support to the program, and 
have no authority or influence with regard to the curriculum 
and activities of the program.

                       Items of Special Interest

Audit materiality standards relating to valuation

    The committee commends the Department of Defense (DOD) on 
beginning its first department-wide financial audit. The 
committee views the audit as vital to the health of Department 
finances and business-related activities which directly impact 
our national security. In order to achieve maximum benefit from 
conducting an annual full financial audit, the Department must 
exercise continued transparency to this committee and to the 
American people.
    The committee understands that the Department is still 
developing materiality standards regarding property, plant, and 
equipment valuation for the department-wide audit. The 
committee also understands that judgments about materiality 
standards for valuation have been developed and used by other 
government entities and large private companies in the process 
of achieving an unqualified audit opinion.
    Materiality standards and thresholds are critical factors 
in the conduct and results of a full financial audit. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Department to provide an 
update on their assertions regarding materiality standards 
relating to valuation within the department-wide audit in order 
to promote necessary transparency and accountability by 
December 31, 2018.

Business case analysis for the 168th Air Refueling Wing

    The committee notes that the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291) required the Secretary of the 
Air Force to conduct a business case analysis on the creation 
of an Active Duty association for the 168th Air Refueling Wing. 
However, the committee notes that since the prescribed analysis 
was completed in December 2016, two important developments have 
occurred that were not taken into account. First, consideration 
of the addition of two F-35A squadrons at Eielson Air Force 
Base, Alaska, in 2020, and an examination of future shortfalls 
in air refueling requirements due to such additional aircraft. 
Second, consideration of the increased operations tempo of the 
168th Air Refueling Wing due to increased mission requirements 
of the North American Aerospace Defense Command. The committee 
believes that consideration of these two factors could 
potentially have led to different conclusions in the 2016 
analysis.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to update the 2016 business case analysis taking into 
consideration the aforementioned factors and brief the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives on its results no later than March 1, 2019.

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Response Enterprise

    A robust Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear 
(CBRN) Response Enterprise is critical to our nation's 
security. U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) plays an integral 
part of any domestic CBRN response, and the committee applauds 
the role the National Guard performs in such a response. The 
committee also notes the importance of coordinated combined 
training and operations between the Department of Defense (DOD) 
and civilian first responders and agencies, including the 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
    To further enhance this collaboration, the committee 
believes DOD and civilian agencies that sponsor first responder 
training should coordinate such training opportunities at the 
individual level. As NORTHCOM continues to execute unit-level 
and enterprise-wide training events, such as through exercises 
with major metropolitan cities, the Department should consider 
allowing state and local first responders to participate in 
CBRN response training programs provided by the individual 
military services, particularly those supported by Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grants, such as those 
offered at the Army's Maneuver Support Center of Excellence 
(MSCOE), on a space-available basis. This would better 
integrate NORTHCOM's overall response to a CBRN event. The 
committee also believes that there are cost efficiencies and 
improved information-sharing and integration that could result 
from using existing DOD CBRN training facilities.
    Therefore, the committee directs DOD, in coordination with 
DHS, to develop a plan to expand individual training 
opportunities on a space-available basis for state and local 
first responders. This plan should examine and take into 
consideration: (1) Existing DOD programs that provide trained 
and certified service members to serve in the CBRN Response 
Enterprise (CRE) including standardized training products and 
facilities offered by the Army's MSCOE and the Army Chemical, 
Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear School and their ability 
to provide courses to non-DOD students that comply with 
civilian standards and industry best practices; (2) Existing 
programs and training standards set by the National Domestic 
Preparedness Consortium (NDPC), the Emergency Management 
Institute (EMI), and the Center for Domestic Preparedness 
(CDP), a training component of FEMA; (3) Any additional or 
unmet CBRN training requirements that are needed by the 
National Guard, Department of Homeland Security, other federal 
agencies, and state and local first responders that can 
currently be provided by the Department of Defense and military 
services to better integrate civilian CBRN training; and (4) 
Any other factors the Secretary deems appropriate. The 
Department should submit such a plan to the committee no later 
than March 1, 2019.

Comptroller General report on monitoring ongoing challenges in remotely 
        piloted aircraft community

    The committee continues to follow the retention and quality 
of life of pilots and sensor operators in the remotely piloted 
aircraft (RPA) community. In April 2018, the Air Force provided 
a report on the RPA Culture and Process Improvement Plan 
(CPIP), pursuant to National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 
for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91). The committee 
applauds the Air Force on the achievements detailed in the 
report, including reaching a 10:1 crew-to-combat line ratio in 
December 2016.
    The committee notes that the CPIP report detailed ongoing 
shortfalls in quality of life services for the RPA community 
and contained little detail on the Air Force's plans to address 
those shortfalls. The Air Force's own studies have found poor 
quality of life have a major impact on morale and wellbeing in 
the RPA community, which is compounded by the effects of high 
demand and persistent shiftwork.
    The committee reiterates its commitment to receiving a 
detailed plan from the Air Force on expeditiously expanding 
access to housing, childcare, exchanges and commissaries, 
quality schools, and spouse employment opportunities at 
military installations where RPAs operate. The committee also 
notes that such a plan was required by Fiscal Year 2018 NDAA.
    The committee notes the Air Force's plans to implement a 
combat-to-dwell policy within the next six years. While the 
committee supports that goal, it remains concerned about 
ongoing stress in the RPA community in the interim and the 
effect it will have on morale and retention.
    Therefore the committee directs Comptroller General of the 
United States to complete a report reviewing the Air Force's 
plan to expand services at RPA bases, as well as the service's 
plans to implement a combat-to-dwell policy. The report should 
address: (1) Challenges in expanding services at RPA bases and 
mitigation options; (2) How the service can incrementally 
reduce RPA operator stress and improve workload prior to 
achieving 1:0.5 combat-to-dwell; (3) How to balance production 
of additional sorties with attendant staffing requirements to 
support training; and (4) How to achieve retention goals to 
support the timeline for increasing the combat-to-dwell time 
ratio. Preliminary observations shall be provided to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives by the end of March 2019. At that time, a final 
product due date will be determined.

Comptroller General review of Federally Funded Research and Development 
        Centers

    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) maintains long-term strategic partnerships with Federally 
Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and relies on 
their capabilities to quickly respond to the needs of the 
Department while offering independent and objective scientific 
and technical advice, and other research services. FFRDCs 
provide federal agencies with capabilities that cannot be 
effectively met by the federal government or the private sector 
alone.
    FFRDCs are often given unique access to government data, 
employees, and facilities to complete their research. According 
to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) that regulates 
FFRDCs, these organizations must (1) Operate in the public 
interest with objectivity and independence; (2) Be free from 
organizational conflicts of interest; and (3) Fully disclose 
their activities to their sponsoring agency.
    The committee supports the Department in utilizing FFRDCs 
for high quality and independent research to fulfill 
Congressional mandates and to otherwise inform DOD decision 
making. In fiscal year 2015, the Federal Government spent 
$128.6 billion on R&D. Of that amount, $11.1 billion went to 
FFRDCs. FFRDCs are a critical resource for decision makers in 
DOD and Congress. Due to the sensitive and extensive research 
conducted by FFRDCs, the committee encourages the Department to 
ensure that FFRDCs continue to maintain the neutrality and 
objectivity imperative to the completion of quality products 
without the pressures of predetermined outcomes.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to conduct a review of the Department's use of FFRDCs 
over the past 5 years and to provide a report on this review to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives by no later than January 31, 2019. The review 
shall include, at a minimum: (1) The amount each military 
department and the Office of the Secretary of Defense spent on 
FFRDC research in Fiscal Years 2013 through 2017; (2) 
Identification of each research project conducted during those 
years; (3) FFRDC and Department policies intended to maintain 
the research independence of FFRDCs; (4) The number of FFRDC 
recommendations that have been implemented by DOD since Fiscal 
Year 2007; and (5) The Comptroller General's view of the value 
provided to the Federal Government by FFRDCs and the ability of 
private sector companies to provide a similar research option 
at competitive prices.

Department of Defense information operations

    The committee notes the importance of information 
superiority in peacetime competition and modern warfare. The 
committee concurs with the priority placed on information 
operations in the President's National Security Strategy (NSS) 
and the necessity to drive effective communications to ``expose 
adversary propaganda and disinformation.'' The Department of 
Defense (DOD) further highlighted this objective in the 
National Defense Strategy (NDS). Defensively, the NDS 
prioritized interagency cooperation with the Department of 
State and other agencies ``to address areas of economic, 
technological, and information vulnerabilities.'' Offensively, 
the NDS called for tactical, operational, and strategic 
investments ``to gain and exploit information'' and to ``deny 
competitors those same advantages''. The committee supports 
DOD's broad vision for achieving and maintaining information 
superiority.
    Moreover, the committee notes that DOD actively produces 
content for information operations seeking to fulfill the NSS 
objective of exposing adversary propaganda and disinformation. 
Even so, the committee recognizes the technical and political 
difficulties inherent in transmitting such content into target 
markets. Maintaining information superiority during peacetime 
competition requires interagency cooperation to move beyond 
content production into dissemination in both permissive and 
contested information environments. In order to effectively 
operate in the information environment, DOD must continue to 
leverage the full spectrum of capabilities, ranging from 
existing telecommunication assets to emerging technologies in 
cyberspace.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to congressional defense committees not 
later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act identifying 
any capability gaps that would inhibit the ability of the 
Geographic Combatant Commanders to disseminate information 
content in support of the NSS and the NDS, to include content 
produced by other elements of the U.S. Government.

Marine Mammal Program and Support to Civil Authorities

    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy's 
Marine Mammal Program has been successful in training marine 
mammals to perform countermeasures and mine detection to ensure 
port security. The committee urges those state and local 
authorities wishing to request assistance from this program for 
homeland security purposes do so through the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security. 
Such requests are made on a reimbursable basis and may not 
adversely affect military preparedness in accordance with 
section 2564 of title 10, United States Code, and sections 272-
276 of title 10, United States Code.

Navy mine countermeasures aboard vessels of opportunity

    The committee notes the Navy program-of-record includes 24 
Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mine countermeasures (MCM) mission 
packages. The committee understands the Navy plans to use nine 
of these MCM mission packages on vessels of opportunity (VOOs). 
The committee recognizes that VOOs can provide additional MCM 
host platform capacity to meet warfighting capability 
requirements and account for MCM maintenance cycles.
    Therefore, not later than February 1, 2019, the committee 
directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives on the plan to field MCM mission packages on 
VOOs. The report shall include the following: (1) A description 
of VOOs approved or under consideration to serve as a MCM host 
platform; (2) The VOO shipboard systems and integration 
necessary to serve as a MCM host platform; (3) The MCM mission 
package systems planned to be employed from a VOO; (4) The test 
plan necessary to achieve operational effectiveness and 
suitability determinations for VOOs serving as MCM host 
platforms; and (5) The schedule and funding by fiscal year 
necessary to achieve the full operational capability for VOOs 
serving as MCM host platforms.

Nimitz-class aircraft carrier service life assessment

    The committee notes that the first Nimitz-class aircraft 
carrier, USS Nimitz (CVN-68) is planned to decommission in 
fiscal year 2025 at its expected service life of 50 years of 
service. The committee further notes that the Navy has extended 
the service lives of many ship classes, including Ohio-class 
nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines from 30 years to 
42 years. Recognizing the policy of the United States to 
achieve a 355-ship Navy includes 12 aircraft carriers, the 
committee is interested in better understanding the technical 
and engineering feasibility of extending Nimitz-class aircraft 
carriers beyond the class' 50-year planned service life.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than January 1, 2019, on the options to extend the 
service lives of Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. This report 
shall include each of the following: (1) The technical and 
engineering feasibility of extending the service life of each 
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier; (2) The duration of such service 
life extensions; (3) Notional cost and schedule estimates for 
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier service life extensions; (4) 
Public or private shipyard availability to accomplish such 
service life extensions; and (5) An assessment by the Secretary 
on the merits of implementing such options.

Overclassification of Department of Defense information

    The committee believes protecting national security 
information and demonstrating our commitment to transparency 
through the proper application of classification standards are 
equally important and compatible priorities. However, the 
committee is growing increasingly concerned by the Department 
of Defense's recent tendency to restrict information that was 
previously unclassified and had been routinely available 
publicly. For example, in materials submitted in support of the 
services' budget requests, similar information was marked by 
some services as ``sensitive but unclassified'' but left 
unmarked by other services. In addition, the committee has 
observed recent incidents limiting distribution of reports from 
the Comptroller General of the United States, among others. 
While the committee understands the need to protect operational 
security, unnecessarily restricting the ability of the 
committee to share information makes it difficult for the 
committee to perform its constitutional oversight 
responsibilities in a transparent manner. Moreover, restricting 
information limits the American taxpayers' visibility into the 
Department's use of its significant budgetary resources.
    The committee looks forward to working with the Department 
to prevent overzealous use of dissemination control and 
handling markings that could unnecessarily restrict information 
sharing. Doing so will enable the committee to be open and 
transparent about key information, to include reports of the 
Comptroller General and other audit organizations, that informs 
the committee's deliberations and oversight activities.

Policy of the Department of Defense on contract terms to support 
        achievement of full financial audits

    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment and the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Comptroller) to jointly develop a report on how future 
Department of Defense (DOD) contracts will support the 
valuation of, and accounting for, inventory and related 
property, general property, plant, and equipment constructed or 
acquired in accordance with generally accepted accounting 
principles. The report must be submitted by March 1, 2019 to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives.
    The committee urges the DOD to recognize the complex 
changes in business processes, including contracting, that must 
occur to achieve an unqualified audit opinion. Currently, some 
DOD contracts do not consider the need for auditors to 
accurately value and account for associated property or to 
separately identify and track all capital and expense-type 
items. This report should outline a path forward for a common-
sense policy that accounts for these business process needs 
without imposing undue additional bureaucracy or slowness on 
the organization.

Report on training and readiness of Navy surface ships

    The committee notes the 2017 Navy Comprehensive Review and 
Strategic Readiness Review (SRR) of surface Navy incidents 
identified unit-level certification standards as an area of 
concern. For example, the SRR found, ``The Navy's readiness 
standards for training opportunities, certifications, 
maintenance availabilities, and manning quality and levels, 
have been thoughtfully established. However, the Navy allowed 
these standards to erode to the point that they are nearly 
ineffective, especially in the case of Forward Deployed Naval 
Forces in Japan.''
    Therefore, not later than 60 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary for the Navy shall submit 
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House 
of Representatives a report on the training and readiness of 
Navy surface ships. This report shall include the following: 
(1) A description of the tasks each Navy surface ship shall 
accomplish to achieve each required training certification; (2) 
A description of the manner in which the readiness of Navy 
surface ships will be measured and assessed in order to ensure 
that requirements for each training certification applicable to 
such ships are being met; (3) A description of the required 
frequency of recertifications of Navy surface ships with 
respect to each required training certification; (4) A 
description of waivers and associated mitigation measures 
allowable for each required training certification; and (5) Any 
other matters the Secretary deems appropriate.

Review of Surface Warfare Officer initial training

    The committee understands the current Navy Surface Warfare 
Officer (SWO) candidate training curriculum is comprised of 
primarily classroom and simulator training methods. The 
committee believes SWO candidates lack sufficient at-sea 
training before reporting to their first ships. The committee 
is concerned that the lack of practical at-sea experience 
before reporting to their first ships may result in SWOs having 
gaps in their foundational safety, seamanship, and navigation 
knowledge, skills, and experience. The committee has previously 
encouraged the Navy to utilize Navy Yard Patrol craft for SWO 
candidate training in the Senate report accompanying S. 2943 
(S. Rept. 114-255) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328). Additionally, the 
2017 Comprehensive Review of Surface Force Incidents directed 
an evaluation of the use of YP craft in all officer accession 
programs, including the feasibility of expanding YP craft use.
    Therefore, the Secretary of the Navy is directed to review 
and determine the adequacy and appropriate balance of practical 
at-sea, virtual, classroom, and other training for SWO 
candidates, including accessions from the U.S. Naval Academy, 
Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps, and Officer Candidate 
School, and the extent to which such training provides the 
necessary foundational safety, seamanship, and navigation 
knowledge, skills, and experience. Not later than October 1, 
2018, the Secretary shall provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees and the Comptroller General of the United 
States with the results of this review and any associated 
policy changes.
    Not later than 120 days after receiving the Secretary of 
the Navy's report, the Comptroller General is directed to 
provide the congressional defense committees with a written 
review of the Secretary's report, including matters in 
connection with the Secretary's report and review that the 
Comptroller General considers appropriate.

Strategic dispersal of capital ships

    The committee continues to affirm the judgment of the 
Chiefs of Naval Operations, first stated in the Senate report 
(S. Rept. 209-254) accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), 
that the Atlantic Fleet should continue to be dispersed in two 
homeports. On January 14, 2009, the Navy issued a Record of 
Decision to establish a second Atlantic Fleet nuclear aircraft 
carrier homeport at Naval Station Mayport in order to 
strategically disperse some of the most expensive and essential 
assets of the U.S. Fleet. The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review 
validated the Navy's decision, stating ``to mitigate the risk 
of a terrorist attack, accident, or natural disaster, the U.S. 
Navy will homeport an East Coast carrier in Mayport, Florida.''
    The committee remains concerned that, despite the validated 
need for dispersal of some the Navy's most expensive assets 
along the East Coast, the Navy has continually deferred 
projects necessary to achieve this strategic imperative. The 
committee believes that the Navy must review and update 
analysis of the need for strategic dispersal of the Atlantic 
Fleet along the East Coast. Further, the committee believes 
that, should such a review revalidate the strategic imperative 
for further dispersal of these ships, the Navy must carry out 
implementation of plans to enable this dispersal.

                  TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

               Subtitle A--Department of Defense Matters

Inapplicability of certification of executive qualifications by 
        qualification review boards of Office of Personnel Management 
        for initial appointments to Senior Executive Service positions 
        in Department of Defense (sec. 1101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would temporarily 
exempt the Department of Defense from the requirement that 
Office of Personnel Management qualification review boards 
certify candidates for senior executive service positions 
within the Department. The provision would sunset 2-years after 
enactment.
Direct hire authority for science and technology reinvention 
        laboratories and Major Range and Test Facilities Base 
        facilities for recent science, technology, engineering, and 
        mathematics graduates of minority-serving institutions (sec. 
        1102)
    The committee recommends a provision that would create a 
direct-hire authority at Science and Technology Reinvention 
Laboratories and Major Range and Test Facilities Base 
Facilities for graduates of minority-serving institutions with 
degrees in science, technology, mathematics, and engineering.
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. 1103)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
existing direct hiring authority codified in section 1599h of 
title 10, United States Code, to the Strategic Capabilities 
Office and the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental.
Enhancement of flexible management authorities for Science and 
        Technology Reinvention Laboratories of the Department of 
        Defense (sec. 1104)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend and 
enhance existing direct hiring authorities at the Science and 
Technology Reinvention Laboratories (STRLs) within the 
Department of Defense. These provisions would extend pilot 
programs from previous National Defense Authorization Acts 
based on the committee's continuing desire to ensure that the 
Department of Defense is able to recruit and retain high 
quality technical talent in its laboratories.
Inclusion of Office of Secretary of Defense among components of the 
        Department of Defense covered by direct hire authority for 
        financial management experts (sec. 1105)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
direct hire authority created in section 1110 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-
328) for financial management experts to include the Office of 
Secretary of Defense.
Authority to employ civilian faculty members at the Joint Special 
        Operations University (sec. 1106)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1595(c) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to employ and develop compensation 
policies for civilian professors, instructors, and lecturers at 
the Joint Special Operations University.

                  Subtitle B--Government-Wide Matters

Alcohol testing of civil service mariners of the Military Sealift 
        Command assigned to vessels (sec. 1121)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 643 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of the Navy to prescribe regulations establishing a 
program to conduct on-duty reasonable suspicion alcohol testing 
and post-accident alcohol testing of civil service mariners of 
the Military Sealift Command assigned to vessels. In addition, 
this provision would amend section 7479 of such title to permit 
release of alcohol testing results to the Coast Guard.
Expedited hiring authority for college graduates and post secondary 
        students (sec. 1122)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
recruitment and hiring process to provide additional 
flexibility in hiring college graduates and students. This 
authority would allow Federal agencies to determine recruitment 
sources and processes for the solicitation of applications in 
order to compete for top talent. The Director of the Office of 
Personnel Management would have the authority to cap the number 
of hires made under this authority.
Increase in maximum amount of voluntary separation incentive pay 
        authorized for civilian employees (sec. 1123)
    The committee recommends a proposal that would amend 
sections 3523 and 9902 of title 5, United States Code, to 
increase the maximum amount of separation pay authorized for 
Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay (VSIP) from the current 
ceiling of $25,000 to $40,000, and includes an annual 
adjustment in accordance with the Consumer Price Index. The 
maximum payable amount has not been adjusted since VSIP was 
first authorized by the Chief Human Capital Officers Act of 
2002 (title XIII of Public Law 107-296).
One-year extension of temporary authority to grant allowances, 
        benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel on official duty 
        in a combat zone (sec. 1124)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 
one 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.

One-year extension of authority to waive annual limitation on premium 
        pay and aggregate limitation on pay for Federal civilian 
        employees working overseas (sec. 1125)

    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 2018 (Public Law 115-91), to 
extend through 2019 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, U.S. Africa Command, in 
support of a military operation or an operation in response to 
a declared emergency.

                       Items of Special Interest

Competitive salary and benefits for science, technology, engineering, 
        and mathematics professionals

    The committee believes the Department of Defense must 
develop new and innovative methods to attract and manage talent 
with highly valuable technical skills. The committee recognizes 
that with new technologies and systems, the civilian and 
military workforce must be well-trained in the fields of 
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). To 
this end, the Department of Defense, in coordination with the 
Office of Personnel Management and the Department of Energy, 
should conduct a comparison of salary and benefits for 
government professional engineers and scientists compared to 
similar positions in the private sector, and report the results 
of such comparison to the congressional defense committees no 
later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act. 
This study should consider new competitive strategies to hire 
and retain a skilled workforce in the STEM fields.

             TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS

                  Subtitle A--Assistance and Training

Clarification of authority for use of advisors and trainers for 
        training of personnel of foreign ministries with security 
        missions under defense institution capacity building 
        authorities (sec. 1201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify 
section 332 of title 10, United States Code, regarding the 
provision of assistance to build the institutional capacity of 
foreign partners. The committee expects the Department of 
Defense to continue its efforts to emphasize strengthening the 
defense institutions of friendly foreign nations as a key 
component of its security cooperation programs and believes the 
modification contained in this provision will provide 
appropriate flexibility for the Department to fulfill its 
requirements under section 332 of title 10, United States Code.
Modification to Department of Defense State Partnership Program (sec. 
        1202)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make a 
technical modification to section 341(b)(2) of title 10, United 
States Code to clarify the conditions under which vetting 
pursuant to section 362, title 10, United States Code, is 
required for the conduct of Department of Defense State 
Partnership Program activities. The committee notes that this 
technical correction does not constitute a change in 
congressional intent but rather seeks to clarify its 
longstanding intent that only those activities that involve the 
provision of training and assistance require such vetting.
Expansion of Regional Defense Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program to 
        include irregular warfare (sec. 1203)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 354 of title 10, United States Code and expand the 
Regional Defense Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program to 
include irregular warfare. The committee notes 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. As such, the committee 
believes it is important that the Department of Defense's 
efforts to build the capacity of foreign partner forces reflect 
the evolving nature of the global security environment.
Extension and modification of authority to support border security 
        operations of certain foreign countries (sec. 1204)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1226 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), as amended, by 
authorizing the Secretary of Defense to provide support on a 
reimbursable basis to the Government of Oman and Government of 
Pakistan for the purposes of supporting and enhancing efforts 
of the armed forces of Oman and Pakistan to increase and 
sustain security along the borders of Yemen and Afghanistan, 
respectively.
    The provision would also require quarterly reports on the 
use of this authority, including descriptions of the efforts of 
each country reimbursed and assessments of the value of such 
efforts. Additionally, the provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report 15 days prior to the 
provision of support under this authority to any country that 
has not previously received such support detailing the purpose, 
amount, and anticipated duration of the support along with a 
certification that the recipient country has increased border 
security and that the provision of such support is in the 
interest of United States national security. This provision 
would also add several conditions on reimbursements to 
Pakistan. Finally, the provision would extend this authority 
through December 31, 2021.
Legal and policy review of advise, assist, and accompany missions (sec. 
        1205)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and the General Counsel 
of the Department of Defense, in coordination with the 
appropriate combatant commands, not later than 120 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act, to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report on a review of the 
legal and policy frameworks associated with advise, assist, and 
accompany missions by United States military personnel.
Technical corrections relating to defense security cooperation 
        statutory reorganization (sec. 1206)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
technical corrections to title 10, United States Code, and 
other legislation referencing sections that were redesignated 
under section 1241 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328).
Naval Small Craft Instruction and Technical Training School (sec. 1207)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to operate and maintain the Naval 
Small Craft Instruction and Technical Training School 
(NAVSCIATTS).

        Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (sec. 1211)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 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 1212 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-125), to 
continue certain established provisions applicable to the 
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (ASFF), including use of the 
funds, transfer authority, and acceptance of contributions to 
provide assistance to the security forces of the Ministry of 
Defense and Ministry of Interior of Afghanistan, including the 
provision of equipment, supplies, services, training, and funds 
for developing the capacity of Afghanistan's security 
ministries.
    This provision would also continue the authorization for 
the Department of Defense to accept the return of equipment 
procured using ASFF that is damaged, excess to need, or 
otherwise not accepted by the Afghan security forces. The 
provision would extend spending goals for the ASFF to promote 
the recruitment, training, and integration of women into the 
Afghan security forces. It would also include additional 
reporting criteria in the Secretary of Defense's assessment of 
the progress made by the Afghan government toward achieving 
security, peace, and reconciliation objectives. Additionally, 
it would extend the authorization for the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretary of State, to withhold 
assistance for the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces 
if the determination is made that such progress has been 
insufficient. The committee encourages the provision of 
assistance to be closely tied to progress in these critical 
areas.
    The committee has closely watched the ongoing efforts to 
reform Afghan government institutions and root out corruption 
in commitment to a peaceful, stable, and prosperous society. 
The introduction of the bilateral U.S.-Afghanistan Compact, 
with a focus on the four pillars of governance, economics, 
peace and reconciliation, and security, was a welcome step in 
the right direction. However, the committee is disappointed by 
the lack of transparency provided by the Department of Defense 
and the Department of State on the central tenants of the 
Compact and the associated benchmarks. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Department of Defense, in coordination with the 
Department of State, to provide a briefing to the committee on 
the Compact, including the benchmarks and associated timelines, 
no later than October 31, 2018.
    The committee understands that the Combined Security 
Transition Command-Afghanistan (CSTC-A) conducted a tactical 
wheeled vehicle (TWV) optimization study in 2016 in support of 
the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces with a focus on 
creating a sustainable, affordable, and effective fleet to 
increase combat capability and force protection for occupants. 
The committee would like to understand how this study has 
informed procurement decisions for TWV in the ASFF. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
briefing to Armed Services Committee of the Senate not later 
than October 31, 2018, on the results of the TWV study, 
including the types of vehicles considered in the study; their 
respective cost, operational survivability, and sustainability; 
and how the results of the study are reflected in ASFF 
procurements.

Extension and modification of authority for reimbursement of certain 
        coalition nations for support provided to United States 
        military operations (sec. 1212)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority to make Coalition Support Fund (CSF) reimbursements 
under section 1233 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), as amended, through 
fiscal year 2019 and would limit the total amount of 
reimbursements that may be provided in fiscal year 2019 to 
$350.0 million. Under this provision, the Secretary of Defense 
may use Coalition Support Funds to reimburse certain nations 
for support provided to or in connection with U.S. military 
operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. This authority may 
only be used with regard to Pakistan pursuant to section 1226 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92), as amended by this Act.
    The committee recognizes that stability in the South Asia 
region cannot be achieved without stability in Pakistan and 
that engaging with the Government of Pakistan in order to 
ensure a strong, stable, and secure nation is consistent with 
the national security goals of the United States. The 
relationship between the United States and Pakistan, however, 
is under significant strain. Cooperation in key areas, to 
include counterterrorism, has fallen short of expectations and 
has, in some cases, run counter to U.S. national security 
interests and regional stability. The committee recognizes that 
there are a number of areas in which U.S. and Pakistani 
national security interests converge and that it is important 
to continue to seek methods and processes by which coordination 
and cooperation can occur in transparent and mutually 
beneficial ways. Therefore, the committee recommends the 
provision of CSF reimbursements for a set of narrowly defined, 
measurable border security activities under the conditions set 
forth in section 1226 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), as amended by this 
Act, in the hope that such efforts may provide a productive 
framework for continued U.S.-Pakistani engagement in the 
future.

Extension of authority to transfer defense articles and provide defense 
        services to the military and security forces of Afghanistan 
        (sec. 1213)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2019, 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 1212 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-125), 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 through 
fiscal year 2019 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).

Modification of reporting requirements for special immigrant visas for 
        Afghan allies program (sec. 1214)

    The committee recommends a provision that would renew a 
reporting requirement under the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 
2009 to assess the health of the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) 
application process and identify any delays in orderly visa 
processing. Afghan allies work with the United States and 
coalition partners, often at great personal risk and sacrifice. 
Sustaining support from Afghan individuals willing to partner 
with the U.S. Government is critical to the mission in 
Afghanistan. The committee is concerned by reports that the SIV 
application process may be hampered by a breakdown in 
interagency coordination resulting in undue delay, needless 
stress on applicants, and a sizable drop in SIV admissions 
during the first and second quarters of fiscal year 2018.

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

Extension of authority to provide assistance to counter the Islamic 
        State of Iraq and Syria (sec. 1221)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 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) until December 31, 2020.
    The recommended provision would also limit the obligation 
and expenditure of more than $450.0 million of the funds 
available for activities under the section 1236 authority until 
the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense 
committees a report that describes the roles, missions, and 
responsibilities of any future U.S. military presence in Iraq, 
provides information on anticipated funding requirements, and 
provides a transition plan for operational sustainment 
activities of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) for fiscal years 
after fiscal year 2019.
    The committee recognizes the significant progress and 
achievements of the ISF in the campaign against the Islamic 
State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), including the recapture of 
numerous ISIS strongholds. Furthermore, the committee supports 
continued engagement and cooperation with the ISF and the 
Government of Iraq to secure these gains via the ISF's 
continued pursuit of remaining ISIS elements, enhanced border 
security, stabilization of liberated areas, and the promotion 
of equitable governance. In light of ISIS's gains in the wake 
of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, the 
committee seeks greater clarity from the Department of Defense 
(DOD) on the requirements for an enduring U.S. military 
presence in Iraq to prevent a similar resurgence in the future. 
The committee also seeks greater clarity from DOD on future 
plans to support the ISF given its growing capabilities and 
status as the sole legitimate security guarantor in Iraq.
    The committee notes that despite progress on the 
battlefield, ISIS continues to pose a security threat to Iraq, 
including the Iraqi Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish communities and 
religious and ethnic minorities in Iraq, and to the stability 
of the Middle East more broadly. The committee also recognizes 
that the lasting defeat of ISIS and ongoing stabilization 
efforts are critical to maintaining an Iraq in which all 
faiths, sects, and ethnicities are afforded equal protection 
and full integration into society. The committee believes that 
the United States, in coordination with coalition partners, 
should continue necessary support to Iraqi security forces with 
a national security mission in their fight against ISIS. The 
committee notes that Iraqi security forces with a national 
security mission may include Kurdish, Shia, and Sunni tribal 
elements, as well as other security forces that are committed 
to protecting highly vulnerable ethnic and religious 
communities, such as Yazidi, Christian, Assyrian, and Turkoman, 
against the ISIS threat. As requirements are identified and 
validated, the committee urges the department to provide 
security assistance to such forces serving a national security 
mission in an expeditious and responsive manner.

Extension and modification of authority to provide assistance to the 
        vetted Syrian opposition (sec. 1222)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
section 1209 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 section 1223 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91), through December 31, 2019. The provision would 
also limit the obligation or expenditure of funds for 
activities under section 1209 until the President submits the 
report on United States strategy required under section 1221 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91) and the Secretary of Defense submits a 
detailed report to the congressional defense committees 
describing the intended use of this authority during fiscal 
year 2019, including the forces to be trained and equipped, for 
what purposes, and the planned level of engagement between such 
forces and U.S personnel. Lastly, the provision would require 
the Secretary of Defense to submit a certification every 120 
days related to the activities conducted by partner forces 
trained and equipped under this authority.
    The committee is deeply concerned by the lack of clarity 
and conflicting messages from administration officials related 
to the Middle East and, specifically, Syria. The committee 
recognizes the significant progress made by the U.S and our 
partners against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in 
Syria, including the liberation of nearly all territory 
previously held by the group, but the committee believes that 
the activities of the U.S. military in Syria are not adequately 
integrated into a broader strategy designed to stabilize Syria 
and address the factors that gave rise to ISIS. The committee 
notes that the influence of Russia and Iran have expanded in 
Syria at the expense of American interests and that General 
Joseph L. Votel, Commander of U.S. Central Command, testified 
on March 13, 2018, that the Assad regime is ``ascendant.'' 
Simultaneously, the United States' support for some partner 
forces in Syria has created significant tension with Turkey, a 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally.
    The committee notes that the President's Fiscal Year 2019 
Budget Request includes $300 million to continue the training 
and equipping of vetted opposition forces in Syria, yet the 
President has publicly expressed his intent to remove U.S. 
forces from Syria in the near future. This inconsistency, 
paired with the administration's failure to submit the report 
on the United States strategy for Syria required by section 
1221 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91), inhibit the committee's ability to 
sufficiently consider the continuation of this authority for 
fiscal year 2019. Therefore, the committee urges the 
administration to promptly provide details necessary for the 
Congress to adequately evaluate the requirement for this 
authority and how it contributes to the accomplishment of U.S. 
objectives in Syria.

Extension and modification of authority to support operations and 
        activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (sec. 
        1223)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority for the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (OSC-
I) for one year. The provision would also limit the obligation 
or expenditure of more than 25 percent of funds available for 
fiscal year 2019 pending the submission of the report on the 
United States strategy in Iraq required by the Joint 
Explanatory Statement on the National Defense Authorization of 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) and a plan for 
normalization of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq to 
conform to other similar embassy-based entities, including the 
transition of funding from the Department of Defense to the 
Department of State by the beginning of fiscal year 2020. The 
committee notes that the transition plan submitted by the 
Secretary of Defense pursuant to the Joint Explanatory 
Statement accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) failed to provide the 
level of detail required.
    Furthermore, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to submit to the congressional defense and 
foreign relations committees a report, not later than September 
1, 2018, that addresses the following: (1) A description of 
OSC-I's mission and how it relates to the missions of other 
U.S. military personnel in Iraq, including those operating 
under the command of Combined Joint Task Force-Operation 
Inherent Resolve; (2) A description of activities undertaken by 
OSC-I to date; (3) An assessment of OSC-I's capabilities to 
perform defense institution building activities; (4) An 
evaluation of whether Department of Defense goals, objectives, 
plans, and guidance for executing security cooperation programs 
in Iraq through OSC-I are sufficient; (5) An evaluation of the 
efficacy of OSC-I's organizational and funding model compared 
to models of other offices of security cooperation; (6) An 
assessment of the adequacy of the plan to transition activities 
funded by the Department of Defense under OSC-I to other 
departments and agencies required by the Joint Explanatory 
Statement accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328); and (7) Any other 
matters deemed relevant by the Comptroller General.

Syria Study Group (sec. 1224)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
Syria Study Group tasked with providing a report with findings 
and recommendations on the military and diplomatic strategy of 
the United States with respect to the conflict in Syria. The 
Syria Study Group would submit the report not later than June 
30, 2019, to the President, the Secretary of Defense, the 
Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate, the Committee on Armed Services and 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of 
Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the 
Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the 
minority leader of the House of Representatives.

Modification of annual report on military power of Iran (sec. 1225)

    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 information on the Government of Iran's military 
cooperation with the Russian Federation, support to the Houthis 
in Yemen, and its involvement in the trafficking of weapons and 
weapons systems to certain countries.

   Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Europe and the Russian Federation

Extension of limitation on military cooperation between the United 
        States and the Russian Federation (sec. 1231)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through fiscal year 2019 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, made in coordination with the Secretary 
of State, or unless certain waiver conditions are met. The 
provision would also clarify that the limitation shall not be 
construed to limit bilateral military-to-military dialogue 
between the United States and the Russian Federation for the 
purposes of reducing the risk of conflict.

Limitation on availability of funds relating to sovereignty of the 
        Russian Federation over Crimea (sec. 1232)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
funds authorized to be appropriated or made available by this 
Act for fiscal year 2019 for the Department of Defense to 
implement any activity that recognizes the sovereignty of the 
Russian Federation over Crimea.

Extension of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (sec. 1233)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2021 the authority under section 1250 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92) as amended by section 1234 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91) 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 $200.0 
million in fiscal year 2019 to provide security assistance to 
Ukraine.
    The committee continues to believe that defense 
institutional reforms are critical to sustaining capabilities 
developed using security assistance provided under this and 
other authorities. Therefore, the provision would prohibit the 
obligation or expenditure of 50 percent of the funds available 
in fiscal year 2019 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. With respect to the certification on 
Ukrainian defense institutional reforms, the committee 
encourages the Secretary of Defense to consider, among other 
factors, whether the Government of Ukraine has enacted 
legislation that ensures a solid legal basis for the 
implementation of defense reforms consistent with Ukraine's 
Strategic Defense Bulletin.
    The committee also encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
consider, as part of the certification process, defense 
institutional reforms that promote more efficient use of 
defense resources, which will ultimately enable a more 
effective defense of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial 
integrity and allow Ukraine to achieve its full potential as a 
strategic partner of the United States. Therefore, the 
committee urges the Department of Defense to encourage the 
Ministry of Defense of Ukraine to institutionalize a formal 
internal control measures program and a risk management 
framework to identify, prioritize, report, and mitigate 
operational and financial risk before it impairs the strategic 
objectives of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
    The committee also urges the Department of Defense to 
encourage Ukroboronprom, Ukraine's state defense concern, to 
initiate an audit of its financial statements and a corporate 
governance review that are in strict accordance with 
international auditing and accounting standards.
    The committee recognizes that fulfilling the promises of 
the Euromaidan and achieving stability, security, and 
prosperity for all Ukrainians ultimately depends on effectively 
countering corruption. The committee commends the efforts of 
the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), and 
encourages the Government of Ukraine to ensure NABU and other 
anti-corruption institutions in Ukraine are fully supported, 
resourced, and defended. The committee also urges the 
Government of Ukraine to establish an independent anti-
corruption court in line with the recommendations of the Venice 
Commission. While the committee welcomes the establishment of 
Ukraine's electronic asset declaration system as an important 
step for greater transparency, the committee encourages the 
Government of Ukraine to take appropriate actions to ensure 
this system does not place unnecessary burdens or pressure on 
civil society, especially those individuals dedicated to 
achieving greater transparency and accountability in Ukraine.
    The committee remains deeply concerned by the continuing 
aggression of Russia and Russian-led separatist forces in 
Ukraine. The committee welcomes the delivery of Javelin 
Missiles and Javelin Command Launch Units to Ukraine, which 
sends a strong signal of the United States' commitment to the 
defense of allies and partners. 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 
sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Sense of Senate on relocation of Joint Intelligence Analysis Complex 
        (sec. 1234)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that in consideration of any future plans, 
including the conduct of any analysis of alternatives, 
regarding the relocation of U.S. European Command's Joint 
Intelligence Analysis Complex, the Secretary of Defense should 
maintain its geographic location within the United Kingdom and 
its collocation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
(NATO) Intelligence Fusion Center.

Sense of Senate on enhancing deterrence against Russian aggression in 
        Europe (sec. 1235)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that in order to protect the national 
security of the United States, it is the policy of the United 
States to pursue an integrated approach to strengthening the 
defense of allies and partners in Europe as part of a broader 
strategy backed by all elements of United States power to deter 
and, if necessary, defeat Russian aggression. The provision 
would also express the sense of the Senate that in order to do 
so, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
Secretary of State and in consultation with the Commander, U.S. 
European Command, should consider specific steps to improve 
U.S. combat capability and capacity in Europe, increase U.S. 
forward presence in Europe, maintain robust security assistance 
for allies and partners in Europe, promote reforms within the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and enhance 
multilateral security cooperation among U.S. partners and 
allies, including between NATO and the European Union.
    The provision would primarily address activities to be 
conducted by the Secretary of Defense related to conventional 
deterrence. However, the committee recognizes that a 
comprehensive strategy to deter Russian aggression requires a 
whole-of-government approach, and must address Russian malign 
influence activities, which pose an urgent threat to democratic 
institutions, including in the United States, and to stability 
in Europe.
    The committee believes a comprehensive, integrated approach 
to strengthen the capabilities of allies and partners in Europe 
to deter and defend against the Russian hybrid threat is 
urgently needed. Russian aggression utilizing the full spectrum 
of national power threatens our most vulnerable European allies 
and partners and continues to result in harm to civilians, the 
suppression of human rights, loss of faith in democracy, and 
the undermining of the sovereignty of Russia's neighbors. In 
particular, the committee condemns the ongoing Russian 
violations of the territorial integrity of Georgia over 
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Ukraine over Crimea and 
Donbass.
    Not later than March 1, 2019, the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Policy shall provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees on the Department of Defense's 
strategy for enhancing deterrence against Russian aggression by 
strengthening the defense of allies and partners in Europe, 
including the Department's consideration and/or implementation 
of the specific steps described in the provision.

Technical amendments related to NATO Support and Procurement 
        Organization and related NATO agreements (sec. 1236)

    The committee recommends a provision that would revise 
section 2350d of title 10, United States Code and section 
2761(e)(3) of title 22, United States Code to reflect the 
current North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 
organizational structure and would permit NATO agency reform 
processes to apply U.S. statutory provisions to the updated 
NATO organization.

Report on security cooperation between the Russian Federation and Cuba, 
        Nicaragua, and Venezuela (sec. 1237)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency to submit a report 
not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act 
on security cooperation between the Russian Federation and 
Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to the appropriate congressional 
committees.

Sense of Senate on countering Russian malign influence (sec. 1238)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary of State should urgently prioritize the completion of 
a comprehensive strategy to counter Russian malign influence 
and submit to Congress the report required by section 1239A of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91).
    Russian aggression below the level of direct military 
conflict continues to be an immediate and urgent threat to the 
United States, its allies, and partners. The Senate Select 
Committee on Intelligence recently confirmed the unanimous 
assessment of the intelligence community in January 2017 that 
``Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence 
campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.'' In 
February 2018, then-Director of Central Intelligence Michael 
Pompeo testified that, with regard to Russian interference in 
the 2018 mid-term elections, ``[W]e have seen Russian activity 
and intentions to have an impact on the next election cycle 
here.'' Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats 
testified at that same hearing that Russia ``will conduct 
bolder and more disruptive cyber operations during the next 
year'' and that Russia ``will work to use cyber operations to 
achieve strategic objectives unless they face clear 
repercussions for their cyber operations.''
    The actions that the U.S. Government has taken to date have 
not succeeded in deterring Russia from engaging in asymmetric 
aggression. In February of this year, then-Commander, U.S. 
Cyber Command, Admiral Michael Rogers, testified that 
``President Putin has clearly come to the conclusion there's 
little price to pay here.'' In addition, then-National Security 
Adviser H.R. McMaster said in April 2018 with respect to 
Russia, ``We have failed to impose sufficient costs.''
    The committee is concerned that the U.S. government 
continues to lack a unified, whole-of-government strategy to 
impose real costs on Vladimir Putin and his regime in order to 
deter future Russian malign aggression. In March 2018, 
Commander, U.S. European Command, General Curtis Scaparrotti, 
testified, ``I don't believe there's an effective unification 
across the interagency with the energy and the focus that we 
could attain.'' The absence of a comprehensive strategy 
persists despite the requirement under section 1239A of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91) for the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State 
to develop and report to Congress on such an approach. The 
strategy must be coordinated at the highest levels of 
government and integrate all tools of national power, bringing 
together military, diplomatic, cyber, informational, financial, 
and economic measures to counter Russian malign influence.
    The committee urges the Secretary of Defense and Secretary 
of State to dedicate all necessary resources to complete the 
strategy and submit the required report without delay.

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

Redesignation, expansion, and extension of Southeast Asia Maritime 
        Security Initiative (sec. 1241)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1263 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to: redesignate the 
Southeast Asia Maritime Security Initiative as the Indo-Pacific 
Maritime Security Initiative; add Bangladesh and Sri Lanka as 
recipient countries of assistance and training; add India as a 
covered country eligible for payment of certain incremental 
expenses; and extend the authority under the section through 
December 31, 2025.
    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 is encouraged by the 
progress that has been made under the initiative, and 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 recognizes that the initiative was 
designed to support a long-term capacity building effort, which 
will require increased resources in future years as 
requirements are established and refined, as programs mature, 
and as the regional security environment continues to evolve.
    The committee believes the Department's efforts to improve 
maritime domain awareness and maritime security should be fully 
integrated into a U.S. strategy for a free and open Indo-
Pacific. Therefore, the committee supports redesignating the 
authority under section 1263 as the Indo-Pacific Maritime 
Security Initiative, the inclusion of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka 
as recipient countries, and the addition of India as a covered 
country to encourage its participation in regional security 
initiatives of this kind. Furthermore, as a demonstration of 
the United States' commitment to allies and partners in the 
region, the committee supports the extension of the Indo-
Pacific Maritime Security Initiative through the end of 2025.
    Beyond the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative, the 
committee encourages 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 South and Southeast Asia to protect mutual security 
interests.

Modification of annual report on military and security developments 
        involving the People's Republic of China (sec. 1242)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1202(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), and modify the annual 
report on military and security developments involving the 
People's Republic of China.
    While significant attention has been focused on Russian 
malign influence in recent years, the committee is also 
concerned by China's increasingly active influence operations, 
which exploit the openness of democratic systems, including in 
the United States. Therefore, among other elements that would 
be added to the matters included in the annual report for 
analyses and forecasts, the provision would add efforts by 
China to influence the media, cultural institutions, business, 
and academic and policy communities of the United States to be 
more favorable to its security and military strategy and 
objectives.
    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) is not the agency primarily responsible for countering 
Chinese malign influence in the United States. However, the 
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to examine how 
DOD can make appropriate use of existing authorities and 
resources to support interagency efforts to counter Chinese 
malign influence. For example, the committee is concerned about 
China's use of Confucius Institutes-which are under the 
supervision of Hanban, a Chinese state agency-as a tool of 
malign influence at American universities. Multiple reports by 
academic organizations have highlighted the threat to academic 
freedom and open debate posed by Confucius Institutes, and have 
called on universities to terminate or substantially 
renegotiate agreements with Hanban. In order to protect free 
inquiry and free expression, the Secretary of Defense could 
examine whether DOD should terminate research and development 
partnerships with universities that fail to terminate or 
substantially renegotiate agreements with Hanban.

Sense of Senate on Taiwan (sec. 1243)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate on the importance of a strong U.S. defense 
relationship with Taiwan.

Redesignation and modification of sense of Congress and initiative for 
        the Indo-Asia-Pacific region (sec. 1244)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) by redesignating the 
``Indo-Asia-Pacific Stability Initiative'' as the ``Indo-
Pacific Stability Initiative'' and making modifications to 
emphasize the initiative's alignment with the National Defense 
Strategy and its focus on minimizing the risk of executing the 
contingency plans of the Department of Defense. The provision 
would also require the Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with the Commander, United States Pacific Command, to submit a 
future years plan on activities and resources of the initiative 
no later than March 1, 2019.

Prohibition on participation of the People's Republic of China in Rim 
        of the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercises (sec. 1245)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of Defense from enabling or facilitating the 
participation of the People's Republic of China in any Rim of 
the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercise unless the Secretary 
certifies to the congressional defense committees that China 
has ceased all land reclamation activities in the South China 
Sea, removed all weapons from its land reclamation sites, and 
established a consistent 4-year track record of taking actions 
toward stabilizing the region.

Assessment of and report on geopolitical conditions in the Indo-Pacific 
        region (sec. 1246)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require, 
not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary of Defense to select and enter into an 
agreement with an entity independent of the Department of 
Defense to conduct an assessment of the geopolitical conditions 
in the Indo-Pacific region that are necessary for the 
successful implementation of the National Defense Strategy. At 
a minimum, the provision would require the assessment to 
address the geopolitical conditions in the Indo-Pacific region, 
including any change in economic and political relations, that 
are necessary to support United States military requirements 
for forward defense, extensive forward basing, and alliance 
formation and strengthening. The provision would require that 
the independent entity selected submit a report on the results 
of the assessment to the appropriate congressional committees 
not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
    The committee has emphasized the importance of translating 
strategy into force capabilities and posture through the 
budgeting and acquisition processes within the Department of 
Defense. It is equally important and necessary to examine the 
requirements that military strategy imposes on diplomacy and 
other activities of the government as a whole. A military 
strategy that relies on heavier forward deployment and expanded 
basing structures and access could foreseeably require 
significant changes in relations with nations in the region, 
which has implications for U.S. policy concerning trade, 
security assistance, foreign aid, economic investment, and 
diplomacy. Likewise, broadening and deepening alliances may 
require changes in military strategy. For example, alliance 
credibility and cohesion in the Indo-Pacific region could 
necessitate that the United States commit to a robust forward 
defense in the Indo-Pacific region, which would require that 
U.S. and allied air, naval, and ground forces would have to 
develop capabilities and concepts of operations to survive and 
operate within the range of ballistic and cruise missiles.

Sense of Senate on United States-India defense relationship (sec. 1247)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the United States should strengthen 
and enhance its major defense partnership with India and work 
toward mutual security objectives.

Sense of Senate on strategic importance of maintaining commitments 
        under Compacts of Free Association (sec. 1248)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that maintaining the commitments of the 
United States under the Compacts of Free Association is of 
vital strategic importance to the national security interests 
of the United States.
    The committee notes that under compacts with the Freely 
Associated States (FAS), the Federated States of Micronesia, 
Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Palau, the U.S. has 
exclusive military use rights in these countries in exchange 
for the defense of the FAS. These territories were once used by 
the U.S. for nuclear weapons testing, and, according to the 
Department of Defense, the compacts have enabled it to maintain 
critical access in the Indo-Pacific region. Therefore, the 
United States' Compacts of Free Association (COFA) are critical 
to strengthening partnerships and maintaining commitments in 
the Indo-Pacific Theater. It is the sense of the Senate that 
these partnerships and commitments are of vital strategic 
importance to the national security interests of the United 
States.

Sense of the Senate on United States military forces on the Korean 
        Peninsula (sec. 1249)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the presence of United States military 
forces on the Korean Peninsula and across the Indo-Pacific 
region continues to play a critical role in safeguarding the 
peaceful and stable rules-based international order. The 
provision would also express that the significant removal of 
United States military forces from the Korean peninsula is a 
non-negotiable item as it relates to the complete, verifiable, 
and irreversible denuclearization of the Democratic People's 
Republic of Korea.

                          Subtitle F--Reports

Report on military and coercive activities of the People's Republic of 
        China in the South China Sea (sec. 1251)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of 
State, to submit to the congressional defense committees and 
release to the public, a report on the military and coercive 
activities of China in the South China Sea in connection with 
such activity immediately after the commencement of any 
significant reclamation or militarization activity by the 
People's Republic of China in the South China Sea, including 
any significant military deployment or operation or 
infrastructure construction.
    The committee is concerned that sufficient information has 
not been made publicly available in a timely fashion regarding 
China's reclamation and militarization activities of China in 
the South China Sea. Therefore, the committee urges the 
Secretary of Defense to determine that the public interest in 
selective declassification of China's activities in the South 
China Sea outweighs the potential damage from disclosure. The 
Secretary should consider mandating that the directors of 
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the Defense 
Intelligence Agency provide the Bureau of Intelligence and 
Research (INR) at the State Department with declassified 
aircraft-generated imagery and supporting analysis describing 
Chinese activities of concern. The committee also urges that 
the State Department brief and distribute the reports to the 
media and throughout Southeast Asia.

Report on terrorist use of human shields (sec. 1252)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
State, to submit a report to the appropriate congressional 
committees not later than 180 days after the enactment of this 
Act, on the use of human shields by terrorist groups to protect 
otherwise lawful targets from attack and efforts to incorporate 
lessons learned to address the challenge posed by the use of 
human shields.

Report on Arctic strategies (sec. 1253)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the 
Secretary of the Air Force not later than 180 days after the 
enactment of this Act to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the strategy of the Army, Navy, the 
Marine Corps, and the Air Force for the Arctic region. The 
committee recognizes that the Arctic is a region of growing 
strategic importance to the national security interest of the 
United States and that the Secretary of Defense should improve 
the posture and capabilities of the Department of Defense to 
meet the growing array of challenges in the region, with a 
particular focus on the People's Republic of China and the 
Russian Federation.

Report on permanent stationing of a United States Army brigade combat 
        team in the Republic of Poland (sec. 1254)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require not 
later than March 1, 2019, that the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report on the feasibility 
and advisability of permanently stationing a United States Army 
brigade combat team in the Republic of Poland.

Reports on nuclear capabilities of the Democratic People's Republic of 
        Korea (sec. 1255)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require, 
not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of 
National Intelligence, to submit to the appropriate committees 
a report on the status of the nuclear program of the Democratic 
People's Republic of Korea to establish a baseline of progress 
for negotiations with respect to denuclearization. The 
provision would require, in the case of an agreement between 
the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of 
Korea, the Secretary of Defense to submit a written update to 
the required baseline report not later than 60 days after the 
date on which the agreement is reached and every 90 days 
thereafter.
    The provision would also require, not later than 180 days 
after the date on which the baseline report is submitted and 
every 180 days thereafter, that the written update to the 
baseline report include: (1) an assessment of the establishment 
of safeguards, other control mechanisms, and other assurances 
secured from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to 
ensure its activities permitted under any agreement will not be 
used to further any nuclear-related military or nuclear 
explosive purpose, including research on or development of a 
nuclear explosive device; and (2) an assessment of the capacity 
of the United States or an international organization, 
including the International Atomic Energy Agency, to 
effectively access and investigate suspicious sites in the 
Democratic People's Republic of Korea or allegations of covered 
nuclear-related activities, including storage sites for nuclear 
weapons.

Report on United States military training opportunities with allies and 
        partners in the Indo-Pacific region (sec. 1256)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense should 
continue to place emphasis on United States military training 
exercises with allies in the Indo-Pacific region. The provision 
would also require that, not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense submit 
to the congressional defense committees a report on future 
United States military training opportunities with allied 
partner countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

                       Subtitle G--Others Matters

Modification of authorities relating to acquisition and cross-servicing 
        agreements (sec. 1261)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2342 of title 10, United States Code, to prohibit the 
use of acquisition and cross-servicing agreements (ACSAs) to 
facilitate transfers of logistics support, supplies, and 
services to third-party countries or organizations and clarify 
that ACSAs may not provide for, or otherwise constitute by 
itself a commitment for, the introduction of U.S. Armed Forces 
into hostilities. The provision would also require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report on the 
Department's use of the authority to the appropriate committees 
of Congress.
    The committee acknowledges the value of ACSAs with an array 
of partners, including North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
allies, parties to bilateral and collective defense treaties 
and agreements with the United States, and the wide array of 
partners with which the United States cooperates. Such 
agreements provide the Department of Defense with flexibility, 
access, and support on the basis of full reciprocity in 
numerous regions around the world in the furtherance of U.S. 
national security interests. ACSAs may also help to enhance 
readiness at minimal cost and increase military effectiveness 
by allowing partners and allies to practice mutual support 
procedures during military exercises.
    However, the committee is concerned that the Department has 
not kept Congress adequately informed of new ACSAs being signed 
with non-NATO member countries or provided sufficient 
information with respect to how the Department is ensuring that 
U.S.-provided logistics support, supplies, and services are 
being fully reimbursed on a reciprocal basis. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States 
to submit a report to Congress, no later than November 1, 2018, 
that evaluates the use of ACSAs by the Department of Defense 
(DOD), including: (1) A list of current ACSAs signed by the 
United States; (2) The criteria and processes used by DOD to 
determine the need for ACSAs with allies and partners; (3) The 
extent to which DOD is complying with the requirements of 
section 2342 of title 10, United States Code, to account for 
support provided under ACSAs and receive reciprocal support or 
reimbursements from partner nations; (4) The extent to which 
DOD has complied with the requirement of section 2342 of title 
10, United States Code, to notify Congress of their intent to 
sign an ACSA with a non-NATO member country; (5) Any known 
instances of DOD's use of ACSAs as mechanisms for transfers of 
logistics support, supplies, and services to third-party 
countries for which there is no ACSA currently in place; (6) 
Recommendations for improving DOD's administration of the ACSA 
authority; and (7) Any other matters deemed relevant by the 
Comptroller General.

Extension of authority for transfer of amounts for Global Engagement 
        Center (sec. 1262)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
one year the transfer authority contained in section 1287(e)(1) 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 
relating to the Global Engagement Center (GEC).
    The committee strongly supports the mission of the GEC to 
counter false and misleading messaging by both state and non-
state adversaries and notes the importance of integrating 
military and nonmilitary tools of statecraft to address these 
challenges. The committee believes continuation of the transfer 
authority provided by this provision helps to facilitate such 
whole-of-government approaches.
    The committee notes that the Departments of State and 
Defense signed a memorandum of understanding on February 26, 
2018, to facilitate the transfer of $40.0 million for the 
purposes of countering propaganda and disinformation from 
foreign nations, more than a year after such transfers were 
authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2017 and after the Intelligence Community publicly 
reported Russian efforts to influence the 2016 elections. The 
committee has significant concern about delayed action on these 
issues in the face of a significant and growing threat from 
Russia. The committee strongly encourages the Departments of 
State and Defense to fully utilize the authorities that have 
been provided to more aggressively counter propaganda by Russia 
and other state and non-state actors.

Sense of Senate on purchase by Turkey of S-400 air defense system (sec. 
        1263)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the President should impose and apply 
sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries through 
Sanctions Act (Public Law 115-44) against the Republic of 
Turkey if it purchases the S-400 air defense system from the 
Russian Federation.
    The Republic of Turkey is a North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) ally and critical strategic partner of the 
United States. The committee recognizes that the United States-
Turkey alliance remains essential for deterring and countering 
Russian aggression, countering Iranian malign influence, and 
combating terrorism, all of which are priorities of the new 
National Defense Strategy. Moreover, the primary beneficiaries 
of any rupture in the United States-Turkey alliance would be 
Russia and Iran. Thus, the committee urges the administration 
to continue working with the Government of Turkey to develop 
cooperative approaches to shared challenges, including 
counterterrorism cooperation concerning the Kurdistan Workers' 
Party (PKK), defeating ISIS, the situation in Syria, NATO 
posture and activities in the Black Sea, and countering Iranian 
malign influence, among others.
    However, the committee remains concerned about a number of 
issues, which threaten to undermine the foundation for a strong 
and sustainable United States-Turkey alliance. For example, 
Turkey's purchase of the S-400 air defense system from the 
Russian Federation would be incompatible with Turkey's 
commitments as a NATO ally. Not only would the purchase put 
billions of dollars into the Russian military industrial 
complex and give more profits to Vladimir Putin's corrupt 
network of kleptocrats, it would subsidize Russian aggression 
on Turkey's periphery, including in Syria and Ukraine. The 
committee urges the Government of Turkey to abandon any plans 
for the purchase of the S-400 air defense system from the 
Russian Federation. At the same time, the committee urges the 
administration to work with the Government of Turkey to 
identify alternatives to the S-400 air defense system that meet 
Turkey's defense requirements.
    Beyond defense, there are other concerning issues that have 
a negative impact on United States-Turkey relations. The 
committee has serious concerns about cases against U.S. 
citizens who have been arrested under Turkey's state of 
emergency, including Pastor Andrew Brunson, and calls for their 
immediate release. The committee also remains disturbed by the 
violence that took place outside the Turkish ambassador's 
residence in Washington, D.C. on May 16, 2017, and believes the 
perpetrators should be brought to justice under United States 
law. More broadly, the committee is concerned by indications of 
deteriorating respect for human rights and the rule of law in 
Turkey. As an important member of NATO, the committee calls on 
the Government of Turkey to uphold its 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.''

Department of Defense support for stabilization activities in national 
        security interest of the United States (sec. 1264)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary 
of State and in consultation with the Administrator of the 
United States Agency for International Development and the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to provide 
certain support for the stabilization activities of other 
Federal agencies.

Enhancement of U.S.-Israel defense cooperation (sec. 1265)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 12001(d) of the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-287) to extend the authority for the 
War Reserves Stockpile Ammunition-Israel through September 30, 
2023. The provision would also authorize the President, acting 
through the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, to 
conduct a joint assessment of the quantity of precision guided 
munitions necessary for Israel to counter regional threats. The 
provision would also amend the Bob Stump National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314) to 
require the Secretary of Defense to prescribe procedures for 
the rapid acquisition and deployment of supplies and associated 
support services urgently needed to support production of 
precision guided munitions.
    The committee believes that the United States should 
continue to work closely with Israel to research, develop, and 
eventually procure the necessary capabilities to effectively 
detect, map, monitor, operate in, and neutralize underground 
tunnels and share successful tactics to engage in effective 
tunnel warfare. Therefore, not later than February 1, 2019, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with Israel's Ministry of Defense, to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees on anti-tunneling cooperation 
with Israel, which shall include the following elements: (1) An 
identification of specific capability gaps of the United 
States, the capability gaps of Israel, and any shared 
capability gaps with respect to detecting, mapping, monitoring, 
operating in, and neutralizing underground tunnels; (2) An 
identification of cooperative projects that would address those 
capability gaps and mutually benefit and strengthen the 
security of the United States and Israel; (3) An assessment of 
the projected cost for research and development efforts and the 
timeline for the completion of each cooperative project; (4) An 
assessment of the percentage of U.S. funds for cooperative 
projects that could be realistically and efficiently spent in 
the United States; (5) An identification of anti-tunnel 
capability gaps of the United States not likely to be addressed 
through cooperative projects; and (6) An assessment of the 
projected costs for procurement and fielding of jointly 
developed anti-tunneling capabilities.

Certifications regarding actions by Saudi Arabia in Yemen (sec. 1266)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the expenditure of funds to provide authorized in-flight 
refueling to Saudi or Saudi-led coalition non-United States 
aircraft conducting missions in Yemen pending certifications by 
the Secretary of State that the Government of Saudi Arabia is 
taking certain actions related to the civil war in Yemen. The 
provision includes several exceptions and provides for a 
national security waiver that may be exercised by the Secretary 
of State.

Sense of the Senate on support for G5 Sahel Joint Force countries (sec. 
        1267)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate on support for the G5 Sahel Joint Force 
countries.

Sense of Congress on broadening and expanding strategic partnerships 
        and allies (sec. 1268)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the United States manages multiple 
strategic challenges through the enduring strength of its 
alliances and that it remains resolved to forge new alliances 
and partnerships in order to address shared challenges in 
Europe, the Indo-Pacific, and throughout the world.

Removal of Turkey from the F-35 program (sec. 1269)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the transfer of title for any F-35 aircraft to the Government 
of the Republic of Turkey until such time as the Secretary of 
Defense submits to the appropriate congressional committees a 
plan to remove the Government of the Republic of Turkey from 
participation in the F-35 program, to include industrial and 
military aspects of the program.

Increase in minimum amount of obligations from the Special Defense 
        Acquisition Fund for precision guided munitions (sec. 1270)

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the amount of annual obligations from the Special Defense 
Acquisition Fund for the procurement and stocking of precision 
guided munitions from 20 percent to 25 percent.

                       Items of Special Interest

Advise and assist efforts in Afghanistan

    In August 2017, the President announced a new South Asia 
strategy that was accompanied by an increase of U.S. and North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops in Afghanistan in 
support of a renewed effort to advise and assist Afghan forces 
as part of the NATO Resolute Support Mission. As part of the 
increase, the Army has deployed a Security Force Assistance 
Brigade (SFAB), a new unit created to advise and assist foreign 
military forces. The development of the Afghan National Defense 
and Security Forces (ANDSF) has been a central element of 
successive U.S. strategies in Afghanistan and the Department of 
Defense (DOD) has utilized a variety of approaches to execute 
that strategy. The committee is aware of the challenges DOD has 
faced in prior efforts to advise and assist various ANDSF 
elements. For example, in 2013, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) report, ``GAO-13-381 Security Force Assistance: 
More Detailed Planning and Improved Access to Information 
Needed to Guide Efforts of Advisor Teams in Afghanistan,'' 
found that advisor teams in Afghanistan needed clearer guidance 
regarding the end states, objectives, and milestones they were 
expected to achieve as well as improved access to information 
to guide their efforts. The GAO also discussed challenges DOD 
faced in fulfilling requirements for advisor personnel, 
including the Army's decision to use personnel from non-
deployed brigade combat teams to form advisor teams. The 
committee remains concerned about the efficacy of U.S. advise 
and assist efforts in Afghanistan, particularly in light of the 
increased emphasis on those efforts under the new South Asia 
strategy. Additionally, the committee is concerned by the 
compressed timeline under which the first SFAB was created, 
trained and equipped, and deployed to Afghanistan. The 
committee understands that the decision to accelerate the 
fielding of this unit created a number of challenges, including 
manning shortages, the scaling back of training, and 
reprogramming requests for essential equipment. Accordingly, 
the Committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to evaluate the following issues: (1) The extent to 
which DOD, in conjunction with NATO, has defined advisor team 
missions, goals, and objectives; (2) The extent to which 
advisors were trained and equipped for their specific missions 
in Afghanistan; (3) The ability of the Army's Security Force 
Assistance Brigade to meet current and future advisor 
requirements in Afghanistan and elsewhere; (4) What 
adjustments, if any, are being made to the manning, training 
and equipping, and deployment of the second and third SFABs; 
and (5) Any other issues the Comptroller General determines 
appropriate with respect to the advise and assist mission in 
Afghanistan.
    The committee further directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a briefing to the Senate Committee on Armed Services 
not later than November 1, 2018 on the Comptroller General's 
preliminary findings and submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees on a date agreed to at the time of the 
briefing.

Clarification of authority to waive certain expenses for activities of 
        regional centers for security studies

    The committee notes the important contribution of the 
regional centers for security studies for building security 
cooperation with allies and partners globally. The regional 
centers advance U.S. security priorities by promoting 
multilateral dialogue on a broad spectrum of shared security 
issues. The United States benefits from the participation of 
national security leaders from partner nations in the exchange 
of ideas promoted by the regional centers. The committee notes 
that the Department of Defense is authorized to provide 
reimbursements for the logistical expenses associated with the 
participation of foreign government officials in regional 
center activities. However, the committee understands that 
there may be concerns with the processes and associated 
timelines for approving such reimbursements that could impact 
participation of foreign government officials. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in 
coordination with appropriate officials from the Department of 
State, to provide the congressional defense committees a 
briefing on the authorities and procedures for making 
reimbursements for the logistical expenses associated with the 
participation of foreign government officials in regional 
center activities. The briefing should be provided no later 
than October 1, 2018.

Defense Institute of International Legal Studies

    A key component of the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
efforts to build the institutional capacity of foreign security 
forces is defense legal institution building. Building partner 
security forces' legal institutional capacity serves the U.S. 
goals of promoting accountability, the rule of law, respect for 
civilian control of the military, enhancing compliance with 
human rights and the law of armed conflict. In this regard, the 
Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (DIILS) is the 
principal resource within the DOD security cooperation 
enterprise for helping to build the legal capacity of foreign 
security forces through mobile programs deployed globally and 
resident courses at Naval Station Newport in Newport, Rhode 
Island.
    Over the last several years, the mission and activities of 
DIILS have expanded significantly, as U.S. forces increasingly 
work by, with, and through partner security forces. The 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report on 
December, 2016, titled, ``Rule of Law Assistance: DOD Should 
Assess Workforce Size of Defense Institute of International 
Legal Studies'' (GAO-17-118), which stated that between fiscal 
years 2013 and 2016, DIILS assistance activities grew by nearly 
50 percent, and that trend has continued. At the same time, the 
GAO report found that DIILS staffing during this same period 
had remained essentially static. The Institute has initiated 
hiring in fiscal year 2018 to begin to address this staffing 
shortfall.
    In addition, the number of resident courses offered at the 
Naval Station Newport has increased significantly over the last 
several years. In 2017, the DIILS resident course program 
hosted over 200 participants representing over 80 countries 
from all the Geographic Combatant Commands. However, the 
limited classroom space available to DIILS presents challenges 
for further expansion of resident courses to meet the growing 
demand.
    Another important driver for DIILS's expanding mission has 
been the security cooperation reforms enacted in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. The 
consolidated ``Section 333'' authority under that Act 
emphasizes the importance of building defense institutional 
capacity of friendly foreign forces, particularly at higher 
echelons, as part of capacity building programs. DIILS's 
mission of providing defense legal institution building 
training under Title 10 authorities currently comprises more 
than one third of DIILS's events, and the committee expects 
that this mission will continue to grow as DIILS aims to build 
sustained capacity in partner security forces over the long-
term.
    In order to ensure DIILS is appropriately resourced to meet 
growing requirements for defense legal institution building, 
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
review of the facility requirements for DIILS at the Naval 
Station Newport. This review shall include consideration of the 
full range of options for optimizing DIILS capacity to carry 
out its current and expected mission, including an expanding 
role in defense legal institution building through both mobile 
and resident courses. The options shall include: (1) The impact 
of maintaining the status quo on DIILS ability to carry out its 
mission; (2) The costs and benefits of renovating the existing 
buildings available to DIILS for its administrative offices and 
classroom spaces; (3) The costs and benefits of consolidating 
DIILS administrative offices and classroom spaces in a newly 
constructed, single facility with sufficient capacity to 
accommodate DIILS's expanding mission; and (4) Consideration of 
using any other installation or facility authority deemed 
appropriate by the Secretary. The committee directs the 
Secretary to report on the findings of this review, including a 
recommended course of action, to the congressional defense 
committees not later than January 30, 2019.

Human rights in Burma

    The committee condemns the systematic human rights abuses 
committed against the Rohingya people in Burma, as well as 
attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army militant group. 
Amid disturbing reports of widespread sexual assault and 
violence against women and girls, starvation, killing, and 
forcible deportation, nearly 700,000 men, women, and children 
have been forced from their homes. The committee remains 
concerned about role of the Burmese military in the violence 
and displacement inflicted on the Rohingya and other ethnic 
minorities in Burma.
    The committee calls on the Government of Burma to: (1) 
Cease hostilities against the Rohingya in Burma and take 
proactive steps to prevent further violence; (2) Ensure the 
Burmese military adheres to international human rights 
standards; (3) Carry out meaningful and comprehensive 
investigations of credible reports of human rights violations, 
including reports of conflict-related sexual and gender-based 
violence; (4) Take steps to hold accountable those in the 
Burmese military responsible for human rights violations; (5) 
Allow immediate and unfettered humanitarian access to 
communities in areas affected by conflict, including Rohingya 
communities in Rakhine State; and (6) Cooperate with the United 
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and other relevant 
United Nations agencies to ensure the protection of displaced 
persons and the safe and voluntary return of Rohingya refugees 
and internally displaced persons.
    The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to direct the 
resources necessary for ensuring full implementation of section 
362 of title 10, United States Code, which prohibits the use of 
funds for any training, equipment, or other assistance for a 
unit of a foreign security force if the Secretary of Defense 
has credible information that the unit has committed a gross 
violation of human rights. The committee encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to alert the appropriate congressional 
committees if additional resources are required in order to 
ensure full implementation. The committee also encourages the 
Secretary of Defense to focus military-to-military exchanges 
with the Burmese military, including participation in regional 
humanitarian and disaster relief exercises, on human rights and 
necessary military reforms to promote transparency, 
accountability, and adherence to international human rights 
standards.

Matters relating to Kosovo

    The committee fully supports efforts to normalize relations 
between Kosovo and Serbia through the European Union-led, U.S.-
supported dialogue process. Normalization of relations between 
Kosovo and Serbia is in the interest of Kosovars and Serbs 
alike. Furthermore, it is vital to Kosovo and Serbia's shared 
European future and essential to stability in the Western 
Balkans.
    The committee condemns the murder of Oliver Ivanovic on 
January 16, 2018. The committee urges the governments of Kosovo 
and Serbia to ensure the perpetrators of this crime are brought 
to justice, and to protect all those who are willing to work 
towards reconciliation between Kosovars and Serbs in order to 
improve the lives of citizens in both countries.
    The committee commends Kosovo's recent passage of a border 
demarcation agreement with Montenegro. The committee hopes this 
agreement will enable Kosovo to move forward with the European 
Union visa liberalization process and provide incentives to 
advance other reforms, which are necessary to achieve Kosovo's 
integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions.
    The committee continues to support U.S. assistance to the 
Kosovo Security Force as it makes the gradual transition to a 
multi-ethnic army for the Republic of Kosovo. 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 the rights and concerns of all 
of Kosovo's citizens, promotes regional security and stability, 
and supports Kosovo's aspirations for eventual full membership 
in NATO.

Notifications for sensitive military operations

    The committee's support for sensitive military operations 
rests, in part, on our ability to conduct regular and 
continuous oversight of those operations. Notifications from 
the Department are fundamental to that oversight, and they are 
also required by section 130f of title 10, United States Code. 
However, despite the Department's guidelines regarding 
notifications, recent notifications have been both untimely and 
insufficiently detailed for the committee to conduct necessary 
oversight. Moreover, the committee is concerned that the 
Department has used an exception to the reporting requirement, 
which was included at the Department's request, in a way that 
is inconsistent with congressional intent. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Department to comply with the following 
requirements for notifications of sensitive military operations 
going forward.
    First, notifications must be timely. Section 130f of title 
10, United States Code, requires written notification of a 
sensitive military operation within 48 hours. Yet the committee 
has repeatedly been notified outside that window or without the 
required notification in writing. Oral notifications are 
appreciated but are not a substitute for compliance with these 
statutory requirements.
    Second, the Department must notify the Congress of 
sensitive operations in line with congressional intent. A 
reliance on the limited exception contained in section 130f 
continues to result in delayed or complete lack of 
notification. This is in direct conflict with congressional 
intent.
    Third, notifications must be sufficiently detailed to allow 
the committee to understand the risks, benefits, and 
consequences of sensitive military operations. The 
notifications received from the Department have been 
increasingly vague. In order for the Congress to perform its 
Constitutional duties, the committee must understand the 
context and intent associated with Department actions. At a 
minimum, notifications of sensitive military operations should 
include the following:
          (1) The legal authority for the operation;
          (2) The objectives of the operation, including any 
        metrics being used to grade the success of the 
        operation in achieving those objectives;
          (3) The number and type of United States military 
        personnel involved in the operation;
          (4) The number and type of United States military 
        platforms involved in the operation;
          (5) The number and type of foreign partner military 
        personnel involved in the operation, if any;
          (6) The planned duration of the operation;
          (7) The location of the operation;
          (8) A description of the reasons the operation was 
        conducted, including a description of the threat to be 
        addressed by the operation and the intelligence 
        information that precipitated the operation;
          (9) Whether any part of the operation was conducted 
        without the knowledge of the country where the 
        operation occurred or any other country with a military 
        presence in the location the operation occurred;
          (10) Whether any U.S. persons were the target of, or 
        harmed during, the operation;
          (11) A battle damage assessment of the operation, if 
        available; and
          (12) Any significant diplomatic issues or impacts on 
        the Department's operations that resulted from the 
        operation.
    If the details described above require the notice to be 
classified, it should be submitted in a classified form. 
Classification is not a justification for omitting important 
details from the notice. Moreover, in the rare case that a 
notice contains information that the Department believes must 
be closely held within the committee, the Department should 
inform the Chairman and Ranking Member of the need for such 
handling. The committee, not the Department, will then 
determine how to handle that specific issue. The committee, not 
the Department, must make its own determinations about how to 
conduct the requisite oversight, and under no circumstances 
should the Department unilaterally exclude appropriately-
cleared staff from receiving notifications to Congress that are 
required by law.

Report on U.S. assistance to the Lebanese Security Forces

    The committee recognizes and commends the contributions of 
the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and Lebanese Internal Security 
Forces (ISF) to the campaign against the Islamic State of Iraq 
and Syria, efforts to address the threat posed by other 
terrorist organizations, and efforts to secure Lebanon's 
borders in recent years. The committee also notes that U.S. 
assistance to the LAF is intended, in part, to enable the LAF 
to function as the nation's only legitimate security provider 
and to support the implementation of the terms of United 
Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1701 as soon as 
practicable. A central challenge to these efforts is the 
persistence and influence of Lebanese Hezbollah, which actively 
undermines security throughout the Middle East, facilitates the 
Government of Iran's destabilizing agenda, and supports war 
crimes and acts of terror, while simultaneously acting as a 
significant political entity in Lebanon.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
in coordination with the Secretary of State, to provide a 
report, not later than September 1, 2018, on U.S. assistance to 
the LAF and ISF. At a minimum, that report shall include: (1) A 
description of U.S. objectives in its support to the LAF and 
ISF in Lebanon and any progress made towards those objectives; 
(2) A description of support to the LAF and ISF since 2013 and 
a projection of continued support across the Future Years 
Defense Program; (3) An evaluation of the specific actions 
taken by the LAF and ISF to implement the terms of UNSCR 1701, 
to include descriptions of the scope and trends of LAF and ISF 
activities to address progress toward the disarmament of 
Hezbollah and other armed groups in Lebanon, the movement and 
establishment of Iranian or Hezbollah arms, personnel, and 
infrastructure in and through Lebanon through the use of 
checkpoints and roadblocks, and other enforcement actions by 
such forces to counter related malign activities; (4) An 
assessment of the military, political, and economic factors 
impacting the ability of the LAF and ISF to enforce the terms 
of UNSCR 1701, as described in subsection (3) and the 
utilization of U.S. assistance for that purpose; (5) A 
description of destabilizing actions by the Government of Iran 
in Lebanon and trends of those actions, to include Iran's 
material support of Hezbollah's military and political 
entities, the status of Iran's influence in Lebanese 
institutions including any operational coordination between the 
Lebanese security forces, Hezbollah, and Iranian forces, any 
efforts by Iran to establish infrastructure for the purposes of 
manufacturing or storing weaponry in Lebanon, and efforts by 
the Government of Iran in Lebanon to threaten the interests of 
the United States and its allies and partners in the region; 
(6) An assessment of current and planned end-use monitoring 
protocols for U.S. security assistance to the LAF and ISF, to 
include detailed descriptions of Lebanese forces' adherence to 
those protocols and any specific instances of misuse or 
unauthorized transfer of U.S. assistance, if any, along with an 
assessment of any risk of future misuse or unauthorized 
transfer; and (7) Any other matters deemed relevant by the 
Secretary.

Report on WRSA-I Stockpile Quantity Review

    The committee values the strategic alliance between the 
United States and Israel and supports an increase in the number 
of precision guided munitions (PGMs) in the War Reserve Stock 
Allies-Israel (WRSA-I). These munitions are intended to be 
utilized by the United States, but can also be used by our ally 
Israel, should a critical need arise where longer term 
procurement of specific munitions may not be an option. While 
the stockpile contains many valuable munitions, the committee 
is concerned that some critical items requiring long lead-time 
for development may not be readily available.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Policy to conduct a review of the number of PGMs 
needed to ensure that the United States can counter regional 
threats and also to collaborate with the Israeli Ministry of 
Defense to gauge its PGM requirements should the U.S. need to 
provide immediate assistance. The results from this joint 
assessment shall be submitted to the congressional defense 
committees by February 1, 2019. Included in this assessment, 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy shall outline any 
challenges in meeting the results of the joint assessment and 
provide recommendations to spur the national security 
industrial base toward a higher production rate.

Role of Turkey in the F-35 supply chain

    The committee continues to monitor with concern the 
trajectory of the U.S.-Turkey relationship. The committee is 
aware that Turkey plans to buy a large number of F-35s and is a 
program partner eligible to become a supplier to the global F-
35 fleet. However, the announced purchase by Turkey of the 
Almaz-Antey S-400 system represents the latest in a troubling 
series of events affecting relations between the government of 
Turkey and the United States. The committee is concerned that 
further deterioration in the relationship between the United 
States and Turkey could result in disruption of cooperative 
programs, such as the F-35. Therefore, the committee requests 
that the Department of Defense provide to the congressional 
defense committees a briefing no later than February 1, 2019 
that shall include: (1) a component-level description of the 
current and planned supply chain contributions of Turkey to the 
F-35 program, both in manufacturing and in sustainment; and (2) 
any components for which Turkey is a sole or majority supplier, 
or where the removal of components of Turkish manufacture would 
create significant or lasting disruption for the F-35 program.

United States-Mexico military cooperation

    The committee recognizes the importance of military 
cooperation between the United States and Mexico given their 
mutual national security interests, intertwined economies, and 
shared values. Furthermore, the committee acknowledges the 
Government of Mexico's significant efforts in recent years to 
address the challenges posed by transnational criminal 
organizations, narcotics and human trafficking, unauthorized 
migration, and securing its long, geographically complex 
borders. Such efforts benefit not only the United States and 
Mexico, but nations throughout Latin America through the 
disruption of illicit threat networks that further degrade 
internal instability, erode confidence in the governance of 
partner nations, and establish pathways that can be exploited 
by criminals and terrorist organizations.
    With that in mind, the committee strongly supports the 
Department of State-led Merida Initiative, which has provided 
$2.7 billion in assistance to Mexico since fiscal year 2008 to 
combat drug trafficking and support Mexican efforts to support 
human rights, combat corruption, and reform its institutions. 
The committee also strongly supports Department of Defense-led 
military-to-military engagement with Mexico. As General Lori J. 
Robinson, former Commander of U.S. Northern Command 
(USNORTHCOM), noted in testimony before the committee on 
February 15, 2018, this engagement starts at ``the tactical 
level and extends through the close ties between USNORTHCOM 
senior leadership and SEMAR [Secretaria de Marina] and SEDENA 
[Secretaria de la Defensa Nacional].''
    The committee applauds recent high-level engagement between 
senior leaders of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the 
Government of Mexico. It also notes the success of recent 
exercises ranging from U.S. Marine Forces North's provision of 
training to over 1,500 Mexican Marines, who are on the 
frontlines of combating drug trafficking, to Mexico's 
participation in the UNITAS 2017 exercise, during which U.S. 
and Mexican forces joined members of 16 other militaries in 
Peru to enhance their ability to conduct naval operations and 
interoperable amphibious operations, stability operations, and 
humanitarian and disaster relief missions in the Western 
Hemisphere. Such activities, along with the security 
cooperation funding provided by DOD and International Military 
Education and Training funds directed by the Department of 
State and administered by DOD, are critical to the security of 
both Mexico and the United States. The importance of these ties 
will only increase given the challenges posed by heroin 
cultivation and the proliferation and smuggling of potent 
synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl, in and through Mexico to 
the United States.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary of State to continue to deepen the military-to-
military relations with Mexico through the continued provision 
of training and equipment to enhance SEDENA and SEMAR's 
capabilities to combat transnational criminal organizations, 
regular bilateral engagements on defense with Mexican 
leadership, and swift coordination across agencies to approve 
training activities and exercises in ways that support and 
reinforce U.S. national security policy.

United States policy and strategy in the Western Balkans

    The committee affirms that the United States commitment to 
a Europe whole, free, and at peace remains ironclad. 
Furthermore, the committee recognizes that security and 
prosperity in the Western Balkans remain essential for the 
success of this vision.
    However, the committee recognizes that the region confronts 
growing challenges: lagging economic growth, corruption, rising 
political tensions within and among states, the threat of 
radicalization and terrorism, and malign Russian influence. For 
example, in a hearing before the committee on March 8, 2018, 
General Curtis Scaparrotti, Commander of U.S. European Command, 
testified that the area that most concerned him in relation to 
future Russian interference was ``the Balkans.'' He added, 
``Russia's at work in the Balkans, and I think we've kind of 
taken our eye off the area.'' If unaddressed or unresolved, 
these challenges confronting the Western Balkans could have 
serious consequences for regional security and prosperity, as 
well as for U.S. interests in Europe.
    The committee believes the United States needs a clear 
policy and strategy for the Western Balkans-one that is 
integrated with the European Union's (EU) ``Strategy for the 
Western Balkans'' and, most importantly, backed by enhanced, 
focused, and sustained engagement by senior political leaders 
in the United States. The committee encourages the president to 
consider the appointment of a Presidential Special Envoy to 
lead and coordinate U.S. diplomatic efforts in the region and 
oversee implementation of a U.S. strategy for the region across 
the interagency.
    The committee believes such a strategy should include 
diplomatic, economic, and military efforts to: (1) Support the 
sovereign right of the countries of the Western Balkans to 
pursue integration into the Euro-Atlantic community through 
institutions including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
(NATO) and the EU; (2) Counter Russian malign influence in the 
region; (3) Integrate U.S. and EU efforts to incentivize 
reform, combat corruption, strengthen the rule of law, and hold 
regional leaders accountable for results; (4) Enhance military-
to-military engagement between the United States and the 
militaries of the Western Balkans countries to promote 
interoperability with NATO, civilian control of the military, 
procurement reforms, and regional security cooperation; (5) 
Promote energy security in the Western Balkans; (6) Support 
diplomatic efforts to normalize relations between Serbia and 
Kosovo through the EU-led, U.S.-supported dialogue process; (7) 
Resolve the dispute between Greece and Macedonia, enabling 
Macedonia to move forward with integration into NATO and the 
EU; and (8) Align U.S. and EU efforts in Bosnia-Herzegovina to 
catalyze and advance necessary domestic political reforms.

U.S. Africa Command

    In April 2018 testimony before the committee, Secretary of 
Defense James Mattis noted, ``Our efforts in Africa are largely 
focused on assisting nations facing violent terrorists to 
develop their own capability to provide internal security and 
mutual support against insurgents and terror groups.'' The 
committee believes that the security cooperation efforts of 
U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) are critical to support the 2018 
National Defense Strategy's direction to move towards a ``more 
resource sustainable approach'' to combat shared security 
threats to the U.S. and our partners.
    For example, the committee notes the important role 
regional partnerships in the African Union Mission in Somalia 
are playing to combat the threat posed by al-Shabaab and other 
terrorist threats in Somalia. General Thomas Waldhauser, the 
Commander of AFRICOM, stated in testimony that Ethiopia 
``remains a longstanding partner and contributes over 4,000 
uniformed personnel to the African Union Mission in Somalia, 
further advancing regional peace and security efforts in East 
Africa.'' Similarly, General Waldhauser noted that Kenya and 
Uganda ``continue to develop reconnaissance and surveillance 
capabilities to build their capacity for counterterrorism 
operations'' against al-Shabaab and other terrorist threats.
    Other important regional security cooperation programs, 
such as the State Department-led Global Peace Operations 
Initiative and the African Peacekeeping Rapid Response 
Partnership, are focused on strengthening the capacity, 
capabilities, and professionalism of African partners to 
support peacekeeping and crisis response operations across the 
continent.
    In order to absorb and sustain security cooperation 
programs such as these, partner nations must build and maintain 
accountable and transparent government institutions with a 
commitment to civilian control of the military, respect for 
human rights, and good governance. The committee encourages 
AFRICOM to develop a code of conduct, in conjunction with 
African partner nations, to establish a common standard with 
regard to issues of defense sector corruption, including a 
commitment to equitable, transparent, and accountable defense 
institutions, the development and improvement of security-
sector legal capacity, and a commitment to the rule of law.
    The committee supports these efforts and encourages AFRICOM 
to continue its emphasis on a whole-of-government approach, 
leveraging the specific skill sets of interagency partners like 
the Department of State, United States Agency for International 
Development, and others to synchronize and complement 
Department of Defense efforts to build the capability and 
capacity of our African partners to strengthen institutions and 
develop local solutions to radicalization, destabilization, and 
other drivers of conflict that undermine stability and our 
shared security interests.

                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 
$335.2 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

Consolidation of reporting requirements under the Strategic and 
        Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (sec. 1411)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 11 of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling 
Act (50 U.S.C. 98h-2) to consolidate reporting requirements.

                Subtitle C--Armed Forces Retirement Home

Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 
        1421)
    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 2019 for the 
operation of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Expansion of eligibility for residence at the Armed Forces Retirement 
        Home (sec. 1422)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1512 of the Armed Forces Retirement Home Act of 1991 
(24 U.S.C. 412) to include as authorized residents of the Armed 
Forces Retirement Home (AFRH): (1) Persons with a service-
connected disability incurred in the line of duty in the Armed 
Forces; and (2) Certain spouses of residents. The provision 
would also delineate persons ineligible to be residents of the 
AFRH: (1) Persons discharged or released from military service 
under other than honorable conditions; and (2) Persons with 
substance abuse or mental health problems, with a limited 
exception.
Oversight of health care provided to residents of the Armed Forces 
        Retirement Home (sec. 1423)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1513A(c) of the Armed Forces Retirement Home Act of 
1991 (24 U.S.C. 413a(c)) to revise the duties of the senior 
medical advisor to the Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) to 
require the senior medical advisor to facilitate and monitor 
the timely availability to residents of the AFRH such medical, 
mental health, and dental care services as such residents may 
require at locations other than the AFRH and to monitor 
compliance by the facilities of the AFRH with applicable 
accreditation and health care standards and requirements.
Modification of authority on acceptance of gifts for the Armed Forces 
        Retirement Home (sec. 1424)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
paragraph (1) of section 1515(f) of the Armed Forces Retirement 
Home Act of 1991 (24 U.S.C. 415(f)) to authorize the Chief 
Operating Officer of the Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) to 
accept, receive, solicit, hold, administer, and use any gift, 
devise, or bequest, either absolutely or in trust, of real or 
personal property, or any income therefrom or other interest 
therein, for the benefit of the AFRH. This provision would 
allow the AFRH to adopt gift authorities consistent with those 
of other Federal Government organizations, which are not 
intended to be capitalized by direct appropriations.
Relief for residents of the Armed Forces Retirement Home impacted by 
        increase in fees (sec. 1425)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the removal or release of a resident of the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home (AFRH) as of September 30, 2018, after that 
date based solely on the inability of the resident to pay the 
amount of any increase in fees applicable to residents that 
take effect on October 1, 2018. The provision would require the 
Chief Operating Officer of the AFRH to accommodate residents 
impacted by the fee structure that takes effect on October 1, 
2018, through hardship relief, additional deductions from gross 
income, and other appropriate actions.
Limitation on applicability of fee increase for residents of the Armed 
        Forces Retirement Home (sec. 1426)
    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
amount of the fee increase for a resident of the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home (AFRH) as of April 9, 2018, of those fees 
scheduled to increase on October 1, 2018, to 50 percent of the 
fees payable by such resident.

                       Subtitle D--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. 1431)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to transfer $113.0 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.
Economical and efficient operation of working capital fund activities 
        (sec. 1432)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Department of Defense to implement workload plans that optimize 
the efficiency of the workforce operating within a working 
capital fund activity and reduce the rate structure. The 
provision would also encourage the working capital fund to 
perform reimbursable work for other entities where appropriate.

                       Items of Special Interest

Assessment on material shortfalls in United States Forces Korea for 
        chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear defenses
    The committee is encouraged by the increased chemical, 
biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) defense efforts by 
United States Forces Korea (USFK). The committee remains 
concerned that there are unknown shortfalls in material needs 
for the CBRN mission on the South Korean peninsula. Therefore, 
the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with USFK, to 
submit an assessment, no later than 180 days after the 
enactment of this Act, that establishes operational 
requirements and shortfalls for early warning systems, 
decontamination and tactical disablement operations, collective 
protection equipment, weapons of mass destruction 
characterization, subterranean operations, and additional areas 
that the Secretary deems appropriate.
    The committee is also concerned that United States Forces 
Korea has not adequately prepared for decontamination efforts 
or identified possible limitations in the event of a chemical 
weapon attack. Accordingly, the assessment shall include the 
Department of Defense's ability to respond to chemical 
contamination and the limitation of water availability on the 
Korean Peninsula to assist in decontamination.

Fiscal stability of the National Defense Stockpile

    The committee is strongly supportive of the recent efforts 
by the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) to execute the 
acquisition of strategic and critical materials, expand 
domestic qualification, and recycle military end items in order 
to reclaim strategic materials and rare earth elements.
    Given the committee's concern that the funds within the 
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund have been 
significantly depleted and that the fund lacks long-term 
financial stability without appropriated funds, the committee 
is strongly encouraged by and supportive of the NDS' recent 
plan to coordinate a long-term strategy to request Transaction 
Fund appropriations in the future years defense program, 
coupled with the possible reconfiguration of existing 
stockpiles for modern military and strategic requirements.

   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.
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 allow the 
Secretary of Defense to transfer up to $3.5 billion of Overseas 
Contingency Operations funding authorized for fiscal year 2019 
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

Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Organization (sec. 1531)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$610.1 million for the Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat 
Organization. Additionally, the provision would mandate that 
none of these funds would be available for obligation or 
expenditure to supply training, equipment, supplies, or 
services to a foreign country before the date that is 15 days 
after the date on which the Secretary of Defense has submitted 
to the congressional defense committees, the Committee on 
Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs of the House of Representatives a notice detailing the 
relevant arrangement.

                              Budget Items

Tomahawk
    The budget request did not include funding for line number 
3 of Weapons Procurement, Navy (WPN) Overseas Contingency 
Operations (OCO), for Tomahawk missiles.
    On April 13, 2018, the United States fired 69 Tomahawk 
missiles into Syria. The committee recommends procuring 
Tomahawk missiles to replenish the Navy's inventory of 
Tomahawks to account for the missiles used.
    Thus, the committee recommends an increase of $82.8 million 
to line number 3 of WPN OCO to procure 69 Tomahawk missiles.
Ammunition less than $5 million
    The budget request included $211.9 million for Navy 
Ammunition Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), of which $2.2 
million was for LI 15, Ammunition Less than $5 million.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.0 
million to Navy Ammunition OCO, LI 15 due to excess to need.
JASSM-ER
    The budget request included $61.6 million in line number 2 
of Missile Procurement, Air Force (MPAF) Overseas Contingency 
Operations (OCO), for the Joint Air-Surface Standoff Missile 
(JASSM).
    On April 13, 2018, the United States fired 19 JASSMs in 
Syria. The JASSM is no longer in production and has been 
replaced with a more capable variant, the Joint Air-Surface 
Standoff Missiles Extended Range (JASSM-ER). The committee 
recommends procuring JASSM-ERs to replenish the Air Force's 
inventory to account for the JASSMs used.
    The committee recommends an increase of $22.8 million to 
line number 2 of MPAF OCO to procure 19 JASSM-ERs.

                       Items of Special Interest

Cargo inspections to counter vehicle borne Improvised Explosive Device 
        (IED) threats

    The committee is encouraged that the Department of the Army 
is testing and planning to deploy new passive cargo inspection 
technologies to address a joint urgent operational need to 
counter Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) 
threats. This disruptive technology, which utilizes naturally 
occurring cosmic ray muons and electrons, identifies shielded 
and unshielded nuclear and radioactive materials; detects 
smuggled contraband, including weapons, bomb-making materials, 
and illicit goods; and is proven safe for humans, animals, and 
food products.
    The committee encourages the Army to continue with the 
current testing program and supports efforts to deploy the 
system at a major U.S. military facility. Further, the 
committee requests a briefing 60 days after the enactment of 
this Act on the potential future deployments of these next 
generation inspection technologies inside and outside the 
continental United States. The briefing, which may be provided 
in a classified setting, shall include an assessment of current 
cargo inspection protocols and requirement gaps that may exist.

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

                      Subtitle A--Space Activities

Modifications to Space Rapid Capabilities Office (sec. 1601)
    The committee recommends a provision to clarify and update 
the structure of the Space Rapid Capabilities Office (Space 
RCO).
    The committee notes that section 1601 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91) re-designates the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) 
Office as the Space RCO. Given the challenges the committee had 
in persuading the Department of Defense to recognize the need 
for responsive space since the inception of the ORS Office, 
mandated in the National Defense Authorization Act for 2013 
(Public Law 112-239), the committee is encouraged by the 
enthusiasm expressed by the Commander, Air Force Space Command 
and the other Air Force senior leadership for the Space RCO.
Space warfighting policy and review of space capabilities (sec. 1602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to develop a space warfighting policy not 
later than March 29, 2019. The provision would also direct the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a review relating to the 
national security space enterprise that evaluates: (1) The 
resiliency of the national security space enterprise with 
respect to a conflict; (2) The ability of the national security 
space enterprise to attribute an attack on a space system in a 
timely manner; (3) The ability of the United States to resolve 
a conflict in space and determine the material means by which 
such a conflict may be resolved; (4) The ability of the 
national security space enterprise to defend against, defeat, 
and deter aggressive behavior in space; (5) The effectiveness 
and efficiency of the national security space enterprise to 
rapidly research, develop, acquire, and deploy space 
capabilities and capacities; (6) The current organizational 
structure of the national security space enterprise with 
respect to roles, responsibilities, and authorities; (7) Any 
emerging space threat the Deputy Secretary expects the United 
States to confront over the next 10 years; and (8) Any other 
matters that the Deputy Secretary considers appropriate.
Report on enhancements to the Global Positioning System Operational 
        Control Segment (sec. 1603)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than 1 year after the 
enactment of this Act with an interim briefing no later than 
March 15, 2019, on potential further enhancements to the 
Operational Control Segment for the Global Positioning System 
to achieve capabilities similar to the Next Generation 
Operational Control Segment, including cyber security 
enhancements and other incremental capabilities. The report 
would also include the cost and schedule for such additional 
capabilities and enhancements.
Streamline of commercial space launch operations (sec. 1604)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1617 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1106; 51 U.S.C. 
50918 note) to prohibit the Secretary of Defense's imposition 
of a requirement in procurement germane to national security 
space launch duplicative of any requirement imposed by the 
Secretary of Transportation under chapter 509 of title 10, 
United States Code. The provision would also include a waiver.
Reusable launch vehicles (sec. 1605)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out the policy set forth in 
section 2273 of title 10, United States Code, that regarding 
assured access to space for national security payloads, with a 
strategy that includes reusable launch systems.
    The provision would also require the Secretary to submit to 
the congressional defense committees, no less than 60 days 
prior to the issuance of the solicitation for procurement of 
space launch services, a determination as to: whether launch 
vehicles using previously flown components could meet mission 
requirements, whether services utilizing reusable launch 
vehicles are eligible for award, and, if not, a justification 
for this ineligibility.
Review of and report on activities of International Space Station (sec. 
        1606)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Administrator of 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, to complete 
a review of each program, activity, and future technology 
research project of the Department of Defense being carried out 
on the International Space Station and submit that review to 
the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on 
Armed Services, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the 
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of 
Representatives.

  Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities

Framework on governance, mission management, resourcing, and effective 
        oversight of Department of Defense combat support agencies that 
        are also elements of the intelligence community (sec. 1611)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to develop and codify in policy a 
framework and supporting processes within the Department of 
Defense to ensure that the missions, roles, and functions of 
the Combat Support Agencies of the Department of Defense that 
are also elements of the Intelligence Community, and other 
intelligence components of the Department, are appropriately 
balanced and resourced.

                 Subtitle C--Cyberspace-Related Matters

                      Part I--Cyberspace Generally

Policy of the United States on cyberspace, cybersecurity, cyber 
        warfare, and cyber deterrence (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 hitherto and 
incommensurate with the threat we face in the cyber domain.
Affirming the authority of the Secretary of Defense to conduct military 
        activities and operations in cyberspace (sec. 1622)
    The committee recommends a provision that would affirm the 
authority of the Secretary of Defense to conduct military 
activities and operations in cyberspace, including clandestine 
military activities and operations, to defend the United 
States, its allies, and its interests, in anticipation of and 
in response to malicious cyber activities carried out against 
the United States or a United States person by a foreign power. 
The provision would affirm that this authority includes the 
conduct of military activities or operations in cyberspace 
short of war and in areas outside of named areas of conflict 
for the purpose of preparation of the environment, adversary 
influence, force protection, deterrence of hostilities, and 
counterterrorism operations involving the Armed Forces of the 
United States. The provision would also make clear that 
clandestine military activities or operations in cyberspace are 
traditional military activities for the purposes of section 
503(e)(2) of the National Security Act of 1947 (Public Law 80-
253).
    The committee understands that the authors of the National 
Security Act used the term ``traditional military activities'' 
to exempt standard military operations and activities from the 
Act's stringent reporting requirements, designed for the 
intelligence community's covert action. The authors did not 
anticipate the cyber domain or the nature of modern cyber 
conflict and therefore could not establish whether the 
military's activities in cyberspace qualify as such traditional 
military activities. As a result, there is some debate across 
the executive branch today as to whether sufficient precedent 
exists to determine that clandestine military activities in 
cyberspace should qualify as traditional military activities. 
This interagency disagreement has limited the Department of 
Defense's ability to conduct these necessary operations, novel 
only in that they occur in the cyber domain.
    The committee believes that clandestine military activities 
in cyberspace are not just traditional military activities but 
essential to the military effectiveness of the Armed Forces in 
modern warfare. The committee asserts that persistent cyber 
operations in adversary networks, or ``red space,'' are 
critical for the development of military and deterrence 
targets. As Lieutenant General Paul Nakasone stated on February 
27, 2018, in his response to the committee's advance policy 
questions for his nomination to be the Commander, U.S. Cyber 
Command and the Director of the National Security Agency, ``to 
be operationally effective in cyberspace, U.S. forces must have 
the ability to conduct a range of preparatory activities, which 
may include gaining clandestine access to operationally 
relevant cyber systems or networks.'' The committee is 
concerned that, without the ability to identify, surveil, and 
pre-position tools on targets in peacetime, the military's 
ability to provide options to military planners and the 
President during wartime will be severely limited.
Active defense and surveillance against Russian Federation attacks in 
        cyberspace (sec. 1623)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the National Command Authority to direct the Commander, U.S. 
Cyber Command (CYBERCOM), to take appropriate and proportional 
action through cyberspace to disrupt, defeat, and deter 
systematic and ongoing attacks by the Russian Federation in 
cyberspace. The provision would require the Commander, U.S. 
Cyber Command, to provide at least quarterly reports to the 
congressional defense committees in any year in which such 
actions are undertaken.
    The provision would also authorize the Secretary of Defense 
to conduct, through the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, 
surveillance in networks outside the United States of personnel 
and organizations engaged at the behest or in support of the 
Russian Federation in: (1) Stealing and releasing confidential 
information from U.S. persons campaigning for public office or 
organizations supporting such campaigns; (2) Generating and 
planting information and narratives in U.S. social media and 
other media intended to mislead, sharpen social and political 
conflicts, or otherwise manipulate perceptions and opinions of 
American citizens; (3) Creating networks of subverted computers 
and false accounts on social media platforms for the purpose of 
spreading and amplifying such information and narratives; and 
(4) Planning and developing capabilities to attack U.S. 
critical infrastructure with the intent to cause casualties 
among U.S. persons or persons of allies of the United States, 
significant damage to private or public property, significant 
economic disruption, an effect, individually or in aggregate, 
comparable to that of an armed attack or one that imperils a 
vital national security interest of the United States, or 
significant disruption of the normal functioning of the United 
States democratic society or government, including attacks 
against or incidents involving critical infrastructure that 
could damage systems used to provide key services to the public 
or government.
    The provision would direct the Secretary of Defense, either 
directly or in coordination with other Federal agencies and 
departments, and using the results of the surveillance 
conducted through CYBERCOM, to work with social media companies 
on a voluntary basis to assist those companies in identifying 
accounts created by personnel and organizations engaged at the 
behest or in support of the Russian Federation and that violate 
the companies' terms of service. The provision would allow the 
Secretary of Defense to grant security clearances to 
individuals of media companies as the Secretary deems necessary 
and appropriate for this purpose.
    Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit an annual report to the Congress on the scope 
and intensity of Russian Federation information operations and 
attacks through cyberspace against the U.S. government and the 
American people, as observed by the Cyber Mission Forces of 
CYBERCOM and the National Security Agency.
    Through open and closed hearings with Department of Defense 
officials and independent experts, the committee received 
testimony on the feasibility and appropriateness of utilizing 
the Cyber Mission Forces assigned to CYBERCOM, operating 
outside the United States, to detect, identify, track, and 
actively disrupt the activities of operators working on behalf 
of the Russian Federation to conduct influence operations in 
the United States. The committee heard testimony establishing 
that the Russian Federation seeks to achieve strategic 
objectives in conducting such operations and concludes that the 
threat posed by such operations is significant enough to 
require active countervailing actions. These illegal 
operations, to date, though intended to achieve strategic 
effects, are generally assessed to fall into the category of 
``grey zone conflict,'' below the level of an armed attack. The 
committee believes that disrupting them in proportionate self-
defense through traditional military activities in cyberspace 
is likewise not an armed attack nor escalatory. The committee 
urges the National Command Authority to act on this 
authorization.
Reorganization and consolidation of certain cyber provisions (sec. 
        1624)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend part 
I of subtitle A of title 10, United States Code, by 
transferring sections 130g, 130j, and 130k, currently of 
chapter 13, to chapter 19. This reorganization would codify 
these sections, governing some of the Department of Defense's 
responsibilities and reporting requirements concerning 
cyberspace, under ``Cyber Matters'' rather than ``General 
Powers and Functions.''
Designation of official for matters relating to integrating 
        cybersecurity and industrial control systems within the 
        Department of Defense (sec. 1625)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to designate one official as responsible 
for the integration of cybersecurity and industrial control 
systems within the Department of Defense, to include the 
development of Department-wide standards for integration of 
industrial control systems and the potential applicability of 
frameworks set forth by the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology and similar organizations.
    The committee is concerned that no one individual is 
responsible for defining industrial control system 
cybersecurity standards within the Department of Defense and 
that the lack of such an individual has impeded holistic 
cybersecurity efforts across the Department and its critical 
infrastructure.
Assistance for small manufacturers in the defense industrial supply 
        chain on matters relating to cybersecurity (sec. 1626)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, acting through the Chief Information 
Officer and Under Secretary of Defense for Research and 
Engineering, to improve awareness of cybersecurity threats 
among small- and medium-sized manufacturers in the defense 
industrial supply chain. Measures pursuant to this requirement 
would include: (1) Energetic outreach to the relevant 
businesses critical to the industrial base and supply chain 
needs of the Department of Defense (DOD); (2) The development 
of cybersecurity self-assessments to enhance firms' 
understanding of network vulnerabilities and the Department's 
cybersecurity standards; (3) The transfer of appropriate 
cybersecurity technology, threat information, and techniques 
developed in the DOD to these businesses; and (4) The 
establishment of a cyber counseling certification program, or 
approval of a similar extant program, to certify small- and 
medium-sized business professionals and other relevant 
acquisition staff within the DOD to provide cyber planning 
assistance to small- and medium-sized manufacturers.
    The committee is concerned that small- and medium-sized 
manufacturers of defense or defense-related systems are unaware 
of or unable to meet the cybersecurity standards of the DOD; 
they therefore represent a potential vulnerability to DOD 
systems and assets. The committee believes that, to avoid 
exclusion of small- and medium-sized manufacturers from the 
acquisition process, the Department should be proactive in its 
communication to and cooperation with these businesses in 
ensuring that they can meet DOD standards. The committee also 
believes that the Department should consider using extant 
resources and capacities in this space, including the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership Program and the National Network of Manufacturing 
Institutes.
Modification of acquisition authority of the Commander of United States 
        Cyber Command (sec. 1627)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) by extending the 
acquisition authority established in that section for the 
Commander, U.S. Cyber Command. The section initially limited 
the Commander's obligation and expenditure germane to his 
acquisition authority to $75.0 million from fiscal year 2016 
through fiscal year 2021, at which point the authority would 
sunset. This provision would extend that authority through 
fiscal year 2025 and raise the limit on obligation and 
expenditure to $250.0 million.
Email and Internet website security and authentication (sec. 1628)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to implement the requirements of the 
Binding Operational Directive (BOD) 18-01, issued by the 
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on 
October 16, 2017. This BOD was modeled on actions directed by 
the United Kingdom's National Cybersecurity Center to enhance 
email security and authentication and web security. The 
Department of Defense (DOD) as a rule is exempt from DHS BODs, 
on the grounds that the DOD's security posture is superior to 
that of the rest of the government. In this case, however, the 
DHS BOD makes eminent sense for DOD and should be adopted as 
soon as possible.
    The actions required specifically include: (1) The adoption 
of the START Transport Layer Security (STARTTLS) protocol for 
encryption; (2) Enforcement of Sender Policy Framework (SPF), 
Domain Keys Identified Mail (DKIM), and Domain-based Message 
Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) for email 
authentication; and (3) Implementation of Hypertext Transfer 
Protocol Strict Transport Security (HSTS).
    These simple measures would provide enormous cybersecurity 
benefits for the Department and would bring the Department in 
line with current accepted standards.
    The provision would also require the Chief Information 
Officer of the Department of Defense to notify the 
congressional defense committees within 180 days of the 
issuance of a DHS BOD germane to cybersecurity as to whether 
the Department plans to comply with the directive or how the 
Department plans to meet the security objectives of the 
directive.
Matters pertaining to the Sharkseer cybersecurity programs (sec. 1629)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to transfer the Sharkseer cybersecurity 
program from the National Security Agency (NSA) to the Defense 
Information Systems Agency (DISA). In executing this transfer, 
the Secretary would be required to also transfer all funding 
and, as needed, personnel for the program. The provision would 
fence 10 percent of the funding available for obligation in 
fiscal year 2019 and subsequent years for NSA's Information 
Systems Security Program, PE 33140G, until the Principal Cyber 
Advisor certifies to the congressional defense committees that 
the operations and maintenance funding for the Sharkseer 
program for fiscal year 2019 and the subsequent fiscal years of 
the current future years defense program are available or 
programmed.
    The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
to adopt the Sharkseer ``break and inspect'' decryption 
capability as the enterprise solution in satisfaction of the 
requirement in section 1636 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. 
``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). In executing this requirement, 
the provision would require the Secretary to integrate the 
Sharkseer break and inspect subsystem with the Department of 
Defense's public key infrastructure.
    The provision would require the Secretary, by October 1, 
2020, to enable the Sharkseer system and computer network 
defense service providers to automatically identify and locate 
hosts and endpoints that received or sent malware detected by 
Sharkseer or other network perimeter defense systems for 
remediation.
    The committee notes that the Sharkseer system provides an 
enterprise capability for ``sandboxing as a service,'' meaning 
that it has the capacity to receive and run in a virtual host 
any suspicious samples isolated by any component in the 
Department of Defense (DOD). Meanwhile, other DOD organizations 
are pursuing redundant capabilities. This provision would 
require the termination of alternative sandbox-as-a-service 
initiatives and designation of Sharkseer for that purpose by 
October 1, 2020.
    Finally, the provision would authorize an increase of $20.0 
million to the $790.2 million requested for the Defense 
Information Systems Agency in Procurement, Defense-wide. The 
committee recommends this additional authorization to increase 
the bandwidth of the Sharkseer system to match the increased 
bandwidth of the Internet Access Points that the Sharkseer 
system must monitor.
Pilot program on modeling and simulation in support of military 
        homeland defense operations in connection with cyber attacks on 
        critical infrastructure (sec. 1630)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global 
Security to carry out a pilot program on modeling and 
simulation in support of military homeland defense operations 
through U.S. Northern Command and U.S. Cyber Command. The pilot 
program would be based on the results and lessons learned from 
ongoing research exercises involving local government, 
industry, and military responses to combined natural disasters 
and cyber attacks on critical infrastructure. The ongoing 
research exercises, known as ``Jack Voltaic 1.0'' and ``Jack 
Voltaic 2.0,'' are conducted by the Army Cyber Institute, 
industry partners, and the cities of New York and Houston.
    In general, the objective of such a pilot program would be 
the development of risk analysis methodologies and the 
application of advanced commercial simulation and modeling 
capabilities, based on hyperscale cloud computing technology 
and artificial intelligence/machine learning technology, for 
use by active and reserve component military forces, industry, 
and civil government organizations, to: (1) Assess defense 
critical infrastructure vulnerabilities and interdependencies 
to improve military resilience; (2) Determine the likely 
effectiveness of potential cyber attacks and the 
countermeasures, tactics, and tools used in responding to such 
attacks; (3) Train personnel in incident response; (4) Conduct 
complex and large scale exercises and test scenarios; and (5) 
Foster collaboration and learning between and among departments 
and agencies of the Federal government, State and local 
government, military forces, and private entities responsible 
for critical infrastructure. The pilot would also assist in the 
development and demonstration of the foundations for a 
potential program of record for a shared, high-fidelity, 
interactive, and affordable cloud-based modeling and simulation 
of critical infrastructure systems and incident response that 
can simulate complex cyber and physical disruptions on local, 
State, regional, and national scales.
    The provision would require the Assistant Secretary to 
provide a report on the pilot program coincident with the 
submission of the President's fiscal year 2020 budget request. 
The report should include: (1) A description of the exercises 
conducted under the ``Jack Voltaic'' series and the pilot 
program; (2) An inventory of the cybersecurity units of the 
National Guard and Reserves that could be shared among the 
States under mutual assistance compacts; (3) A description of 
the risk analysis methodologies and modeling and simulation 
capabilities developed and demonstrated in the pilot, together 
with an assessment of the potential future growth of commercial 
technology; (4) Recommendations regarding the establishment of 
a program of record for the Department of Defense for the 
further development and sustainment of advanced, large-scale 
modeling and simulation on modern cloud infrastructure of cyber 
warfare involving critical infrastructure; (5) Lessons learned 
from the application of novel risk analysis methodologies and 
large-scale modeling and simulation regarding vulnerabilities, 
required capabilities, and reconfigured force structure, 
coordination practices, and policy; and (6) Planned steps for 
implementing these lessons.
    The budget request included $10.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Army, of which $28.5 
million was for PE 62308A Advanced Concepts and Simulation. The 
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million, for a total 
of $38.5 million, in RDT&E Army, PE 62308A, for the pilot 
program on modeling and simulation.
Security product integration framework (sec. 1631)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA), the Chief Information Officer 
(CIO), and the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, to select a 
network or network segment and associated computer network 
defense service provider to conduct a demonstration and 
evaluation of one or more existing security product integration 
frameworks, including through modification of network security 
systems to enable such systems to ingest, publish, subscribe, 
tip and cue, and request information or services from each 
other.
    The provision also includes congressional findings that: 
(1) The Department of Defense (DOD) requires a standard, 
enterprise-wide ``security product integration framework'' 
(SPIF) that provides machine-to-machine data exchange 
architecture and protocol to achieve interoperability among and 
orchestration of all the cybersecurity tools, applications, 
systems, and services deployed across DOD networks; (2) 
Information security products and services must be engineered 
not only to connect to this framework but also to consume and 
act on the information that can be provided and to prompt other 
actions by other devices and applications; and (3) Candidate 
SPIFs would ideally be non-proprietary or designed as a modular 
open system.
    The committee directs that the PCA, CIO, and Commander, 
U.S. Cyber Command: (1) Complete this demonstration and 
evaluation by October 1, 2019; (2) Promptly report their 
findings and recommendations to the Deputy Secretary of Defense 
for consideration of funding for follow-on activities in 
preparation of the budget request for fiscal year 2020; and (3) 
Provide a briefing on the results to the congressional defense 
committees on request.
Report on enhancement of software security for critical systems (sec. 
        1632)
    Consistent with and pursuant to section 1647 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public 
Law 114-92), section 1650 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), and section 1640 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 
(Public Law 115-91), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Homeland Defense and Global Security, who serves as the 
Principal Cyber Advisor, and the Chief Information Officer 
shall conduct a technical and cost-benefit study of the merits 
of applying, to the vulnerability assessment and remediation of 
nuclear systems and nuclear command and control, a critical 
subset of conventional power projection capabilities, cyber 
command and control, and defense critical infrastructure: (1) 
Technology developed and used by Department of Defense combat 
support agencies to discover flaws and weaknesses in software 
code by inputting immense quantities of pseudo-random data, 
commonly referred to as ``fuzz,'' to identify inputs that cause 
the software to fail; (2) Software fuzzing-as-a-service in a 
commercial cloud that could be used to continuously ``fuzz'' 
critically important software repositories used by the 
Department of Defense to make them more secure and stable by 
combining modern fuzzing techniques with scalable distributed 
execution; (3) Formal programming and protocol language for 
software code development and other methods and tools developed 
under the High Assurance Cyber Military Systems program of the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; and (4) The binary 
analysis and symbolic execution software security tools 
developed under the Cyber Grand Challenge program of the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to discover flaws and 
weaknesses in software by inputting mathematically generated 
data based on automated analysis of code and providing proof 
of, and patches to, the identified flaws.
    The Principal Cyber Advisor and the Chief Information 
Officer shall provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees on the results of the study, and their 
recommendations for further action, no later than March 1, 
2019.

Comply to connect and cybersecurity scorecard (sec. 1633)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the obligation or expenditure of funds for the so-called 
Cybersecurity Scorecard after October 1, 2019, unless the 
Department of Defense (DOD) is implementing by that date a 
funded program pursuant to section 1653 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) to 
fulfill the requirements established by the Chief Information 
Officer (CIO) and the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command in the 
Information Security Continuous Monitoring Strategy, Comply-to-
Connect Strategy, Enterprise Patch Management Service Strategy 
and Concept of Operations, and User Activity Monitoring 
Strategy.
    The provision would also require the Director of Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees: (1) Comparing the current 
capabilities of the DOD to the requirements established by the 
CIO and the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command pursuant to section 
1653 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017 (Public Law 114-328) for the Information Security 
Continuous Monitoring Strategy, Comply-to-Connect Strategy, 
Enterprise Patch Management Service Strategy and Concept of 
Operations, and User Activity Monitoring Strategy; and (2) The 
capabilities deployed by the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) and the General Services Administration under the 
Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation Program across the non-
DOD Federal agencies and departments.
    The provision would also require the CIO, the Principal 
Cyber Advisor (PCA), the Director of Operations of the Joint 
Staff, and the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command to establish risk 
thresholds for systems and network operations that, when 
exceeded, would trigger heightened security measures.
    Finally, the provision would require, not later than 180 
days after the enactment of this Act, the CIO and the PCA to 
develop a plan to implement an enterprise governance, risk, and 
compliance platform and process similar to those adopted by 
leading commercial entities for information and operational 
technology security.
    The Congress has in vain mandated multiple times in 
legislation that the DOD correct its inability to account for 
software licenses in use across the Department. Likewise, the 
Congress has mandated the development and implementation of a 
strategy for automated comply-to-connect and continuous 
monitoring capabilities. The committee notes that budget 
justification materials for the President's fiscal year 2019 
request show that the CIO and the Commander, U.S. Cyber Command 
developed the required strategy, implementation plans, and 
funding proposal but that the proposal was rejected by the CAPE 
in the issue-paper cycle. Meanwhile, DOD components are in a 
constant scramble to produce through manual data calls the 
regular cybersecurity scorecard for the Secretary of Defense, 
but this scorecard is neither up-to-date nor accurate, as the 
Department has no method for detecting the large number of 
unknown devices and unaccounted for software instances running 
on its networks. That unknown software on unknown devices 
represents a substantial risk, in addition to the risk posed by 
cumbersome, rigid, and manually managed patching and access 
procedures.
    The committee notes that commercial products exist to solve 
these serious problems and that the DHS is already fielding 
such capabilities in protection of the civil departments and 
agencies.

Cyberspace Solarium Commission (sec. 1634)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, tasked with developing a 
strategic approach to protecting and advancing the United 
States' advantages in cyberspace. The Commission would weigh 
the benefits and costs of various strategic frameworks (e.g., 
deterrence, norms-based regimes, and cyber persistence), 
evaluate the sufficiency of the current allocation of resources 
in cyberspace, and consider potential realignments in 
governmental structure and authorities.
    The Commission would comprise 13 members, including the 
Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, the Deputy 
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense, and 10 members chosen by the majority and minority 
parties of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The 
latter would be either members of Congress or cybersecurity and 
national security experts from the public and private sectors. 
The Commission would be co-chaired by a member of the 
Republican Party and a member of the Democratic Party. The 
Commission would have broad authorities to hold hearings, 
request information from government entities, subpoena 
witnesses, and contract out taskings.
    Not later than September 1, 2019, the Commission would 
submit a report detailing its findings to the congressional 
defense committees, the congressional intelligence committees, 
the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of 
Defense, and the Secretary of Homeland Security. Not later than 
60 days after receipt of the Commission's report, the Director 
of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense would 
both submit to the congressional defense and intelligence 
committees their assessments of the report and final 
recommendations.
    The committee is aware that a nascent literature on 
cybersecurity strategy has emerged, encompassing the views and 
theories of various entities across State and Federal 
government, the private sector, and academia. Practitioners 
have begun to appreciate this body of thought and leverage 
these resources in shaping the Nation's cybersecurity posture. 
The committee is enthusiastic about this decentralized 
initiative but believes that the establishment of the Cyber 
Solarium Commission, by formalizing this utilization process, 
would only improve the government's cybersecurity posture and 
help to preserve the United States' extant advantages.
    In 1953, President Eisenhower convened the original Project 
Solarium as a resource to inform the United States' containment 
strategy. The project featured three teams, with two advocating 
differing degrees of containment and one advancing a strategy 
of roll-back. This direct comparison illuminated for the 
Eisenhower administration a number of implications and 
contingencies associated with containment, thus refining its 
successful implementation of containment in NSC 162/2, an 
update on the Truman administration's NSC 68. The committee 
sees a great deal of value in such an approach, especially as 
it might be applied to one of the great challenges of our time: 
preserving the United States' interests and advantages in 
cyberspace.

Program to establish cyber institutes at institutions of higher 
        learning (sec. 1635)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to establish a Cyber Institute at any 
college or university that hosts a Reserve Officers' Training 
Corps program, with special consideration for the Senior 
Military Colleges.
    The committee recognizes the importance of institutions of 
higher learning in the education and development of the cyber 
workforce and believes that these institutions offer an avenue 
to accelerate and focus the development of foundational 
expertise in critical cyber operations skills for future 
military and civilian leaders. The committee commends the 
Department on its continued investment in cyber education and 
training as a cornerstone of our national security.
    The committee believes that the Department's future focus 
on cyber education and training should extend to other 
institutions of higher learning that have Reserve Officers' 
Training Corps programs in order to develop the cyber workforce 
across the active and components. The Senior Military Colleges 
offer robust cyber programs at the undergraduate and graduate 
levels, provide a focus on leadership development, and 
commission a large portion of officers across the active, 
reserve, and National Guard components.

Establishment of Cybersecurity for Defense Industrial Base 
        Manufacturing Activity (sec. 1636)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to, in consultation with the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology, establish an activity to 
assess and strengthen the cybersecurity resiliency of the 
defense industrial base in the United States, including the 
development of cybersecurity test capabilities, development of 
training regimes, integration of defense industrial base 
cybersecurity into research and development roadmaps and threat 
assessments, and the dissemination of relevant capabilities to 
address threats to the defense industrial base.

    Part II--Mitigation of Risks Posed by Providers of Information 
           Technology with Obligations to Foreign Governments

Definitions (sec. 1637)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
definitions for subsequent provisions relating to the 
establishment of a program to mitigate the risks derivative of 
foreign governments' code review of information technology 
products used by the Department of Defense.

Identification of countries of concern regarding cybersecurity (sec. 
        1638)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to create a prioritized list of countries 
of concern related to cybersecurity based on their governments' 
hostility, intelligence activity, criminal activity, and 
willingness and ability to disrupt the U.S. government's supply 
chain.

Mitigation of risks to national security posed by providers of 
        information technology products and services who have 
        obligations to foreign governments (sec. 1639)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Department of Defense's use of any information technology, 
cybersecurity, industrial control system, weapons system, or 
computer antivirus system unless the provider discloses to the 
Secretary of Defense: (1) whether it has allowed a foreign 
government to review or access a product custom-developed for 
the Department of Defense or is under any obligation to provide 
a foreign person or government with access or review of such a 
product; (2) whether it has allowed a government listed in the 
report required by section 1638 of this Act to review or access 
the source code of a product, system, or service that the 
Department is using or intends to use or is under any 
obligation to do so; and (3) whether it holds or has sought a 
license pursuant to the Export Administration Regulations under 
subchapter C of chapter VII of title 15, Code of Federal 
Regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations 
under subchapter M of chapter I of title 22, Code of Federal 
Regulations, or successor regulations, for information 
technology products, components, software, or services.
    The provision would further require that a procurement 
contract for the covered products include a clause requiring 
that, if the provider becomes aware of any additional 
information germane to these requirements, this information be 
disclosed during the period of the contract.
    Finally, the provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense to take measures to mitigate the risks gleaned from and 
associated with these disclosures, including conditioning in 
contracts and limitations of use of certain products.

Establishment of registry of disclosures (sec. 1640)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a registry containing the 
information on foreign governments required by section 1638 of 
this Act and on providers of information technology products 
and services required by section 1639 of this Act. The 
provision would also require the Secretary to make available 
this information to any agency conducting a procurement 
pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulations and Defense 
Federal Acquisition Regulations and to submit a report to the 
relevant congressional committees on the scope of acquisition 
for and mitigation agreements relevant to the Department of 
Defense's acquisition of products for which a disclosure has 
been made under section 1639 of this Act.

                       Subtitle D--Nuclear Forces

Oversight and management of the command, control, and communications 
        system for the national leadership of the United States (sec. 
        1641)

    The committee recommends a provision that would centralize 
and clarify responsibility for national leadership command, 
control, and communications systems by requiring the Secretary 
of Defense to designate a single individual responsible for 
strategic portfolio management of these and related programs. 
The provision would also modify the structure of the Council on 
Oversight of the National Leadership Command, Control, and 
Communications System to streamline its functions and make the 
single individual designated by the Secretary the sole Chair.
    The committee commends the Secretary for his commitment to 
reforming the governance of nuclear command, control, and 
communications (NC3) and has great respect for the dedication 
of the small group of knowledgeable individuals throughout the 
Department of Defense who have been deeply involved in this 
effort. The NC3 enterprise is one of the most complex and 
distributed systems in the Department, and the committee agrees 
that such an important system cannot effectively be managed by 
a council. The committee believes that a single individual 
should be responsible, and also accountable, for the successful 
management of the NC3 enterprise, including synchronization of 
programs across the Air Force, Navy, and other organizations, 
advocacy for adequate budgets and personnel in the Services, 
and timely integration of new systems into the ongoing nuclear 
triad modernization programs. The individual should also have 
the authorities required to be effective in these roles and a 
full-time staff to support him or her.

Modification to requirement for conventional long-range standoff weapon 
        (sec. 1642)

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Air Force to retire the conventionally-armed AGM-86C prior to 
achieving initial operating capability for a conventionally-
armed variant of the long-range standoff weapon (LRSO). The 
provision would instead require the Air Force to begin 
procurement and fielding of a conventionally-armed LRSO not 
more than 5 years after the nuclear LRSO completes initial 
operational test and evaluation.

Exchange program for nuclear weapons program employees (sec. 1643)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council and the Administrator 
of the National Nuclear Security Administration to jointly 
establish a program to exchange civilian and military personnel 
on a temporary basis between the offices of the Department of 
Defense working on nuclear weapons policy, production, and 
force structure issues and the Office of the Deputy 
Administrator for Defense Programs in the National Nuclear 
Security Administration at the Department of Energy. The 
program would provide for the exchange of between 5 and 10 
civilian and military personnel for terms of 1 to 2 years. The 
provision would require the Chairman and the Administrator to 
provide interim guidance to the congressional defense 
committees within 90 days of the date of enactment of this Act 
and to implement such guidance within 180 days of the date of 
enactment.
    The committee intends for this program to foster working-
level relationships between personnel working on nuclear 
weapons programs in both Departments. The committee firmly 
believes that frequent and robust communication between the 
relevant offices, as well as broadening experience for the 
personnel involved, would result in more effective 
implementation of nuclear weapons programs in the medium- and 
long-term.

Procurement authority for certain parts of intercontinental ballistic 
        missile fuzes (sec. 1644)

    The committee recommends a provision that would give the 
Air Force the authority to expend funds appropriated for fiscal 
year 2019 to buy certain intercontinental ballistic missile 
fuze parts as part of the effort to replace the Mk21 fuze.
    The committee notes that this collaborative effort with the 
Navy has enabled both Services to leverage commonality between 
the intercontinental ballistic missile and sea-launched 
ballistic missile fuze components. Both Services have worked 
with Sandia National Laboratories to perform fuze design and 
development, which has ensured maximum use of common 
components, subassemblies, and technologies.
    The committee also understands that this authority has 
allowed the Air Force to execute life-of-type buys with the 
Navy for fiscal years 2015 through 2019, at an estimated 
savings of $600.0 million to the Air Force. The committee 
encourages the Navy and the Air Force to continue to seek areas 
of commonality between missile programs and leverage those to 
create efficiencies.

Plan to train officers in nuclear command, control, and communications 
        (sec. 1645)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of the 
Air Force, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, to develop a plan to train, educate, 
manage, and track field-grade military officers in nuclear 
command, control, and communications (NC3). The provision would 
require the Secretary of Defense to submit the plan to the 
congressional defense committees no later than 180 days from 
the date of enactment of this Act.
    The committee is aware that managing the NC3 enterprise is 
one of the most complex and vital missions of the U.S. military 
and requires operational, technical, and acquisition expertise. 
The committee does not believe that incidental knowledge of NC3 
gained through operation of a nuclear weapons system like a 
nuclear-capable bomber or intercontinental ballistic missile is 
sufficient to constitute NC3 expertise. The committee also 
understands that the Services do not provide sufficient 
opportunities for explicit training or education on the subject 
and do not deliberately develop officers who possess desired 
expertise to be effective leaders in this complex mission area. 
The committee believes that a carefully-managed cohort of 
officers trained or educated in the NC3 enterprise as a whole 
will be required to build and maintain the future enterprise.
    The committee does not intend to prejudge the content of 
the plan and encourages the Secretary of Defense to examine 
options including modifying or creating entirely new officer 
career fields, developing specialized joint professional 
military education, designating specific NC3 billets, modifying 
promotion timelines and opportunities, and crafting exchanges 
among various elements of the NC3 mission.

Plan for alignment of acquisition of warhead life extension programs 
        and delivery vehicles for such warheads (sec. 1646)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) to provide a 
proposal to better align acquisition of National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) warhead life extension programs 
with Department of Defense (DOD) nuclear weapons delivery 
vehicle programs. The plan would be due no later than February 
15, 2019.
    The committee is concerned about challenges with 
synchronization between NNSA and DOD acquisition programs, such 
as the B61-12 life extension with the Tail-Kit Assembly and the 
W80-4 life extension with the Long-Range Standoff weapon. As 
the nuclear modernization program continues and with the 
recommendations of the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, 
opportunities to better align DOD and NNSA programs-such as the 
analysis of alternatives regarding a sea-launched cruise 
missile and the W78 warhead replacement, both beginning this 
year-will increase in number and salience. The committee 
believes that poor synchronization could disrupt these and 
other elements of the nuclear modernization program, resulting 
in unacceptable delays in delivery.
    The committee encourages the Chairman of the NWC to seek 
input from all stakeholders in the formation of this plan, 
including the other members of the NWC, the Navy, the Air 
Force, and the Deputy Administrator of the NNSA for Defense 
Programs--as well as the Assistant Secretaries of Defense for 
Acquisition and Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense 
Programs within the Chairman's own office. The committee 
further encourages the Chairman to consider a wide range of 
options within the proposal, including improvements to and 
standardization of mechanisms that have been successful for 
existing programs and changes in acquisition authorities or 
processes for the NNSA and the DOD. The committee hopes to 
receive the plan in time to consider any proposal requiring 
legislative action in the defense authorization for fiscal year 
2020.

Extension of annual report on plan for the nuclear weapons stockpile, 
        nuclear weapons complex, nuclear weapons delivery systems, and 
        nuclear weapons command and control system (sec. 1647)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
reporting requirement in section 1043 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81), as 
amended, by 5 years, through fiscal year 2024.

Prohibition on use of funds for activities to modify United States 
        aircraft to implement Open Skies Treaty (sec. 1648)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the obligation or expenditure of any funds for fiscal year 2019 
for research, development, test, and engineering, Air Force, or 
aircraft procurement, Air Force, for the digital visual imaging 
system to modify U.S. aircraft for the purpose of implementing 
the Open Skies Treaty until the President and the Secretary of 
Defense submit the two certifications described in section 
1235(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91).

Sense of Senate on Nuclear Posture Review (sec. 1649)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make a 
series of findings and state the sense of the Senate on the 
2018 Nuclear Posture Review.

                  Subtitle E--Missile Defense Programs

Extension of prohibition relating to missile defense information and 
        systems (sec. 1651)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 130h(e) of title 10, United States Code, by striking 
``January 1, 2019,'' and inserting ``January 1, 2021,'' to 
extend the limitations on providing certain sensitive missile 
defense information to the Russian Federation and integrating 
missile defense systems of the Russian Federation and the 
People's Republic of China into U.S. missile defense systems.

Multiyear procurement authority for Standard Missile-3 IB guided 
        missiles (sec. 1652)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
authority for the Secretary of Defense to enter into a 
multiyear contract for the procurement of up to 204 Standard 
Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IB guided missiles for fiscal year 2019 
through fiscal year 2023 program years, with advance 
procurement for economic order quantities also beginning in 
fiscal year 2019 pending the Director of Cost Assessment and 
Program Evaluation confirmation of the Secretary of the Navy's 
preliminary findings as required in subsection a of section 
2306b of title 10, United States Code.
    The SM-3 Block IB program is a core element of the Aegis 
Ballistic Missile Defense program and is approved through the 
current future years defense program. This provision would 
provide the following benefits: (1) Generate cost savings 
compared to annual procurement cost estimates; (2) Provide 
stable production of SM-3 Block IBs; (3) Provide a long-term 
commitment to the low-density aerospace industrial base that 
stabilizes aerospace employment levels; (4) Provide an 
incentive for industry capital investment for productivity 
improvements that would benefit several Department of Defense 
missile programs; and (5) Reduce disruptions in vendor delivery 
schedules.

Extension of requirement for reports on unfunded priorities of Missile 
        Defense Agency (sec. 1653)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1696 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328), removing the sunset 
requirement for the unfunded priorities list of the Missile 
Defense Agency.

Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system and Israeli cooperative 
        missile defense program co-development and co-production (sec. 
        1654)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
not more than $70.0 million for the Missile Defense Agency to 
provide to the Government of Israel to procure components for 
the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system through co-
production of such components in the United States. 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 $50.0 million for the 
Missile Defense Agency to provide to the Government of Israel 
for the procurement of the David's Sling Weapon System and 
$80.0 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: (1) 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; 
(2) That the funds will be matched on a one-for-one basis or in 
an amount that otherwise meets best efforts; and (3) That the 
level of co-production of parts and components in the United 
States is not less than 50 percent.
    The funds for the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor Program 
may be disbursed after the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment certifies 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 Upper Tier Interceptor Program 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 for these programs.

Metrics for evaluating effectiveness of integrated Ballistic Missile 
        Defense System against operationally realistic ballistic 
        missile attacks (sec. 1655)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) from 
obligating 50 percent of funds available for the Command and 
Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) until the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency establishes metrics for 
evaluating the effectiveness of the integrated Ballistic 
Missile Defense System (BMDS) and its components and elements 
against operationally realistic ballistic missile attacks on 
areas defended by U.S. combatant commands. Since 2004, the MDA 
has expended roughly $5.1 billion in funding for the C2BMC 
system. While this funding has delivered vital capabilities to 
the warfighter over time, as the Congress exercises oversight 
of MDA, it is difficult to follow the progress that the 
investment in C2BMC has delivered.
    The MDA reports capability delivery goals and progress at 
the element level, which enables some oversight of individual 
elements. However, the MDA does not report progress related to 
software intensive capabilities that drive how two or more 
elements must interact to deliver higher performing integrated 
BMDS capabilities: for example, the ability to launch one of 
several types of interceptors that are part of the integrated 
system based on a cue from the family of sensors that are part 
of the integrated system. Thus, the Congress has limited 
insight into the progress and overall return on investment.
    The committee notes that increasing BMDS integration, 
including automation and interoperability between multiple BMDS 
elements, is crucial to addressing increasing quantities and 
capabilities of ballistic missile threats world-wide and 
recognizes MDA's recent progress in BMDS integration. In recent 
years, however, the Comptroller General of the United States 
and the Department of Defense Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation continue to report integrated BMDS capability 
shortfalls, in part due to schedule delays for C2BMC. 
Specifically, the MDA emphasizes the importance of the C2BMC as 
the BMDS integrator; however, the way progress is reported 
makes it nearly impossible to determine how much cost growth or 
schedule delay has occurred and to assess which capabilities 
the C2BMC has delivered over the last decade as compared to 
original plans, budgets, and schedules.
    The lack of objective metrics for these capabilities has 
limited visibility into the effects of delays on overall 
performance and has thus been a significant impediment to 
adequate oversight. The Comptroller General has therefore 
recommended that such metrics and progress be part of the MDA's 
external reporting process.
    Given that the C2BMC is a software intensive capability, 
the metrics that allow assessment of progress differ from those 
typically used to assess hardware-intensive systems. Metrics 
that demonstrate improvement in the quality and timeliness of 
the information the system uses to manage ballistic missile 
defense battles are critically important. Such measures would 
allow oversight and assessment of the extent to which C2BMC is 
or is not shortening the amount of time and resources required 
to sense a ballistic missile threat and the success rate for 
engagement of the threat-to include complex structured attacks, 
not merely engagement of a single threat.
    This provision would require the Director, Missile Defense 
Agency, to coordinate with the Director, Operational Test and 
Evaluation; Director, BMDS Operational Test Agency; Commander, 
Joint Forces Combatant Command-Integrated Missile Defense; as 
well as the service acquisition executives and combatant 
commanders to develop operationally relevant performance 
metrics for the integrated BMDS and, in particular, C2BMC 
capabilities.
    This provision would also require the MDA to report 
progress against these metrics in its annual reports to the 
congressional defense committees on its acquisition baselines, 
beginning in February 2019. The committee believes that it is 
important to require such metrics to ensure that they will be 
an enduring feature of MDA program management and oversight in 
the future.

Modification of requirement relating to transition of ballistic missile 
        defense programs to military departments (sec. 1656)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1676(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) to clarify the 
equivalent of Milestone C approval for the Missile Defense 
Agency.

Sense of the Senate on acceleration of missile defense capabilities 
        (sec. 1657)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) 
should accelerate the fielding, if technically feasible, of the 
planned additional 20 ground-based interceptors with redesigned 
kill vehicles (RKVs) at Fort Greely, Alaska, and ensure that 
the RKV has demonstrated the ability to accomplish its intended 
mission through a successful, operationally realistic flight 
test. Furthermore, the provision would express the sense of the 
Senate that the MDA should rapidly develop and deploy a space-
based sensor architecture and invest in innovative concepts for 
existing technologies to ensure that missile defenses are 
effective against emerging threats such as hypersonic and 
cruise missiles. The provision would also require the Director 
of the MDA to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 180 days after the enactment of this 
Act on the ways the MDA could accelerate such construction and 
deployment at Fort Greely.

Integrated air and missile defense for evolving theater missile threats 
        (sec. 1658)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the United States should pursue 
regional missile defense assets to counter and deter cruise, 
short-to-medium-range ballistic, and hypersonic missile 
threats, as well as continue to focus resources on developing 
an interoperable and integrated air-and-missile defense 
architecture. The provision would also require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees no 
later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act a report on 
the Department of Defense's plan for the creation of a fully 
interoperable and integrated air and missile defense 
architecture, if consistent with the recommendations of the 
2018 Missile Defense Review.

Acceleration of hypersonic missile defense program (sec. 1659)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency to accelerate the 
hypersonic missile defense program and deploy that program in 
conjunction with a persistent space-based missile defense 
sensor program. The provision would also require that the 
Director submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act on how hypersonic missile defense can be accelerated 
to meet emerging hypersonic threats.

Sense of the Senate on allied partnerships for missile defense (sec. 
        1660)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the United States should seek 
additional opportunities to provide missile defense 
capabilities to allies and trusted partners and seek to 
expedite foreign military sales in delivering such missile 
defenses to those partners.

Sense of the Senate on results of tests carried out by Missile Defense 
        Agency (sec. 1660A)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that tests carried out by the Missile 
Defense Agency (MDA) that do not achieve the main intended 
objective should not be considered failures and that the MDA 
should recognize the learning value of individual advancements 
made by all testing events. Furthermore, the provision would 
express the sense of the Senate that the MDA should continue to 
build independently accredited modeling and simulation elements 
and pursue an increasingly rigorous testing regime in 
coordination with the Office of the Director, Operational Test 
and Evaluation, to more rapidly deliver capabilities to the 
warfighter as the threat evolves.

Sense of the Senate on discrimination for missile defense (sec. 1660B)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that prioritizing discrimination 
capabilities to improve missile defense effectiveness against 
current and future threats is critically important. The 
provision would also require the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency (MDA) to submit a report no later than 90 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act describing improvements 
to discrimination required within the missile defense 
architecture, MDA's plan to rapidly field advanced 
discrimination capabilities, and an analysis of efforts to 
address the discrimination challenges of emerging adversary 
threats.

Development and deployment of persistent space-based sensor 
        architecture (sec. 1660C)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to commence 
developing a persistent space-based sensor architecture capable 
of supporting the ballistic missile defense system, 
notwithstanding the outcome of the Missile Defense Review. The 
provision would also require that the architecture developed by 
MDA be compatible with efforts of the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) related to space-based sensors for 
missile defense and would require that the Secretary of Defense 
submit a report no later than 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act to the congressional defense committees 
on the progress of and coordination between the MDA, DARPA, and 
Air Force efforts in this area.

Modification of requirement to develop a space-based ballistic missile 
        intercept layer (sec. 1660D)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency to commence development 
of a space-based ballistic missile intercept layer 
notwithstanding the outcome of the Missile Defense Review.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

Assessment of the electronic warfare capabilities of Russia and China 
        (sec. 1661)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency to conduct a 
comprehensive assessment of the electronic warfare capabilities 
of the Russian Federation and People's Republic of China. 
Electronic warfare is increasingly used to gain an asymmetric 
advantage with respect to electronic systems such as Global 
Positioning System. It is essential that the Department of 
Defense, as it develops countermeasures, holistically study all 
aspects of how Russia and China develop electronic warfare 
doctrine and order of battle across multiple domains, in 
addition to long-term research trends for each country.

Budget exhibit on support provided to entities outside Department of 
        Defense (sec. 1662)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to include in the 
budget justification materials accompanying the President's 
Budget request each year a budget exhibit containing all 
relevant details on Department of Defense support to the 
programs at the Executive Office of the President related to 
senior leader communications and continuity of government 
programs.
    The committee is aware that the Department provides 
critical capabilities to the President in support of senior 
leader communications and continuity of government missions, 
and the committee fully supports these activities, including 
those of the White House Military Office, the White House 
Communications Agency, and certain activities at the Defense 
Information Systems Agency. The committee has found, however, 
that the Department is often unable to provide even the most 
basic information about how much funding supports these 
programs and from where that funding comes. This has resulted 
in at least one instance in which the Department spent funds 
despite a provision of law prohibiting the expenditure of those 
funds. The committee understands the need to protect the 
details of these programs but strongly believes that the 
Congress needs more information than currently provided in 
order to perform its most basic oversight functions.

Development of Electromagnetic Battle Management capability for joint 
        electromagnetic operations (sec. 1663)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Electronic Warfare Executive Committee to designate a military 
Service with the responsibility for acting as executive agent 
for the development of an Electromagnetic Battle Management 
capability for joint electromagnetic operations.
    The committee is concerned by the limited advocacy across 
the Department of Defense for the development and management of 
electronic warfare systems. The committee understands that, 
while a requirement for a joint Electromagnetic Battle 
Management exists, no Service has been assigned the 
responsibility for developing the capability. The committee 
believes that the development of a joint Electromagnetic Battle 
Management capability is critical to addressing the current and 
anticipated challenges posed by our most capable adversaries.

                              Budget Items

Army Cyber Center of Excellence

    The budget request included $65.8 million for Cyberspace 
Operations Forces and Force Support, Army Research Development 
Technology and Engineering programs, PE 35251A. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million, for a total of $70.8 
million, in PE 35251A, for the Army Cyber Center of Excellence 
to carry out a pilot project in partnership with institutions 
of higher education.

Wargaming and simulator systems

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, of which 
$117.6 million was for PE 1206601F space technology.
    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91), this committee urged the Department 
of Defense to invest in its military construction accounts for 
science and technology facilities, as well as those used for 
test and evaluation. Unfortunately, these projects generally 
fall victim to low prioritization, despite their major value to 
the Department's mission.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 
million, for a total of $123.6 million, in RDT&E, Air Force, PE 
1206601F, for minor military construction. The committee adds 
these funds in order to fund the request for the Wargaming and 
Simulator Laboratory. The committee strongly encourages the Air 
Force to ensure that coordination regarding the appropriate 
planning and design occurs so that this project is executable.

Ground Based Strategic Deterrent

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF), of which 
$345.0 million was for PE 65230F Ground Based Strategic 
Deterrent (GBSD).
    The committee understands that the technology maturation 
and risk reduction phase of the GBSD program is several months 
ahead of schedule, in part due to the lack of a protest of the 
contract award. The committee strongly supports the GBSD 
program as an integral part of the nuclear modernization 
effort, supported by the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review. The 
committee commends the Air Force's effort to maintain or 
increase schedule margin on this program.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $69.4 
million, for a total of $414.4 million in RDTEAF, PE 65230F, 
for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.

Space Rapid Capabilities Office

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF), of which 
$366.0 million was for PE 1206857F Space Rapid Capabilities 
Office. The committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 million, 
for a total of $316.0 million, in RDTEAF, PE 1206857F, for the 
Solar Power Project, as funding is early-to-need. The committee 
fully supports the Space Rapid Capabilities Office and its 
underlying objectives. The committee's reduction of $50.0 
million is without prejudice to the Solar Power Project, and 
the committee has confirmed with the Air Force's Space and 
Missile Systems Center that the funding could be applied to 
other Air Force space priorities, such as the Blackjack 
program, without any impact on the Solar Power Project. The 
committee expects and encourages the Air Force to request the 
necessary funding in its fiscal year 2020 budget to maintain 
the schedule for the Solar Power Project.

Long Range Standoff Weapon

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF), of which 
$614.9 million was for PE 64932F Long Range Standoff Weapon 
(LRSO).
    The committee understands that, after an initial delay in 
the award of the technology maturation and risk reduction 
contracts for the LRSO in 2017, the program is now executing 
ahead of schedule. The committee supports the timely 
replacement of the AGM-85B Air-Launched Cruise Missile in order 
to retain a credible air-launched leg of the nuclear triad and 
is concerned that, without additional funding, the Air Force 
may be forced to slow down or stop work on the LRSO program.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $85.0 
million, for a total of $699.9 million in RDTEAF, PE 64932F, 
for the Long Range Standoff Weapon.

Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF), of which 
$643.1 million was for the PE 1206442F Evolved Space-Based 
Infrared System. The committee recommends an increase of $100.0 
million, for a total of $743.1 million, in RDTEAF, PE 1206442F, 
to accelerate sensor development. The committee, in 
consultation with the Air Force, believes the acceleration of 
space vehicle sensor development is required to reduce overall 
program risk for the Block 0 Next-Generation Persistent 
Infrared satellite and to begin risk reduction for Block 1.

Joint Space Operations Center Mission System

    The budget request included $40.2 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force (RDTEAF), of which 
$72.3 million was for PE 1203614F Joint Space Operations Center 
Mission System.
    The committee recognizes the agile software development 
realignment of this program and notes that there should be cost 
savings associated with this approach.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 
million, for a total of $62.3 million, in RDTEAF, PE 1203614F.

Hypersonic missile defense

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $120.4 million was for hypersonic missile defense.
    The committee believes this is insufficient to accelerate 
the development of critical interceptor technology in the areas 
of propulsion and materials as well as initiate across the kill 
chain advanced technology activities specifically focused on 
the hypersonic glide vehicle threat.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $46.1 
million-$10.5 million for PE 64181C; $13.4 million for PE 
63178C; and $22.2 million for PE 63180C-for a total of $166.5 
million, in RDTEDW, for hypersonic missile defense. This 
additional funding was requested by the Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency on the Unfunded Requirements List.

Exploiting commercial technology for synthetic aperture radar imaging 
        and automated exploitation

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $83.1 million was for PE 63375D8Z Technology Innovation. 
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million, for a 
total of $103.1 million, in RDTEDW, PE 63375D8Z, to fund the 
engineering development and launch of multiple prototype 
synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellites and to sustain 
Project DATAHUB.
    The committee continues to support the efforts of the 
Department of Defense (DOD) to exploit technology advances to 
acquire additional, affordable space-based SAR capabilities. 
Currently, only foreign companies produce commercially 
available SAR satellites. Multiple U.S. companies are 
developing small SAR satellites at an estimated price point of 
$10.0 million or less per satellite on a recurring cost basis, 
with launch costs adding several million dollars, amounts that 
are orders of magnitude less than traditional space acquisition 
programs. These satellites are designed to have resolution in 
the range of 1 meter and impressive per-orbit collection 
capacity. At present and forecasted cost and performance 
levels, the DOD could afford to purchase, launch, and sustain a 
large constellation to augment the coverage and resilience, and 
reduce the latency of, existing and planned government and 
commercial imaging systems.
    The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the former Deputy 
Secretary of Defense also led an initiative, under Project 
DATAHUB, to capitalize on commercial expertise in artificial 
intelligence/machine learning technology to automate radar 
imagery exploitation, which is an indispensable condition for 
maintaining custody of important ground targets by distributed 
constellations of spacecraft and airborne sensors.
    The committee encourages the Vice Chairman to continue with 
these initiatives but to also use an established acquisition 
program office, such as the newly designated Space Rapid 
Capabilities Office, to execute them. The Vice Chairman should 
ensure that the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental (DIUx) 
novates any previously awarded contracts for the efforts to 
establish the acquisition program that the Vice Chairman 
selects. The committee directs the Vice Chairman not to 
continue execution of the initiatives through DIUx. The goal of 
these efforts is to acquire operational capabilities for the 
Department of Defense--not to stimulate a commercial radar 
imaging industry. These projects may be pursued under the 
``Middle Tier'' acquisition authority provided by section 804 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(Public Law 114-92), as described in a memorandum dated April 
16, 2018, issued by the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment.

United States Forces Korea Joint Emergent Operational Need

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $81.0 million was for the U.S. Pacific Command Joint 
Emergent Operational Need (JEON).
    In order to deliver improved ballistic missile defense 
system capability to the Korean Peninsula, including the 
integration of existing ballistic missile defense assets to 
improve engagement options and coverage area, the committee 
recommends an increase of $284.5 million--$184.1 million in PE 
63881C, $24.0 million in PE 63884C, $71.9 million in PE 63914C, 
and $4.5 million in PE 63915C--for a total of $365.5 million 
for U.S. Pacific Command JEON. This additional funding was 
requested by the Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) 
on the Unfunded Requirements List. The committee notes, 
however, that the MDA has struggled in the past to deliver 
certain capabilities relevant to this JEON on an accelerated 
schedule despite planning to do so. The committee is not 
confident that, with the increased funding for the JEON, these 
capabilities will be delivered on the required schedule. For 
this reason, the committee urges the MDA to ensure, through 
rigorous oversight, that the JEON requirements are delivered to 
the warfighter on time. The committee further notes that 
removing testing events in order to deliver capabilities in a 
shorter period of time is an irresponsible acquisition practice 
and encourages the MDA to reconsider the decision to forgo 
those testing events.
    For these reasons, the committee directs the Comptroller 
General of the United States to submit to the congressional 
defense committees a report not later than December 1, 2018, 
that addresses the following: (1) The MDA's progress in 
developing, delivering, and deploying the capabilities 
described in the United States Forces Korea (USFK) JEON; (2) A 
comparison of USFK JEON capabilities with the original 
Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System and 
the original plans for executing European Phased Adaptive 
Approach; (3) An evaluation of the extent to which USFK JEON 
capabilities are sufficient to counter the threat; and (4) An 
evaluation of any factors inhibiting development, acquisition, 
and delivery of USFK JEON capabilities.

Midcourse ballistic missile defense

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $926.4 million was for PE 63882C Ballistic Missile 
Defense Midcourse Defense.
    In order to realign the fiscal year 2019 budget with the 
fiscal year 2018 omnibus, the committee recommends a decrease 
of $208.0 million--a $143.0 million decrease for additional 
boosters with the redesigned kill vehicle and a $65.0 million 
decrease for silos at missile field 4 in Fort Greely, Alaska--
for a total of $718.4 million, in RDTEDW, PE 63882C, for 
Ballistic Missile Defense Midcourse Defense.

Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, (RDTEDW), of 
which $475.2 million was for PE 63896C Ballistic Missile 
Defense Command and Control, Battle Management & Communication.
    The committee encourages the program to deliver capability 
more frequently.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $50.0 
million, for a total of $425.2 million, in RDTEDW, PE 63896C.

Sea-based X-band Radar

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $149.7 million was for PE 63907C Sea-based X-band Radar 
(SBX).
    In order to realign the fiscal year 2019 budget with the 
fiscal year 2018 omnibus, the committee recommends a decrease 
of $33.0 million--a $13.0 million decrease for SBX software 
upgrades and a $20.0 million decrease for previous program 
increases--for a total of $116.7 million, in RDTEDW, PE 63907C, 
for SBX.

Ballistic missile defense targets

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $517.9 million was for PE 63915C ballistic missile 
defense targets.
    In order to realign the fiscal year 2019 budget with the 
fiscal year 2018 omnibus, the committee recommends a decrease 
of $36.0 million, for a total of $486.4 million after the 
separate $4.5 million increase for United States Forces Korea 
Joint Emergent Operational Need, in RDTEDW, PE 63915C, for 
ballistic missile defense targets.

Boost phase intercept laser scaling

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $148.8 million was for PE 64115C technology maturation.
    While multiple efforts are ongoing within the Department of 
Defense for directed energy, laser scaling is a key technology 
that will enable the development of a boost phase intercept 
capability specifically for missile defense.
    In order to achieve a demonstration of a 500 kilowatt laser 
and a best of breed 1-megawatt laser capability by 2024, which 
will enable the development of a boost phase intercept 
capability, the committee recommends an increase of $80.0 
million, for a total of $228.8 million, in RDTEDW, PE 64115C, 
for technology maturation. This additional funding was 
requested by the Director of the Missile Defense Agency on the 
Unfunded Requirements List.

Quartermaster Pathfinder

    The budget request included $1.2 billion for Advanced 
Innovative Technologies, Defense-wide Research, Development, 
Technology, and Engineering programs, exhibit R-1, line 96, 
Program Element 6425D8Z.
    The committee is concerned that our adversaries continue to 
target Department of Defense data to gain technological and 
operational advantages, undermining U.S. data security and 
integrity, as well as mission assurance. As such, the committee 
supports the development and fielding of enhanced tools to 
increase data security and integrity for priority missions and 
supporting systems. The Quartermaster Pathfinder will provide 
such capabilities, protecting data in both transit and rest to 
enable increased mission assurance.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million for the Strategic Capabilities Office's Quartermaster 
Pathfinder.

Improved homeland defense interceptors

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $561.2 million was for PE 64874C improved homeland 
defense interceptors.
    In order to realign the fiscal year 2019 budget with the 
fiscal year 2018 omnibus, the committee recommends a decrease 
of $139.4 million, for a total of $421.8 million, in RDTEDW, PE 
64878C, for improved homeland defense interceptors.

Midcourse segment test for ballistic missile defense

    The budget request included $22.0 billion in Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide (RDTEDW), of 
which $81.9 million was for PE 64887C ballistic missile defense 
midcourse segment test.
    In order to realign the fiscal year 2019 budget with the 
fiscal year 2018 omnibus, the committee recommends a decrease 
of $9.3 million, for a total of $72.6 million, in RDTEDW, PE 
64887C, for ballistic missile defense midcourse segment test.

Missile Defense Tracking System

    The budget request for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) did 
not include funding for the Missile Defense Tracking System. 
The committee believes this capability is vital to the future 
of the missile defense architecture and notes that the MDA 
Director, Lieutenant General Greaves, stated in written 
testimony on March 22, 2018, that ``integrated space and 
terrestrial sensors for cuing, tracking, discrimination, and 
targeting ballistic missile threats are critical to improving 
missile defense architecture robustness.'' The committee is 
concerned that as missile defense advanced technology develops, 
and as the threat of ballistic, hypersonic, and other threats 
emerge, missile defenses will require an advanced tracking and 
sensing system and that the Department of Defense has not 
prioritized this requirement.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $73.0 
million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, 
Defense-wide, for PE 1206895C, line number to be determined, to 
establish a program of record for the Missile Defense Tracking 
System. This additional funding was requested by the Director 
of the MDA on the Unfunded Requirements List. Spacecraft and 
sensor development efforts should be comparable and 
complementary to efforts underway at the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency for its Blackjack program, and the 
Director of the MDA shall provide a report prior to the 
obligation or expenditure of funds demonstrating such 
compatibility.

                       Items of Special Interest

Air Force nuclear acquisition programs

    The committee continues to support the long-term 
modernization of the nuclear triad but is concerned that the 
Air Force's program offices responsible for these programs are 
understaffed. The programs have separate system program offices 
with little, if any, bridge between them in personnel despite 
sharing a common building. Given that the Department of Defense 
plans for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) to be 
operational in the 2030s and that the Minuteman III weapon 
system is still undergoing sustainment, a coherent acquisition 
plan must be developed in order to provide a smooth transition 
for the intercontinental ballistic missile leg of the triad.
    Therefore, the committee directs that no later than March 
15, 2019, the Secretary of the Air Force report to the 
congressional defense committees on the required staffing over 
the next 5 years for nuclear acquisition programs within Air 
Force Materiel Command. The report shall detail the acquisition 
staffing shortfalls at each system program office and a plan to 
remedy these shortfalls using funding from existing programs 
for direct hiring of staff. The report shall further articulate 
a long-term plan for the support of the nuclear modernization 
program including all potential sources of qualified personnel 
to ensure continuity of knowledge and expertise in the long 
term, including the number of required positions over the next 
5 years. Finally, the report shall describe a long-term plan 
for phasing from the sustainment of the Minuteman III to the 
acquisition of the GBSD, which is currently in a technology 
management and risk reduction phase.

Airborne tracking and targeting system

    The committee notes that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) 
has been developing and testing ballistic missile tracking and 
surveillance using electro-optical-infrared (EO-IR) equipped 
aircraft under an experimental program. The committee directs 
the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, in coordination 
with Commander, Pacific Command and Commander, Central Command 
to perform an analysis of airborne EO-IR capability to support 
the ballistic missile defense mission, the airborne platform 
and sensor capabilities required to perform this mission, and 
the impacts of the addition of an operational fleet of advanced 
EO-IR sensors deployed on an airborne platform to the ballistic 
missile defense system, to include integration and test 
efforts, operational value for regional and homeland defense, 
basing options, warfighter concepts of operation, and total 
research, development, test, and evaluation and operations and 
sustainment costs associated with deployment to the Pacific 
Command and Central Command areas of responsibility. The 
committee directs the Director to provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees no later than June 3, 2019, on 
this analysis.

Assessment of and plan for experimentation with Iron Dome for short-
        range air defense

    The committee notes that, since 2011, the Congress has 
authorized approximately $1.5 billion for the procurement of 
Iron Dome batteries for Israel. Given the demonstrated success 
of Iron Dome, the committee sees value in experimentation with 
the Iron Dome system, including potential integration of the 
Iron Dome command and control system with existing U.S. Army 
Air and Missile Defense (AMD) systems, to assess its 
suitability in addressing gaps in U.S. AMD capabilities. 
However, the committee understands that there may be some 
software code limitations and MILSPEC standard compliance 
concerns. Therefore, the committee directs the Army to provide 
to the congressional defense committees no later than December 
31, 2018, an assessment of Iron Dome's suitability for the 
Army's short-range air defense mission, a plan for 
experimentation with and demonstration of Iron Dome, and a 
determination of the feasibility of its use.

Common Minuteman III maintenance vehicle

    The committee understands that each intercontinental 
ballistic missile wing within the Air Force currently receives 
a bare maintenance truck, which must then be individually 
retrofitted in an ad hoc way to support maintenance operations 
by enlisted airmen. The result is a cost- and labor-inefficient 
process for the Minuteman III weapons system, which is common 
to all three wings. The committee further understands that the 
Air Force chose to pursue a common maintenance truck for each 
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and U.S. European 
Command sites for maintenance personnel to work with the B61 
weapons and that this program has been successful.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than March 15, 2019, containing a plan to 
transition to a common maintenance vehicle once the current 
vehicle begins to age out over the next 5 years.

Comptroller General review of Department of Defense cyber 
        classification

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees and the 
Government Accountability Office no later than 90 days after 
the enactment of this Act detailing the Department of Defense's 
classification and declassification practices and policies 
regarding its posture, order of battle, and policies in 
cyberspace.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 1 year after receipt of these 
procedures on these classification and declassification 
practices, assessing their stringency, especially as compared 
to other classification and declassification instructions, and 
their potential effect in overclassification.
    The committee is concerned that the Department's 
classification policies are overly restrictive regarding 
matters in cyberspace. Though it recognizes that the 
Department's cyber posture and policies are particularly 
sensitive, it is frustrated by the Department's excessive 
secrecy, which reduces cyber's visibility, excludes otherwise-
informed voices from policy debates, and obviates justification 
of posture and policy choices.

Comptroller General review of Department of Defense cyber hygiene

    The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than 1 year after enactment of this Act on 
policies governing the Department of Defense (DOD) cyber 
hygiene and the implementation of its Cybersecurity Culture and 
Compliance Initiative and Cyber Workforce Management Program. 
The report should assess: (1) The threat posed by the 
Department's cyber hygiene weaknesses; (2) The Department's 
cyber hygiene strategy and guidelines; and (3) The Department's 
means of distribution, education, and implementation, 
especially as compared to successful cybersecurity curricula in 
the private and public sector. No later than 180 days after the 
Comptroller General submits the report, the DOD Chief 
Information Officer (CIO) shall submit a report summarizing his 
comments and plan to address the Government Accountability 
Office's concerns.
    The committee is concerned that the Department's greatest 
vulnerabilities may lie in architectures through which DOD 
personnel interact with outside networks, making poor cyber 
hygiene of the utmost priority. While the Department's measures 
to negate the systematic vulnerabilities of its secure networks 
are impressive, it must continue to improve its pedagogy of 
best cyber practices throughout the Department and implement 
its signature cybersecurity initiatives. These efforts lie 
within the purview of the CIO, whose responsibilities and 
authorities have changed precipitously in the last few years; 
the committee hopes that this instability has not impaired the 
Department's development and communication of cyber hygiene 
best practices.

Comptroller General review of geographic combatant command integration 
        in nuclear planning and operations

    The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) identifies the 
increased potential for regional conflicts involving nuclear-
armed adversaries, including Russia and North Korea. Further, 
the NPR highlights the need for U.S. leadership, including U.S. 
Combatant Commanders, to communicate across networked command 
and control systems and integrate nuclear and non-nuclear 
military planning and operations. The committee notes in 
particular that the NPR states that the combatant commands will 
plan, train, and exercise to integrate U.S. nuclear and non-
nuclear forces to deter limited nuclear escalation and non-
nuclear attacks. The committee supports this effort but is 
concerned that that significant improvements will need to be 
made in infrastructure and operations to support.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to assess the Department of Defense's plans 
and efforts to incorporate the geographic combatant commands 
into nuclear planning and operations, including command and 
control responsibilities. The assessment should include: (1) 
The role of the geographic combatant commands in the nuclear 
mission; (2) The expertise within the geographic combatant 
commands on nuclear planning and capabilities; (3) The ability 
of geographic combatant commands to plan and conduct nuclear 
operations, including command and control operations; and (4) 
Any changes to command and control infrastructure that might be 
needed to support the recommendation of the NPR.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General to provide a 
briefing on preliminary findings to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by 
March 31, 2019, with a report to follow at a time agreed to at 
the time of the briefing. The committee also directs the 
Department of Defense, the military departments, and the 
relevant combatant and subordinate commands to share relevant 
information about nuclear planning, capabilities, and 
operations with the Government Accountability Office in order 
to enable this review.

Conventional Prompt Strike early limited operational capability

    The committee continues to be encouraged by the commitment 
of the Department of Defense to the Conventional Prompt Strike 
(CPS) activity shown in the budget request and remains 
supportive of the Department's approach of maturing and 
demonstration key technologies needed by both land- and sea-
based CPS systems. The committee believes that, should the 
Department determine that an early limited operational 
capability for the CPS activity is required, the Department 
should budget additional funding above the current plan in 
order to avoid cost and schedule delays to the planned baseline 
activity. The committee further 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 November 1, 2019, on the 
current progress of the Conventional Prompt Strike activity.

Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Technology

    The committee remains concerned about the proliferation of 
unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), which include both the 
unmanned aircraft and its operator controller device. For a 
number of years, adversaries of the United States have used 
UASs in international conflict areas to surveil, disrupt, and 
threaten U.S. and allied personnel, facilities, and interests. 
These challenges are compounded by the growing prevalence of 
UASs domestically, which can be used for legitimate military, 
commercial, and recreational purposes but could also be used 
irresponsibly or with malign intent. The committee continues to 
believe that critical military personnel, facilities, and 
assets must be protected from these threats and encourages the 
Department of Defense (DOD) to develop an array of counter-UAS 
(CUAS) capabilities, particularly nonkinetic CUAS capabilities 
that can: identify, monitor, and track UASs; operate passively 
without interfering with existing military, civilian, and 
commercial communication systems; and differentiate between 
authorized and unauthorized UASs.
    Where appropriate, the committee supports increased funding 
to meet Joint Urgent Operational Needs validated by the Joint 
Staff concerning CUAS solutions as well as the continued 
development of CUAS tactics, techniques, and procedures to 
protect DOD personnel, facilities, and assets. Additionally, 
the committee recognizes the importance of developing necessary 
legal authorities to manage a complex domestic environment. It 
notes with appreciation DOD's efforts to inform and collaborate 
with other relevant departments and agencies following the 
adoption of section 1692 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91) and urges the 
continued sharing of best practices across the government. The 
committee expects that the DOD will continue to coordinate with 
the Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation 
Administration, as required by section 1692 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-
91).

Cyber attacks by the Russian Federation and People's Republic of China 
        on Department of Defense affiliates

    The committee remains concerned about reports that cyber 
actors employed by or affiliated with the Russian Federation 
and People's Republic of China have targeted Department of 
Defense (DOD) systems, the systems of DOD contractors working 
on sensitive U.S. military technology, and the personal 
communications of U.S. military personnel. While the DOD has 
taken steps to harden its systems, the committee remains 
concerned that not enough is being done to detect and protect 
against attacks by the Russian Federation and People's Republic 
of China against non-government systems and other less-
protected targets affiliated with the Department of Defense.
    Therefore, not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a 
report on cyber attacks against the Department of Defense in 
the previous 24 months by agents or associates of the Russian 
and Chinese governments against DOD systems, the systems of DOD 
contractors working on sensitive U.S. military technology, and 
the personal communications of U.S. military personnel. The 
report shall describe what actions, if any, the Department is 
taking or plans to take to protect less-hardened targets 
against Russian and Chinese cyber operations and any associated 
legislative authorities required.

Defense options for Guam

    The committee notes that the Terminal High Altitude Area 
Defense (THAAD) system protects the island of Guam against the 
threat of rogue nations' short-, medium-, and intermediate-
range ballistic missiles. The committee strongly supports 
efforts to augment the defense of Guam with a layered Ballistic 
Missile Defense System, to include more capable interceptors 
and sensors against these rogue threats. As the Department of 
Defense continues to work on the Missile Defense Review, the 
committee encourages the Department to consider the addition of 
diverse missile defenses that would complement the THAAD system 
and provide a layered defense to ensure protection against more 
complex threats, such as cruise and hypersonic missiles.

Department of Defense efforts to cooperate with Department of Homeland 
        Security Fusion Centers

    The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
consider coordinating with the other relevant Federal 
Government departments and agencies and each State that has a 
National Guard with a defensive cyber operations element to 
establish regionally-focused public-private cooperative 
agreements or cross-functional task-forces, responsible for the 
creation of strategies to coordinate and share information 
among local, regional, and national entities, both public and 
private, in order to protect vital assets in the cyber realm. 
This cooperation might leverage divergent skillsets, extant 
public-private partnership relationships, and high-performing 
Federal Government assets in the joint defense of public and 
private systems. These cross-functional task-forces could 
comprise National Guard units, Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers, and private 
sector companies with significant cybersecurity equities and 
assets--in particular, in critical infrastructure sectors--
thereby strengthening active participation and sharing of 
information, integrating threat mitigation strategies, and 
growing the cyber network through shared experience.
    Pursuant to this kind of coordination, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than 180 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act on opportunities and efforts 
underway to cooperate with DHS fusion centers and State assets 
in cybersecurity. This report should relay: (1) The extant 
collaboration between National Guard units, the rest of the 
public sector, and the private sector in advancing 
cybersecurity across their aggregated assets; (2) Planned 
cooperation along these lines; and (3) The Secretary's 
assessment of opportunities in cooperation in red-teaming, 
incident response, data-sharing, provision of technical 
expertise, common cybersecurity standards, and attachment to 
DHS State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers.

Digital High Frequency Global Communications System

    The committee is aware that the Air Force's High Frequency 
Global Communications System (HFGCS) and the Navy's messaging 
system are both transitioning to digital operations as part of 
the modernization of the nuclear command, control, and 
communications enterprise. The committee is also aware that the 
interface between these two message traffic systems currently 
relies on analog routing technology, which will become 
unsupportable and must be replaced. However, the committee is 
concerned that the Air Force does not currently provide 
sufficient oversight of the HFGCS program relative to the 
importance of its mission in disseminating emergency action 
messages world-wide.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in consultation with the Commander, U.S. Strategic 
Command, to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees on the organization and management of the HFGCS no 
later than March 15, 2019. The report shall include the 
conversion of the system to digital operations as well as the 
interface with Navy systems.

Diversified access to space with Federal Aviation Administration-
        licensed spaceports

    The committee continues to recognize the unique importance 
of U.S. Federal Aviation Administration-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. There are a number of spaceports 
that are already developed or under development, including in 
New Mexico, Alaska, Oklahoma, Virginia, Texas, and Arizona.
    As the Department of Defense (DOD) and future national 
security space missions begin to prioritize the use of smaller, 
less expensive satellites and launch vehicles for rapid 
reconstitution and resilience, the DOD should assess what 
benefit nontraditional spaceports may offer in terms of cost 
and flexibility.
    The Department of Defense and future national security 
space missions are focused on using smaller, less expensive 
satellites and launch vehicles for rapid reconstitution and 
resilience. Spaceports have proven small launch capability and 
offer the U.S. government less costly launch sites and services 
for these missions and an alternative to Vandenberg Air Force 
Base, using commercial business practices to expedite DOD test 
and development programs across a variety of mission sets and a 
variety of launch and landing methods.
    The committee believes that these federally-licensed, non-
federally-owned launch facilities--including the Spaceport 
America in New Mexico, Pacific Spaceport Complex-Alaska (PSCA), 
the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS), and Oklahoma Air & 
Space Port--are available to help meet the requirements for the 
national security space program from the DOD, Air Force Space 
Command, the Space Rapid Capabilities Office, and the Missile 
Defense Agency (MDA). 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, offering both orbital and sub-orbital 
capabilities. 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 DOD, 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 Pacific Spaceport Complex-Alaska supported the Space 
and Missile Defense Command Advanced Hypersonic test launch in 
2014 and has both the facilities and range to support a variety 
of other multi-service hypersonic tests. U.S. Strategic Command 
is focused on developing a resilient response force that has 
enhanced capabilities and that can respond to an adversary. The 
PSCA has become a force multiplier in being the alternative 
west coast range to Vandenberg Air Force Base, providing 
additional capacity to test national security missions from an 
existing spaceport.
    The Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at Wallops Island, 
Virginia provides medium-class and small-class launch 
capabilities for the Department. It has launched numerous 
missions for the DOD with its agency partners, Air Force Space 
Command, the Operationally Responsive Space Office, and the 
MDA. The 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 the MARS by the end of 2018. 
The MARS provides additional proven east coast capacity for 
national security payloads, launches, flights of hypersonic 
vehicles, and other DOD test programs.
    The Oklahoma Air & Space Port, near Bums Flat, Oklahoma, is 
the only space port in the United States to have a civilian 
Federal Aviation Administration-approved spaceflight corridor 
in the National Airspace System. This spaceflight corridor is 
unique because it is not within military operating areas nor 
within restricted airspace, which provides an operational 
capability for space launch operations and associated 
industries specialized in space-related activities.
    Spaceport America in New Mexico is a licensed inland 
spaceport that already provides surface-to-space open sky 
launches landing in restricted flight zones. The New Mexico 
Spaceport is located next to White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) 
where the DOD controls the only restricted air space in the 
country besides the White House. The committee notes that the 
Department has studied hypervelocity testing at White Sands 
Missile Range and its neighbor, Spaceport America, which has 
the horizontal and vertical launch and landing capacities that 
hypervelocity vehicles require. WSMR is preparing environmental 
impact statements for inland flight corridors that will be able 
to provide apogee-to-end-game suborbital instrumented flight 
solutions.
    The committee believes that it is also important for the 
Department to diversify its launch options and capabilities to 
include inland sites. From a national security perspective, a 
secure multimodal spaceport is advantageous for future 
hypervelocity development. Significant investments have been 
made at inland space ports, which already have the 
infrastructure in place to accommodate smaller space launches 
for the Department.
    The committee also directs the Air Force to conduct an 
assessment of small launch providers to determine what payloads 
are appropriate for launch and a plan for utilizing these 
providers in future launches at these spaceports. The committee 
directs the Air Force to brief the congressional defense 
committees on this assessment within 90 days of enactment of 
this Act.

Early Warning Radar upgrades

    The committee notes an evolution of emerging space, 
ballistic missile, and hypersonic threats from a growing number 
of countries. The committee also notes that U.S. Strategic 
Command (STRATCOM) has established operational requirements to 
utilize the latest advancements in early warning radar 
technology to ensure that the United States remains capable of 
detecting, classifying, and tracking incoming threats as soon 
as possible. While the committee supports the Air Force's plan 
to add capabilities to the Ballistic Missile Early Warning 
System and Precision Acquisition Vehicle Entry Phased Array 
Warning System, it is critical that detection range, target 
classification, tracking accuracy, and cost-effective 
operations are prioritized and funded as part of the initial 
upgrades to meet current and emerging requirements.
    The committee understands that early warning radar 
platforms sold to U.S. partners include significant 
technological advancements beyond those included in current 
U.S. systems. The committee feels that it is imperative that 
STRATCOM leverage technologies already developed that are 
currently utilized by U.S. partners.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees, within 180 days of enactment of this Act, detailing 
possible upgrades of U.S. early warning radars to meet evolving 
threats beyond those already being addressed by the Air Force 
Space and Missile Systems Center. The report shall include a 
roadmap required to achieve state-of-the-art performance at 
U.S. early warning radar sites consistent with that of U.S. 
partners, including radar sensitivity and energy efficiency.

Importance of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program to United States 
        strategic deterrence

    The committee has great interest in actions by the 
Department of Defense to develop, build, and deploy the 
Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine. The vessels in this 
class will be the latest nuclear-powered ships, continuing a 
distinguished line of technological advancement fostered by 
Admiral Hyman Rickover. In particular, the committee notes the 
important role of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, also 
known as Naval Reactors, in the Columbia program. Naval 
Reactors' mission is to ensure the safe, reliable, and long-
lived operation of U.S. Navy nuclear powered ships. This in 
turn ensures the viability of the undersea leg of the American 
nuclear deterrence triad, of which the Columbia-class 
submarines will be a critical piece.
    The committee notes that in the development of the 
Columbia-class submarines, the Navy is confronting an 
aggressive schedule and a certain level of technological risk. 
The committee therefore encourages Naval Reactors to renew its 
efforts in the program, particularly after experiencing 
difficulties in the manufacturing process and inadequate 
oversight of contractors, to ensure that schedule and 
technology risks are managed in accordance with best practices. 
The committee also urges Naval Reactors to ensure that the 
training of officer and enlisted personnel for nuclear power 
jobs continues to meet the highest standards.

Laser communications

    The committee supports efforts to develop laser 
communications systems that enable the demonstration of secure, 
covert, anti-jam, very high data rate transmissions using laser 
communications. High data rate laser communications cross-link 
systems are essential to a proliferated satellite 
constellations architecture. The next critical challenge for 
laser communications is the implementation into rugged, lower 
cost, smaller packages for long-life, high-reliability 
satellite and airborne applications critical to intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), other national security 
applications, and commercial satellite constellations.
    The committee supports the development and demonstration of 
high-reliability, rugged laser communications cross-link 
systems. Doing so will help leverage existing prototypes for 
military applications as a proof-of-concept for an enhanced 
layer of resilience for missile warning, navigation, 
communications, weather, ISR, and other Department of Defense 
space applications.

Launch vehicle reusability

    The committee notes that the prospect of launch vehicle 
reusability could have considerable cost savings for the 
taxpayer. The committee believes equal consideration of 
reusable and expendable launch vehicles should be given in all 
future solicitations for which a reusable launch vehicle is 
technically capable. The committee directs the Secretary of the 
Air Force to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees no later than January 31, 2019, on the Air Force's 
plan for the use of reusable launch vehicles.

Layered ballistic missile defense

    The committee notes that the current Ballistic Missile 
Defense System (BMDS) protects the entire United States 
homeland, including Hawaii, from the limited ballistic missile 
threats of rogue nations. The committee strongly supports 
efforts to bolster the defense of the homeland with a layered 
BMDS, to included additional discrimination sensors and more 
capable interceptors, against such threats. Because of its 
location and the trajectories of potential threats, Hawaii is 
uniquely positioned in this layered defense. As the committee 
awaits the outcomes of the Department of Defense's Missile 
Defense Review, the committee urges the Department to continue 
to ensure defense of the homeland, including Hawaii, against 
all ranges of cruise and ballistic missile threats, including 
increasingly complex threats, to include hypersonic missiles.

Live fire training on missiles nearing demilitarization

    The committee is aware that the Navy's leadership desires 
additional fleet readiness training, including live-firing of 
missiles in order to provide sailors with relevant and 
realistic training while also thoroughly exercising ship 
systems prior to deployment. Therefore, the committee directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to conduct a study that considers the 
use of SM-3 missiles that are nearing demilitarization in fleet 
live fire testing exercises. The Navy should determine if 
reprogramming funding meant for demilitarization for these 
missiles would be representative of the cost for fleet 
readiness training, how many missiles the Navy would need for 
testing, and if the missile is capable of certain necessary 
software changes to be used in a fleet live fire testing 
exercise. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
submit a report to the committee, no later than January 1, 
2019, with the results of the study.

Long-term plan for weapons storage facilities

    The committee understands that the Air Force plans to 
construct new weapons storage facilities (WSFs) for storage and 
maintenance of nuclear weapons to replace the current 
facilities at Air Force bases that support nuclear operations. 
These WSFs will also be required at the bases that the Air 
Force chooses as bed-down locations for the B-21 bomber. The 
committee supports the improvements in safety, security, and 
capability that the Air Force expects to gain through the new 
facilities but is concerned that the Air Force is currently 
unable to answer questions about: (1) The different 
requirements for WSFs at B-21 and B-52 bomber bases, missile 
bases, and bases that host a mix of systems; (2) The 
appropriate balance between cost and risk in design; and (3) 
Basic design information about the one WSF already underway at 
FE Warren Air Force Base. The committee is also concerned that 
the Air Force is not appropriately synchronizing the 
construction of these WSFs with the plans for basing of the B-
21 bomber and other force structure considerations.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to provide to the congressional defense committees no 
later than March 15, 2019, a long-term plan for the 
recapitalization of weapons storage capacity for nuclear 
weapons at Air Force bases in the continental United States. 
The plan shall include current cost estimates for each site, 
taking into account the differences in capacity required 
depending on the systems at each bases, as well as a master 
schedule that is sequenced with the Air Force's plan for the 
rollout of the B-21 bomber.

Mapping of Department of Defense base stations

    The committee urges the Department of Defense to reduce and 
mitigate the risk from surreptitious mapping of sensitive 
locations by personal devices, particularly with respect to 
mapping based on Wi-Fi networks and other wireless devices. The 
committee encourages the Department of Defense to work in 
consultation with industry, the Department of Homeland 
Security, the Department of Transportation, and other relevant 
agencies to review the unintended consequences of these 
services and develop and implement any technical or operational 
precautions to prevent the collection of wireless network 
information and mitigate the risk associated with such 
activities. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to the defense committees no later than 1 year 
after the date of enactment of this Act on any actions taken to 
reduce and mitigate the risks associated with the mapping of 
sensitive locations by personal devices.

Matters related to Department of Defense cyber ranges

    The committee is concerned about two challenges that the 
Department of Defense (DOD) faces with respect to its cyber 
ranges: (1) The limitations posed by traditional data storage 
and information technology paradigms; and (2) those offered by 
extant software licensing practices.
    The DOD maintains a significant number of ranges for 
training, exercises, mission rehearsal, and test and 
evaluation, but capacity is limited, and resources are 
relatively scarce. Meanwhile, expensive modernization of 
existing ranges is ongoing but faces the ever-present problem 
of obsolescence. To consolidate its training development 
resources, the Secretary of Defense designated the Army as the 
executive agent for developing and maintaining a persistent 
training environment equal to the needs of the Cyber Mission 
Forces.
    It is expensive to maintain technological parity in range 
infrastructure and emulation capability with real networks in 
foreign countries, the commercial networks making up the bulk 
of cyberspace, and the networks of the DOD, which each and 
collectively evolve rapidly. It is also difficult and costly 
for any single or federated government ranges to achieve the 
scale necessary for unit training and large-scale exercise 
scenarios. Desirable attributes for a cyber range are the scale 
and fidelity of authentic networks and the ability to rapidly 
configure and reconfigure computing environments through 
virtualization.
    Modern commercial cloud offerings provide such 
capabilities. In addition, as a shared resource, clouds spread 
costs, are constantly modernized, and are extensible on demand. 
The only element that may not yet be natively available on 
commercial clouds is a network virtualization capability, which 
is clearly important for a cyber range, but such technology is 
available and could be integrated.
    The DOD is embarking on a major cloud services initiative, 
with commercial capabilities to be available at all levels of 
classification. This initiative or other ongoing acquisitions 
could provide a platform for the Persistent Training 
Environment and all the other range requirements.
    Software licenses are another major challenge for the 
effective functioning of DOD cyber ranges. The DOD's 
information technology purchases do not as a rule include the 
rights to use software in a virtualized test or training 
environment. Moreover, pricing for such rights under normal 
licensing agreements would be unaffordable-or would prevent the 
Department from achieving anything near the scale and fidelity 
needed to clone varied networks for effective training and 
exercises.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security, who serves 
as the Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA), to conduct a study of the 
feasibility of transitioning the DOD's cyber ranges to an 
enterprise service on commercial cloud, in consultation with 
the major stakeholders, including the Test Resource Management 
Center, the Chief Information Officer (CIO), the Army, U.S. 
Cyber Command, and the Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation. The PCA shall also consult with the Cloud Executive 
Steering Group.
    The committee also directs the PCA and the CIO to jointly 
assess the software licensing practices in the Department and 
consult with industry to identify viable license solutions that 
give the DOD the right to unlimited virtualized test and 
training instances. The committee encourages the DOD to use its 
considerable leverage in buying power in negotiation of such 
solutions.
    The committee directs the PCA to update the committee on 
these assessments within 180 days of the enactment of this Act.

Microsegmentation

    The committee supports the increased use of automation to 
provide a systematic and automated response to cybersecurity 
breaches and network and system outages. The committee 
recognizes the potential benefit of implementing automation in 
support of a layered defensive strategy that includes logical 
segmentation of networks within the data center 
(microsegmentation) and of using automation in data and 
application protection. The committee therefore directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the congressional 
defense committees no later than March 1, 2019, on the 
Department's long-term plan for utilizing such automation 
capabilities and current fielding strategy.

Modular array for the direct distribution of integrated energy on small 
        satellites

    The space industry is currently undergoing a substantial 
transformation as next-generation, smaller, low-cost satellites 
become increasingly available. These small satellites are 
capable of being quickly launched in response to a rapidly 
emerging need or threat. Unfortunately, key subsystems are not 
yet fully developed, thus hampering the wide-scale deployment 
of small satellites. Conventional satellite technology relies 
on the manufacturing and assembly of three independent 
subsystems for power: (1) solar panels, (2) a battery pack to 
store the solar energy, and (3) power electronics. Each of 
these subsystems is manufactured independently of one another 
and then fitted together at an integrator. The committee is 
interested in better understanding if combining the three 
subsystems into one single system will result in lower 
production costs and increased performance. In doing so, 
modular, deployable solar arrays have significant potential to 
accelerate the deployment of small satellites for critical 
Department of Defense missions.
    The committee therefore encourages the Air Force to explore 
modular arrays and utilize high strain composites and novel 
electric propulsion systems to reduce the cost and improve the 
performance of small satellites. The committee directs the Air 
Force to provide a briefing to the congressional defense 
committees on new small satellite power generation initiatives 
within 60 days.

Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Program Executive Office 
        staffing

    The committee commends the Air Force's efforts to fully 
staff the Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications (NC3) 
Program Executive Office at Hanscom Air Force Base. Timely 
upgrade of the NC3 program is critical to assure continued and 
resilient security of the national command authority. The 
committee encourages the Air Force to use all congressionally-
approved flexible hiring authorities and incentives to attract 
qualified candidates to these positions.

On-orbit satellite servicing technology

    The committee believes that satellite servicing could have 
promising applications for the Department of Defense. 
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Air Force 
to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees 
by December 1, 2018, on a plan regarding the applicability of 
satellite servicing capabilities. The briefing shall include: a 
prioritized list, with accompanying rationale, of specific 
operational and planned Department of Defense assets that could 
benefit from satellite servicing missions; an assessment of the 
feasibility and advisability of ensuring that future national 
security space satellites and spacecraft are compatible with 
commercial in-orbit servicing capabilities; and a discussion of 
whether and how to integrate satellite servicing capabilities 
as an integral part of operational resilience into the Joint 
Capabilities Integration Development System for identifying 
requirements, the Planning, Programming, Budgeting and 
Execution System for allocating resourcing and budgeting, and 
the Defense Acquisition System for developing and buying items 
or services.

Portable satellite data receiver suites for deployed warfighters

    The committee notes that the United States Air Force 
Research Laboratory's (AFRL) Small Business Initiative Research 
has provided funding for the development of a unique satellite 
communication receive suite for warfighters in need of 
reliable, portable connection to the Global Broadcast System 
(GBS). The committee is aware that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) Joint Program Office now includes these portable receive 
suites as an approved solution for receive technology with 
Military Satellite Communications on the existing GBS network. 
The committee encourages the DOD and the Air Force to ensure 
that these suites are made available to the warfighter. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force as the 
executive agent to provide a briefing to the congressional 
defense committees on the strategy for GBS man-portable receive 
suites no later than 90 days after enactment of this Act.

Review of connected devices on military installations

    The Committee urges the Secretary of Defense to identify 
and address risks related to servicemembers' use of personal 
devices while deployed--especially with respect to the 
potential tracking or identification of sensitive locations and 
the possibility that this information is stored in foreign data 
centers. The committee also urges the Department of Defense to 
evaluate respective foreign governments' ability to access 
information from U.S. servicemembers' personal devices during 
their deployment, the privacy protections and legal processes 
available to affected persons, and educational and directive 
measures that the Department could take to minimize these 
vulnerabilities.

Space Rapid Capabilities Office

    The committee notes that the Air Force's budget request 
indicates a full embrace of the need to rapidly develop and 
field new space capabilities in order to outpace the threat in 
2025 and dominate in 2028. The newly re-designated Space Rapid 
Capabilities Office (Space RCO) will serve to meet this 
aggressive goal and timeline and will seek to replicate the 
culture and processes of the current Air Force Rapid 
Capabilities Office. The additional funding requested will 
enable the Space RCO to quickly meet new billeting requirements 
under consideration and will allow the Space RCO to accelerate 
projects that are considered urgent by the Air Force and Joint 
Forces Command.
    The committee continues to recognize the need to develop a 
more responsive and resilient space architecture and supports 
the vision of the Space Rapid Capabilities Office to rapidly 
field new space capabilities. The committee is concerned, 
however, that there is a lack of Sensitive Compartmentalized 
Information Facility (SCIF) space that can be utilized by 
potential partners near the Air Force's Space RCO. Partnerships 
with commercial aerospace, including non-traditional and 
startup aerospace companies, will enable the Space RCO to carry 
out its mission to rapidly deploy assets to space. The 
committee directs the Air Force Space Command to assess within 
180 days of enactment the need and, if appropriate, to submit a 
plan to the congressional defense committees for SCIF space 
adjacent to or near the Space RCO, which could also be used by 
appropriately cleared commercial partners in support of Space 
RCO missions. The plan should include input from the Space RCO, 
Space and Missile Systems Center, Air Force Space Command, and 
other customers, including business entities that may utilize 
the new SCIF space.

Transition of the Strategic Automatic Control and Communications System 
        to the Navy Nova Communications System

    The committee understands that the Air Force is currently 
considering various modifications to the existing Strategic 
Automatic Control and Communications System (SACCS), which is a 
critical program within the nuclear command, control, and 
communications enterprise as the principal means for 
transmission of data and emergency action messages to Air Force 
locations around the world. The committee is concerned that 
various connected systems will not be replaced in a timely 
manner without disruption of the mission.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force, in consultation with the Secretary of the Navy and the 
Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, to 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees no 
later than March 15, 2019, containing a plan with: (1) Detailed 
timelines to transition parts of the SACCS mission to the Navy 
Nova messaging system; (2) The timeline for the replacement of 
the Promina router technology, including date and location; (3) 
The vulnerabilities in the transmission of data as SACCS front 
end systems are replaced by the Nova system; and (4) The Air 
Force's plans to mitigate those vulnerabilities.

United States-North Korea nuclear and missile threat reduction

    The committee continues to monitor the progress of talks 
between the United States and North Korea. The committee is 
aware that North Korean nuclear and missile programs, both of 
which pose significant unresolved threats to the United States 
and our allies, have substantial physical infrastructure and 
significant human capital associated with them and that North 
Korea remains heavily involved in illegal trade. The committee 
is also aware of the history of the Cooperative Threat 
Reduction program, which provided, and continues to provide, 
funding and expertise to partner governments in the former 
Soviet Union to secure and eliminate weapons of mass 
destruction at the source.
    Given the nature of North Korean threats and the scope of 
effort that would be required to reduce them, the committee 
directs the Department of Defense to provide to the 
congressional defense committees no later than March 29, 2019, 
a report, in consultation with the Department of Energy (DOE), 
on the estimate of resources that would be required for the 
denuclearization of North Korea and on how the DOE plans to 
moderate potential nuclear and missile proliferation through 
transfer of technology, materials, and scientific know-how.

    TITLE XVII--COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES

Short title (sec. 1701)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the short title of this section as ``The Foreign Investment 
Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018.''
Sense of Congress (sec. 1702)
    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Congress regarding the benefits of foreign 
investment in the United States and continuing the United 
States' commitment to open and fair investment policy, the 
shifting threats to national security and the need to modernize 
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States 
(CFIUS) and export controls to address those threats, the 
critical role of CFIUS in protecting national security and need 
for adequate resources and for more robust international 
outreach to allies to help them establish their own foreign 
investment screening regimes, the need to collaborate with 
allies to develop stronger multilateral export controls, and 
additional factors CFIUS may consider in reviewing 
transactions.
Definitions (sec. 1703)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(a) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to update terms pertaining to the Committee on 
Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) statute and add 
several new terms. This provision would expand the purview of 
CFIUS by explicitly adding four new types of covered 
transactions, including: (1) Any non-passive investment by a 
foreign person in any U.S. critical technology or critical 
infrastructure company; (2) Any change in a foreign investor's 
rights regarding a U.S. business; (3) Any other transaction, 
transfer, agreement or arrangement designed to circumvent/evade 
CFIUS; and (4) The purchase, lease, or concession by or to a 
foreign person of certain real estate in close proximity to 
military or other sensitive national security facilities. This 
provision would also allow CFIUS to exempt investments from 
countries meeting certain criteria from the new covered 
transactions.
Acceptance of written notices (sec. 1704)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(1)(c)(i) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
(Public Law 81-774) to update the rules governing the 
acceptance of written notices.
Inclusion of partnership and side agreements in notice (sec. 1705)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(1)(C) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
(Public Law 81-774) to require that any written notice or 
filing to include copies of all related partnership agreements, 
integration agreements, or other side agreements relating to 
transactions, including any related to the transfer of 
intellectual property.
Declarations for certain covered transactions (sec. 1706)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(1)(C) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
(Public Law 81-774) to create declarations that would serve as 
light filings, limited to five pages in length, that must be 
filed in advance of completing the transaction. This provision 
would allow any party to voluntarily file a declaration as an 
alternative to submitting a notice and would also require 
parties to file a declaration for certain investments where a 
foreign government has a substantial interest.
Stipulations regarding transactions (sec. 1707)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(1)(C) of the Defense Production Act (Public Law 
81-774) to allow all parties to a transaction to stipulate, in 
a notice or a declaration, that is a covered transaction and, 
if so, that it is also a foreign government-controlled 
transaction.
Authority for unilateral initiation of reviews (sec. 1708)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(1) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to confirm the circumstances under which the 
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) 
may unilaterally initiate a review, as well as how a 
transaction attains safe harbor status.
Timing for reviews and investigations (sec. 1709)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to gives the Committee on Foreign Investment in the 
United States (CFIUS) extra time to review each transaction by 
extending the overall review period from 30 days to 45 days and 
authorizes CFIUS to extend any investigation for one 30-day 
period in extraordinary circumstances, at the request of the 
head of a lead agency.
Monitoring of non-notified and non-declared transactions (sec. 1710)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(1) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to require the Committee on Foreign Investment in 
the United States to establish a mechanism to identify any 
covered transactions for which a notice or declaration has not 
been filed and on which information is reasonably available.
Submission of certifications to Congress (sec. 1711)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(3)(C) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
(Public Law 81-774) to enhance congressional oversight by 
requiring the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United 
States (CFIUS) to submit its certifications regarding 
transactions to both the Senate Select Committee on 
Intelligence and House Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence.
Analysis by Director of National Intelligence (sec. 1712)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(b)(4) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to require the Director of National Intelligence, 
for each National Security Threat Assessment (NSTA), to 
identify any recognized intelligence collection gaps, update 
the NSTA upon require by a lead agency for any past cleared 
transaction involving a mitigation agreement, and submit the 
NSTA to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and House 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence after conclusion of 
action by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United 
States.
Information sharing (sec. 1713)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(c) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to enhance collaboration and coordination with 
United States allies and partners by allowing the disclosure of 
information to any domestic or foreign governmental entity, 
under the direction of the chairperson, if necessary for 
national security and pursuant to appropriate confidentiality 
and classification arrangements, or when the parties have 
consented for information to be disclosed to third parties.
Action by the President (sec. 1714)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(d) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to confirm the authority of the President to 
suspend or prohibit a transition or require divestment when 
necessary to protect national security.
Judicial review (sec. 1715)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(e) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to clarify that civil action challenges against 
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States actions 
and findings may only be brought in the United States Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Membership and staff of Committee (sec. 1716)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(k) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to clarify the rules that apply to the appointment 
and hiring of members and staff of the Committee on Foreign 
Investment in the United States.

Actions by the Committee to address national security risks (sec. 1717)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(1) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to grant the Committee on Foreign Investment in the 
United States (CFIUS) the authority to suspend a transaction 
during a review or investigation, use mitigation agreements and 
conditions to address situations where the parties have chosen 
to abandon a transaction without a presidential order, and 
impose interim mitigation agreements and conditions for 
national security risks posed by completed transactions while 
they are undergoing CFIUS review.

Modification of annual report and other reporting requirements (sec. 
        1718)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(m) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to require the Committee on Foreign Investment in 
the United States (CFIUS) to include in its annual report a 
description of the outcomes of any review sand investigations 
that year, including whether a mitigation agreement was entered 
into or condition imposed and whether the President took any 
action.

Certification of notices and information (sec. 1719)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721(n) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public 
Law 81-774) to require that each notice submitted to the 
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States be 
accompanied by a written statesmen from the parties certifying 
that the notice or information is accurate, complete, and 
compliant with the rules.

Implementation plans (sec. 1720)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Commerce to 
develop implementation plans for carrying out relevant sections 
of this Title and to submit them to Congress within 180 days of 
enactment of this Act.

Assessment of need for additional resources for Committee (sec. 1721)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
President to determine whether and to what extent the expansion 
of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States' 
(CFIUS) responsibilities would necessitate additional resources 
for CFIUS and its members to perform their functions, and 
include the request for any such additional resources for each 
member agency in the annual budget requests to Congress.

Funding (sec. 1722)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 
81-774) to establish a fund for the Committee on Foreign 
Investment in the United States.

Centralization of certain Committee functions (sec. 1723)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 
81-774) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to 
centralize certain functions of the Committee on Foreign 
Investment of the United States (CFIUS) to include monitoring 
non-notified and non-declared transactions, within the 
Department of Treasury to enhance CFIUS interagency 
coordination and collaboration.

Conforming amendments (sec. 1724)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 
81-774) to make technical and conforming changes to the 
statute.

Requirements to identify and control the export of emerging and 
        foundational technologies (sec. 1725)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
an interagency process led by the President to identify 
emerging and foundational technologies that are not currently 
subject to export controls and establishes an interagency 
process to control such technologies.

Export control enforcement authority (sec. 1726)

    The committee recommends a provision that would enhance and 
harmonize the Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) 
export control enforcement authorities with those authorities 
granted special agents in other law enforcement and 
investigative agencies by allowing BIS to engage in overseas 
investigations and undercover penetration activities and also 
appropriately protects confidentiality of information.

Prohibition on modification of civil penalties under export control and 
        sanctions laws (sec. 1727)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 
81-774) that would prohibit the President from modifying any 
civil penalty implemented by the Government of the United 
States with respect to a Chinese telecommunications company 
pursuant to a determination that the company has violated and 
export control or sanctions law of the United States until the 
dates that is 30 days after the President makes a certification 
to the appropriate congressional committees.

Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security (sec. 1728)

    The committee recommends a provision that would rename the 
position of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Export 
Administration to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry 
and Security to more properly align the position title with the 
organization and role.

Limitation on cancellation of designation of Secretary of the Air Force 
        as Department of Defense Executive Agent for a certain Defense 
        Production Act program (sec. 1729)

    The committee recommends a provision that would bar the 
Department of Defense from making any change to the Secretary 
of the Air Force acting as the program manager or executive 
agent under Title III of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
(Public Law 81-774) until Congress explicitly authorizes such a 
change.

Review of and report on certain defense technologies critical to the 
        United States maintaining superior military capabilities (sec. 
        1730)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
report to Congress, no later than 180 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, from the Secretary of Defense and 
the Director of National Intelligence on key United States 
industries and research and development activities critical to 
maintaining a national security technology capability, where 
over the next five years it is anticipated a domestic 
industrial base shortfall will exist and domestic industry 
cannot or will not provide the needed capacity in a timely 
manner without assistance authorized in existing statutory 
authorities enacted for such purposes.

Briefing on information from transactions reviewed by Committee on 
        Foreign Investment in the United States relating to foreign 
        efforts to influence democratic institutions and processes 
        (sec. 1731)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Treasury, no later than 60 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, to provide a briefing to the 
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate 
and the Committee on Financial Service of the House of 
Representatives.

Effective date (sec. 1732)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the date of applicability of the provision contained within 
this title.

Severability (sec. 1733)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that any provision of this title is held to be invalid, the 
remaining provisions and the application of that provision to 
other persons shall not be affected.

            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 made in prior 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 2019 budget requested $11.4 billion for 
military construction and housing programs. Of this amount, 
$9.4 billion was requested for military construction, $1.6 
billion for the construction and operation of family housing, 
$267.5 million for base closure activities, and $171.1 million 
for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
Program.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations 
for military construction, housing programs, and base closure 
activities totaling $11.4 billion. The total amount authorized 
for appropriations reflects the committee's continued 
commitment to invest in the recapitalization of DOD facilities 
and infrastructure.
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 2019.''
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, 2023, 
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, 2018, or the date of enactment of this Act, 
whichever is later.

                 TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1.0 billion for military construction and $707.2 million 
for family housing for the Army for fiscal year 2019.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$1.1 billion for military construction for the Army and $707.2 
million for family housing for the Army for fiscal year 2019.
    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 projects for the active component of the 
Army for fiscal year 2019. The committee recognizes the 
significant unfunded military construction requirements and has 
included an additional $107.6 million for many of these 
projects. 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 2019. 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 2019. 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.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2104)
    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 two projects until October 1, 2019, 
or the date of the enactment of an act authorizing funds for 
military construction for fiscal year 2020, whichever is later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2016 project (sec. 
        2105)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization of a project authorized by section 2101 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
(division B of Public Law 114-92) until October 1, 2023, or the 
date of enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2024, whichever is later.

                 TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $2.5 billion for military construction and $419.1 million 
for family housing for the Department of the Navy for fiscal 
year 2019.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$2.6 billion for military construction for the Navy and $419.1 
million for family housing for the Navy for fiscal year 2019.
    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 2019. The committee recognizes the significant unfunded 
military construction requirements and has included an 
additional $304.8 million for many of these projects. 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 2019. 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 
$16.6 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 2019. 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.

              TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1.7 billion for military construction and $395.7 million 
for family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 2019.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$1.8 billion for military construction for the Air Force and 
$395.7 million for family housing for the Air Force for fiscal 
year 2019.
    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 2019. 
The committee recognizes the significant unfunded military 
construction requirements and has included an additional $149.2 
million for many of these projects. 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 2019. 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 $75.2 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 2019. 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 phased project 
        authorized in fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017 (sec. 2305)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization contained in section 2301(b) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (division B 
of Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3679) for Royal Air Force 
Croughton, for JIAC Consolidation Phase 1, the authorization 
contained in the table in section 2301(b) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (division B 
of Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1153) for Croughton Royal Air 
Force, for Joint Intelligence Analysis Complex (JIAC) 
Consolidation Phase 2, and the authorization contained in the 
table in section 2301(b) of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (division B of Public 
Law 114-328; 130 Stat. 2697) for Royal Air Force Croughton, for 
JIAC Consolidation Phase 3, to change the location to United 
Kingdom, Unspecified.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2017 project 
        (sec. 2306)
    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 construction of a basic military 
training recruit dormitory at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas, to 
include a 26,537 square meter dormitory.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2018 project 
        (sec. 2307)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authority contained in section 2301(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (division B 
of Public Law 115-91) for the construction of a cyberwork 
facility at the United States Air Force Academy, Colorado, to 
include a facility of up to 4,462 square meters.
Additional authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2019 projects 
        (sec. 2308)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Secretary of the Air Force to carry out certain military 
construction projects using funds available for research, 
development, test, and evaluation.

           TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $2.7 billion for military construction for the Defense 
Agencies for fiscal year 2019.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$2.4 billion for military construction for the Defense Agencies 
for fiscal year 2019.
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 2019. The authorized amounts are listed on an 
installation-by-installation basis.
Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (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 $84.4 
million.
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 2019. 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.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2015 projects (sec. 
        2404)
    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 four projects until October 1, 2019, 
or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
military construction for fiscal year 2020, whichever is later.
Authorization of certain fiscal year 2018 project (sec. 2405)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2401(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2018 (division B of Public Law 105-91) by 
authorizing the Fort Bliss Blood Processing Center for 
$8,300,000.

                   TITLE XXV--INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS

Summary
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $171.1 million for military construction in 
fiscal year 2019 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 $171.1 million for the U.S. contribution to 
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
Program for fiscal year 2019.

             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 $518.6 million from the Republic of Korea as 
in-kind contributions.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

Summary
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $467.4 million for military construction in 
fiscal year 2019 for facilities for the National Guard and 
reserve components.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$661.8 million for military construction in fiscal year 2019 
for facilities for the National Guard and reserve components. 
The detailed funding recommendations are contained in the state 
list table included in this report.
    Further details on projects authorized can be found in the 
tables in this title and section 4601 of this Act.

 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 2019. The committee recognizes the significant 
unfunded military construction requirements and has included an 
additional $126.0 million for many of these projects. 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 2019. 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 2019. 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 2019. 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 2019. 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 2019 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 2016 project 
        (sec. 2611)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization contained in section 2603 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (division B 
of Public Law 114-92) for construction of a Reserve Training 
Center Complex at Dam Neck, Virginia, to authorize the 
construction at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Story, 
Virginia.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2018 project 
        (sec. 2612)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
authorization in section 2601 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (division B of Public 
Law 115-91) for additions and alterations to the National Guard 
Readiness Center at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, to include the 
construction of a new readiness center. Additionally, if a new 
readiness center is constructed, this provision would limit the 
amount available for its construction to the previously 
authorized $15.0 million.
Additional authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2019 project 
        (sec. 2613)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to carry out a certain military 
construction project and acquire approximately 8.5 acres of 
land in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania using unobligated Navy 
military construction reserve funds. The provision would also 
require the Secretary of the Navy to provide the relevant 
information in accordance with section 2851(c) of title 10, 
United States Code, regarding the project and notify the 
congressional defense committees if it becomes necessary to 
exceed the estimated project cost, in accordance with section 
2853 of title 10, United States Code.

          TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

Summary and explanation of tables 
    The budget request included $267.5 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 $267.5 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 2019 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 recommends a provision that prohibits the 
Department of Defense from conducting another base realignment 
and closure (BRAC) round. The committee notes that although the 
Department of Defense did not request authorization to conduct 
a BRAC round in the request for fiscal year 2019, the 
Department is focusing its efforts this year on studying 
facility optimization. The committee is encouraged by these 
efforts and looks forward to reviewing these results prior to 
the request for any future BRAC round.

                       Items of Special Interest

Aligning base realignment and closure goals with infrastructure

    The committee recognizes that in 2005 the Department of 
Defense implemented a plan for Base Realignment and Closure 
(BRAC). The Secretary of Defense identified three goals for the 
2005 Base Realignment and Closure: (1) Transform the military; 
(2) Foster jointness; and (3) Reduce excess infrastructure to 
produce cost savings. The committee recognizes the efforts of 
the Department since that time and the efforts of communities 
across the United States in the relocation of military service 
members and units. The committee believes that the Department 
of Defense must keep the promises that it made during the 2005 
Base Realignment and Closure in regards to its current 
property, facilities, and training spaces, as our military and 
associated communities are growing and modernizing based on 
these 2005 metrics.
    The condition of our bases and surrounding communities, 
along with the welfare of our personnel and serviceability of 
our equipment, remains a key component to the readiness of our 
military. The Department must also continue improving existing 
infrastructure and pursuing military construction projects that 
effectively meet the demands of our future force, as opposed to 
asking this committee for a future complete overhaul of its 
posture at home. The committee finally notes that this Act 
prohibits the Department of Defense from conducting an 
additional BRAC round.

       TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

Additional authority to obtain architectural and engineering services 
        and construction design for defense laboratory modernization 
        pilot program (sec. 2801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2803 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92) to extend the pilot 
program for the use of Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation (RDT&E) funds for military construction projects 
until 2025 and clarify that RDT&E funds may be used to obtain 
architectural and engineering services and carry out 
construction design.
Modification of contract authority for acquisition, construction, or 
        furnishing of test facilities and equipment (sec. 2802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2353(a) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify the 
authority for the contract of a military department to provide 
for the acquisition or construction of facilities and 
equipment, by either the government or the contractor, that the 
secretary of the military department concerned determines to be 
necessary for the performance of a contract for research, 
development, or both.
    The committee believes that the current Air Force 
Instruction (AFI) approval process for acquisition or 
construction projects seeking to use the authority in section 
2353 of title 10, United States Code, does not adequately 
address construction funded through contracts for research, 
development, or both. The addition of language to AFIs 
pertinent to acquisition and construction of facilities and 
equipment authorized by section 2353 of title 10, United States 
Code, is necessary for a more effective and seamless 
implementation of this authority.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to issue a revised AFI that better supports the use of 
section 2353 of title 10, United States Code, and to brief the 
committee not later than September 30, 2018, on the results of 
a review of the authorities that support the acquisition or 
construction of facilities and equipment for research and 
development contracts, the supporting AFIs to carry out such 
projects, and any plans to update the AFI to better utilize the 
existing authorities of Research and Development Contracts.
Extension of temporary, limited authority to use operation and 
        maintenance funds for construction projects in certain areas 
        outside the United States (sec. 2803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
subsection (h) of section 2808 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 from 2019 to 2020 and 
limit the funding authority to $50,000,000.
Unspecified minor military construction projects related to 
        revitalization and recapitalization of Defense Industrial Base 
        Facilities (sec. 2804)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, to establish a 
pilot program authority until 2023 for unspecified minor 
military construction projects of $6.0 million in support of 
defense industrial base facilities.
    The committee recognizes the need to modernize defense 
industrial base facilities in order to support the 
modernization of individual weapons systems. The flexibility 
afforded by the use of funds in unspecified minor construction 
projects would allow installation commanders to quickly adapt 
to changing needs and requirements, especially as depots and 
other facilities historically face difficulty in competition 
for military construction funds.
Congressional oversight of projects carried out pursuant to laws other 
        than Military Construction Authorization Acts (sec. 2805)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2802(e)(1) of title 10, United States Code, to include 
all congressional defense committees in any notification 
requirements set forth by any law other than a Military 
Construction Authorization Act.

          Subtitle B--Project Management and Oversight Reforms

Updates and modifications to Department of Defense Form 1391, Unified 
        Facilities Criteria, and military installation master plans 
        (sec. 2811)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense (DOD) Form 1391 to include a disclosure 
of whether or not a proposed project falls within or partially 
within a 100-year floodplain and, if so, a specific risk 
mitigation plan. The provision would also require a process for 
risk analysis and a report on planned mitigation measures for 
buildings, require disclosure as to whether a project was 
included in the prior year's future years defense program, 
require an energy study or life cycle analysis, amend the 
United Facilities Criteria to ensure building risk data are 
incorporated into planned designs and modifications, require 
consideration of energy and climate resiliency efforts in major 
military installation master plans, amend the definition of 
military installation resilience, and include threats to 
military installation resilience for adjustment and 
diversification assistance.
Work in Process Curve charts and outlay tables for military 
        construction projects (sec. 2812)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries to include as 
an addendum to the 1391 forms submitted with the budget request 
for each fiscal year a Work in Process Curve chart and monthly 
outlay table for funding, obligations, and outlay figures for 
any military construction project over $35,000,000.

                      Subtitle C--Land Conveyances

Land exchange, Air Force Plant 44, Tucson, Arizona (sec. 2821)
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Secretary of the Air Force permissive authority to convey 58 
acres on Air Force Plant 44, Arizona to Tucson International 
Airport and the ability to construct new explosives storage 
facilities to replace the existing facility that would be 
conveyed with this provision while ensuring that the new 
explosives storage facilities is within the end-of-runway clear 
zone.
Land conveyance, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida (sec. 2822)
    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Secretary of the Air Force permissive authority to convey 80 
acres of land adjacent to Eglin Air Force Base to the Air Force 
Enlisted Village. The committee notes that, should the 
Secretary invoke this authority, the conveyance would include a 
reversionary interest clause.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Commemoration of Freedman's Village (sec. 2831)
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow an 
easement of approximately 0.1 acre of land outside Arlington 
National Cemetery for the purpose of recognizing Freedman's 
Village.

Strategic plan to improve capability of Department of Defense training 
        ranges and installations (sec. 2832)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, working through the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to develop a 
comprehensive strategic plan for using existing authorities to 
address training constraints to improve operations training 
capabilities requiring training enablers available in and 
outside the United States. The committee notes that this would 
be an annual report with a sunset of 2022 and would replace the 
existing Sustainable Range Report, which is set to expire in 
2018.

Native American Indian lands environmental mitigation program (sec. 
        2833)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 160 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to participate in a program to mitigate 
the environmental effects of defense activities on Indian lands 
and culturally connected locations.

Defense community infrastructure pilot program (sec. 2834)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2391 of title 10, United States Code, by granting the 
Secretary of Defense permissive authority to make grants, 
conclude cooperative agreements, and supplement funds to assist 
State and local governments in addressing deficiencies in 
community infrastructure. The provision would require that the 
State or local government contribute not less than 30 percent 
of the funding for the community infrastructure project. The 
authority set forth in this provision would expire on September 
30, 2023.

Representation of installation interests in negotiations and 
        proceedings with carriers and other public utilities (sec. 
        2835)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 501(c) of title 40, United States Code, by requiring 
that any representative of the General Services Administration 
that will represent a military installation in any negotiation 
must first notify the senior mission commander of the 
installation and solicit and represent the interest of the 
installation as determined by the installation's senior mission 
commander.

White Sands Missile Range land enhancements (sec. 2836)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
White Sands National Park and abolish White Sands National 
Monument. The establishment of a national park would increase 
the public recognition of the significant resources of White 
Sands. This provision would modify the boundary of White Sands 
National Park and convey 3,737 acres of land from the Secretary 
of the Interior to the Secretary of the Army. This provision 
would also convey 8,592 acres of land from the Secretary of the 
Army to the Secretary of the Interior.

Authority to transfer funds for construction of Indian River Bridge 
        (sec. 2837)

    The committee recommends a provision that would grant the 
Secretary of Defense permissive authority to transfer up to 50 
percent of the shared costs for the construction of the Indian 
River Bridge to the Administrator of the National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration.

                       Items of Special Interest

Assessment of military structures in permafrost areas

    The committee remains concerned that climate-related events 
are already being observed at Department of Defense (DOD) 
installations and that the effects of which will continue to 
have an impact on both the security environment in which 
military forces operate and on DOD infrastructure worldwide. 
For instance, the committee notes that melting permafrost in 
Alaska had led to costly and unexpected repairs of facilities. 
Additionally, the committee is concerned that a failure to 
address identified deficiencies can over time put DOD military 
readiness, mission capability, military construction, and 
valuable taxpayer resources at risk.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to submit 
to the congressional defense committees a report with an 
assessment of military structures in permafrost area no later 
than 180 days after the enactment of this Act. The assessment 
shall include: (1) An inventory of all military structures 
currently built in permafrost areas, including Alaska, 
Greenland, and northern European countries to include all 
planned new military construction in permafrost areas for the 
next 4 fiscal years; (2) An inventory of which structures at 
Eielson Air Force Base, if any, are experiencing stresses and 
impacts associated with melting permafrost foundation 
degradation to include proposed repairs or new construction; 
(3) An explanation of how the DOD determines what constitutes a 
permafrost area; (4) A description of the process by which the 
DOD determines whether a deep foundation is necessary in a 
permafrost area, including cost factors; (5) An assessment of 
how design and construction standards account for foundation 
integrity in the event of permafrost degradation; (6) A 
description of the cost difference between building on standard 
foundations and deep foundations associated with permafrost 
degradation to include repairs over the life of the project for 
both; and (7) Any other information or recommendations the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.

Encouraging the use of existing authorities for construction of future 
        National Guard Readiness Center

    The committee recognizes that the South Carolina National 
Guard plans to construct the Summerville National Guard 
Readiness Center in fiscal year 2021 and commends the South 
Carolina National Guard for working to acquire Federal land 
with Joint Base Charleston in submission of a Base Action 
Request for approval. The committee encourages the Secretary of 
the Air Force to leverage existing authorities to make land 
available at Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina to the 
Secretary of the Army for the purpose of constructing a 
permanent National Guard Readiness Center. Further, the 
committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to use his 
authority to issue a revocable license to the South Carolina 
National Guard for the purpose of constructing a permanent 
National Guard Readiness Center on the land made available if 
the Secretary determines the license to be in the interest of 
the Army.

Excess capacity estimates

    The committee notes that a report by the Comptroller 
General of the United States titled ``Defense Infrastructure: 
DOD Needs to Improve the Accuracy of its Excess Capacity 
Estimates'' (GAO-18-230) found that the Department of Defense's 
(DOD) 2017 excess capacity analysis ``does not have the 
accuracy and analytical sufficiency to provide Congress with a 
reasonable estimate of the actual excess capacity within DOD.'' 
Additionally, the Comptroller General found that the DOD ``used 
a baseline for the analysis that did not fully take into 
account changes in infrastructure needs since 1989, assumptions 
in its analysis that are not reasonable, and methods that were 
not sufficient or implemented consistently.''
    The committee recognizes that DOD has been unable to 
conduct a full Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) analysis; 
however, the committee is concerned that without initial excess 
capacity estimates that are accurate and sufficient, the 
Department may not be providing the Congress with the 
information necessary to make a fully informed decision on a 
future BRAC round.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to 
reliably update the baseline used for estimating excess 
infrastructure capacity, using assumptions in estimating excess 
capacity that are considered realistic and credible, and 
develop guidance to improve the methods used in the analysis in 
order to ensure consistent implementation of DOD's methodology 
to produce reliable estimates of excess capacity across the 
DOD. Additionally, the guidance shall, at a minimum, clearly 
define major installations, identify if and when it is 
appropriate to include a facility in more than one category to 
take into account multiple missions at the facilities, and 
provide protocols for assessing excess capacity at joint bases. 
The Assistant Secretary shall brief or report on this guidance 
to the committee not later than February 1, 2019.

Federal land transfer for South Carolina National Guard

    The committee recognizes that the South Carolina National 
Guard intends to establish a Federal training site and commends 
the South Carolina National Guard for working with the Savannah 
River Site, Aiken, South Carolina on a potential location for 
the site. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Energy, to use existing 
authorities to make land available at the Savannah River Site, 
Aiken, South Carolina to the Secretary of the Army for the 
purpose of establishing a Federal training site for the South 
Carolina National Guard. Further, the committee encourages the 
Secretary of the Army to use his authority to issue a revocable 
license to the South Carolina National Guard for the purpose of 
establishing a Federal training site on the land made available 
if the Secretary determines the license to be in the interest 
of the Army.

Incremental funding of military construction projects

    The committee remains very concerned that the Department of 
Defense is unable to plan, program, or request incrementally 
funded military construction projects. The committee strongly 
believes that the Department should seek relief from this 
restrictive policy set forth by the Office of Management and 
Budget. The committee notes that incremental funding authority 
would ensure greater stability and predictability in the 
planning process, reduce acquisition costs, and enable the 
Department to execute more work in place on other 
infrastructure requirements in the fiscal year. Furthermore, 
the committee believes that incremental funding of large and 
complex military construction projects ensures continuous 
oversight and opportunities to adjust the authorization of 
appropriation level for projects, should issues arise or 
requirements change over the course of construction.
    To date, the committee is not aware of any example where a 
military construction project has been left with inadequate 
funding or has not been executable as a result of an 
incremental funding approach. The committee strongly encourages 
and expects the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to work with 
the committee, and the other appropriate congressional defense 
committees, to develop a framework that enables the planning, 
programming, budgeting, and execution of incrementally funded 
military construction projects.
    As reflected in the funding tables, the committee continues 
to believe in the military value and effective use of taxpayer 
funding to incrementally authorize appropriations for certain 
military construction projects. The committee notes that, as 
readiness is the Department's number one priority, utilizing 
incremental funding, the committee was able to authorize dozens 
of additional projects including National Guard readiness 
centers, fire stations, barracks, and training ranges. As such, 
the authorized funding shall be immediately available and 
allotted to contract for the full scope of authorized military 
construction projects. The committee finally notes that 
executing additional infrastructure projects at a faster pace, 
while maintaining said oversight, only improves readiness.

Installation and facilities physical security gaps

    The committee notes that the physical safety and security 
of Department of Defense personnel and infrastructure are 
paramount to readiness. The committee is concerned, however, 
that there are places where major Department activities are not 
located behind a fence line or other physical access barriers. 
The committee notes that such locations are essentially open to 
the public, putting high visibility concentrations of military 
personnel at risk. The committee recognizes that the Department 
must prioritize where to invest a limited pool of resources 
when it comes to infrastructure and resources. The committee 
encourages the Department to seek out innovative ways to 
improve physical security. However, the committee must first 
have a better understanding of how many installations or 
facilities exist without appropriate physical access barriers.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment to 
provide a briefing no later than September 30, 2018, 
identifying all installations and locations that host more than 
25 civilian employees or uniformed personnel and that lack 
appropriate physical access barriers. The briefing shall list 
each location in priority order and include a cost estimate to 
provide the necessary security measures at each location 
identified.

National Maritime Intelligence Center Parking

    The committee notes that the National Maritime Intelligence 
Center (NMIC) is located on the Suitland Federal Center in 
Suitland, Maryland. The Office of Naval Intelligence is the 
host command of the NMIC, and the facility is required to 
provide safe and adequate parking for all tenet commands, which 
include 3,700 employees. Since 2008, parking at the NMIC has 
been inadequate due to significant facility expansion for 
roughly 700 new employees and the discovery of structural and 
safety deficiencies of the NMIC parking garage. The committee 
notes that Navy engineers have assessed that the useful life of 
the garage will expire between 2021 and 2023. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a planned 
strategy to correct these deficiencies to the committee no 
later than March 1, 2019.

Process for prioritizing funding and identifying facilities for 
        demolition

    The committee remains concerned about the quality and 
condition of many Department of Defense (DOD) facilities around 
the globe, despite the Department's receiving significant 
increases in funding for facilities sustainment restoration and 
modernization (FSRM) in recent years to tackle the challenge of 
maintaining facilities and addressing infrastructure 
maintenance backlogs. As such, the committee strongly 
encourages the Department to increase investments in its FSRM 
accounts in order to match its rhetoric and accepted level of 
risk to date. Additionally, the committee strongly urges the 
DOD to ensure that its installation master plans include a 
comprehensive restoration and modernization project plan that 
uses existing conversion authorities to the maximum extent 
practicable and identifies installation deficiencies 
detrimental to the mission.
    The committee is also aware that the DOD has sought FSRM 
funding for the demolition of facilities that no longer meet 
operational requirements and, in some cases, hinder readiness 
across its installations. The committee has received testimony 
in previous years about the cumulative negative impacts of 
poorly maintained facilities on the overall readiness of the 
Department.
    The committee is concerned that only a small amount of its 
FSRM is programmed for the demolition of aged and no longer 
usable facilities. Demolition of these facilities is important 
to sustaining readiness for the warfighter and reducing 
potential health and safety risks at DOD installations. 
However, the committee is concerned about how the DOD will 
prioritize funding and identify buildings and facilities for 
demolition. As such, the committee directs the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment 
to report to the congressional defense committees no later than 
March 1, 2019, on the Department's process to: (1) Identify 
buildings and facilities for demolition; (2) Prioritize 
demolitions across the DOD enterprise; and (3) Provide a list, 
by military service, to include the Reserve and Guard 
components, of buildings and facilities (by installation) that 
will be demolished with fiscal year 2019 funding and could be 
demolished across the future years defense program if 
additional resources were to become available.

Review of Army Corps of Engineers Centers of Standardization

    The committee notes that the Army Corps of Engineers has 
established nine Centers of Standardization for military 
construction projects, whose purpose is to achieve savings and 
benefits in the programming, design, and construction of Army 
facilities. The committee understands that the intent of these 
Centers is to improve facilities design quality, reduce design 
and construction costs and time, and reduce change orders 
during construction, among other things.
    However, the committee notes that a Government 
Accountability Office report, published March 27, 2018, titled 
``Defense Infrastructure: Action Needed to Increase the 
Reliability of Construction Cost Estimates'' (GAO-18-101), 
found that Department of Defense guidance for construction 
projects does not fully incorporate the necessary steps for 
developing reliable cost estimates. Additionally, projects 
consistently face cost overruns and schedule delays. The 
committee is encouraged by the efforts by the Corps of 
Engineers to ensure that facilities are constructed at the 
lowest cost while still trying to ensure mission capability for 
users. However, the committee is concerned that trends indicate 
that the Centers are not achieving their stated goal.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the effectiveness of the Centers of 
Standardization no later than April 1, 2019. The report should 
address at a minimum the following information: (1) To what 
extent the Army Corps of Engineers Centers of Standardization 
achieve their stated objectives; (2) The metrics that the Corps 
of Engineers uses to measure achievements thought to be derived 
from the Centers; (3) To what extent their measurement 
techniques comport with best practices for such measurement; 
(4) What potential liability the Centers incur in the event 
that problems develop during construction; (5) To what extent 
the Departments of the Navy and Air Force have comparable 
Centers or other procedures for achieving standardization and, 
if they do, how effectively the lessons learned are shared; and 
(6) Any additional information that the Comptroller General 
deems relevant.

Standoff weapons facility project at Andersen Air Force Base

    The committee notes that Andersen Air Force Base enables a 
heavy bomber presence in the Pacific Area of Operations. An 
integral aspect of this operation is the ability to load 
munitions rapidly onto bombers using the large rotary launchers 
associated with these aircraft. The committee is supportive of 
efforts to develop a standoff weapons facility at Andersen Air 
Force Base that will contain the necessary high bays and heavy 
loading equipment to facilitate the storage and loading of 
these rotary launchers and to facilitate timely load out of 
munitions into bombers.

   TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Summary
    The budget request included $921.4 million for military 
construction in fiscal year 2019 for overseas contingency 
operations.
    The committee recommends $852.4 million for military 
construction in fiscal year 2019 for overseas contingency 
operations.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2901)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Army military construction project for fiscal year 2019 for 
overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are 
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2902)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Navy military construction projects for fiscal year 2019 for 
overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are 
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 
        2903)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Air Force military construction projects for fiscal year 2019 
for overseas contingency operations. The authorized amounts are 
listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2904)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Defense Agencies military construction projects for fiscal year 
2019 for overseas contingency operations. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
Authorization of appropriations (sec. 2905)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for military construction in the overseas 
contingency operations account for fiscal year 2019.

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

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

         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

Clarification of roles and authorities of National Nuclear Security 
        Administration (sec. 3111)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
roles and authorities of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration.
    The committee has been outspoken in its concern about 
diversion between the National Nuclear Security 
Administration's (NNSA) defense programs and the requirements 
of the Department of Defense (DOD). Through life extension and 
major alterations programs, production capacity, and research 
into future weapons technology, the NNSA executes its highest 
responsibility, the maintenance of the nuclear deterrent. The 
committee therefore sees the linkage between NNSA and DOD as 
being enormously important and is committed to the preservation 
of the provider-customer relationship.
    The appropriate balance in the relationship of the NNSA 
with the broader Department of Energy (DOE) is critical in this 
respect. The NNSA was established in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) as a 
semi-autonomous organization within the DOE. The Congress 
recognized that the nuclear production and maintenance mission 
required some cabinet-level representation and saw benefits in 
its cohabitation with the atomic energy and national 
laboratories infrastructure in the DOE. However, it was wary of 
the influence of the DOE's competing interests on the weapons 
programs, which are intended to meet the requirements of the 
DOD.
    The committee believes that these fears have been realized 
to an extent. Though the NNSA has so far provided the nuclear 
weapons that the DOD needs for the nuclear deterrent, delays 
and cost overruns in the NNSA's weapons programs and recent 
disagreements about major programs associated with weapons 
activities evince the tensions inherent in the current 
organizational structure. The committee is not alone in this 
opinion. The November 2014 Augustine-Mies Panel found ``that 
the relationships among NNSA, the Secretary of Energy, and the 
DOE headquarters are not properly aligned with mission needs 
today, and are in need of major reform'' and that flawed DOE 
organizational and process features have damaged the NNSA's 
ability to carry out its mission. The January 2007 Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) report, ``National Nuclear Security 
Administration: Additional Actions Needed to Improve Management 
of the Nation's Nuclear Programs'' (GAO 07-26), corroborated 
the panel's findings: ``[A]lthough some NNSA programs have set 
up procedures for interacting with DOE, other programs have 
not, resulting in organizational conflict'' (page 34). In 2009, 
the bipartisan Congressional Commission on the Strategic 
Posture of the United States found that ``the governance 
structure of the NNSA is not delivering the needed results. 
This governance structure should be changed.'' The commission 
concluded that ``it is time to consider fundamental changes.''
    The committee is frustrated that so many reports, studies, 
and panels have come to the same conclusions for more than 15 
years, yet no structural change has been implemented. The 
statement of managers accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), 
out of which the Augustine-Mies panel was authorized, expressed 
nearly identical concerns: ``. . . the status quo is not 
working and must not be continued. The weaknesses of the 
current system, including an overly bureaucratic system, weak 
accountability, ineffective oversight, insufficient program and 
budget expertise, and poor contract management have been 
repeatedly demonstrated . . .'' The conferees asserted that 
``[f]urther slippage in project schedules is unacceptable, and 
could undermine the credibility of the nation's nuclear 
deterrent.'' The conferees concluded with the hope that the 
creation of the advisory panel that would become Augustine-Mies 
would ``provide a bipartisan solution to fix this system.'' The 
committee notes that project schedules have continued to slip 
in the 5 years since the writing of that statement, among other 
continued challenges, and few of the recommendations of the 
panel have been adopted.
    Therefore, in order to realign the immediate 
responsibilities of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration and reinforce its autonomy within the Department 
of Energy, the committee recommends a provision that would 
amend the Department of Energy Organization Act (Public Law 95-
91) as it relates to the NNSA, the National Nuclear Security 
Administration Act (Public Law 106-65), and the Atomic Energy 
Defense Act (Public Law 107-314) to empower the NNSA within the 
DOE. The provision would make the Administrator of the NNSA 
responsible for a number of duties currently assigned to the 
Secretary of Energy, clarify the lines of authority at the DOE 
to emphasize the role of Administrator, and expand the remit 
and authority of the Administrator in statute. The provision 
would implement a number of recommendations of the Augustine-
Mies panel and other studies, including those regarding the 
formulation of NNSA-specific procedure and regulation wherever 
possible. The provision would not remove the Administrator from 
the Secretary of Energy's lines of authority nor divorce the 
defense mission from the DOE's functions, nor would it divorce 
health and safety standards at NNSA facilities from DOE 
regulations. Finally, the provision would repeal the statutory 
cap on federal employees, in order to allow the NNSA to hire at 
sufficient levels to carry out its mission.
    The committee does not intend for this provision to be 
interpreted as an indictment of the current Secretary of Energy 
or Administrator of the NNSA, who have performed admirably. 
Rather, the committee seeks to address a number of structural 
impediments independent of its particular operators, and, in 
doing so, create resilient and enduring organizations to enable 
the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the NNSA to 
carry out the Department of Energy's defense mission.
National Nuclear Security Administration Personnel System (sec. 3112)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
permanent the personnel demonstration project carried out by 
the National Nuclear Security Administration since 2008.
Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (sec. 3113)
    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
delegation of review under section 57b of the Atomic Energy Act 
of 1954 (Public Law 83-703), as amended (42 U.S.C. 2077(b)(2)) 
on a case-by-case basis as consistent with the national 
security interests of the United States. The provision would 
also require that, during a review under section 57b of title 
42, United States Code, if such a request is denied, the 
Department of Energy be told the reasons for denial during 
interagency review or, if the review period is extended, the 
reason for this extension, to be reported to the congressional 
defense committees on an annual basis. Finally, the provision 
recommends the Department of Energy establish rules for civil 
fines for a violation of section 57b of title 42, United States 
Code.
Extension of enhanced procurement authority to manage supply chain risk 
        (sec. 3114)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
6 years, the authority for the Secretary of Energy to take 
certain actions with regard to the protection of the supply 
chain of the Department of Energy.
    The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) has used this authority in an 
appropriately limited fashion since it was granted in 2014. The 
committee believes it is important for the NNSA to have the 
same tools to protect its supply chain as the Department of 
Defense and the intelligence community. The committee also 
notes that the Comptroller General of the United States is 
currently assessing NNSA's use of this authority as mandated by 
section 3113(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66). The committee looks 
forward to the results of this assessment.
Pilot program on conduct by Department of Energy of background reviews 
        for access by certain individuals to national security 
        laboratories (sec. 3115)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
pilot program for 2 years at the Department of Energy (DOE) to 
independently conduct background reviews prior to admitting 
citizens of nations on the current sensitive countries list to 
national security laboratories. The provision would require the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Director of 
National Intelligence to continue to conduct background reviews 
under section 4502(a) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 
U.S.C. 2652(a)) for the duration of the pilot program.
    The committee understands that, under current law, the 
conduct of these reviews by the FBI often takes longer than the 
15 days required by statute and requires duplication of effort 
between the FBI and the DOE. While the committee has confidence 
that the DOE's counterintelligence capability has improved in 
the 2 decades since the current statute was enacted, the 
committee is concerned that the DOE may not currently have the 
capacity to take on this additional workload. The committee 
hopes that, at the end of this pilot program, the DOE will be 
able to demonstrate that it is capable of conducting the same 
reviews with no adverse counterintelligence outcomes and that 
the committee will be able to recommend a permanent transfer of 
this responsibility from the FBI to the DOE.
Extension of authority for acceptance of contributions for acceleration 
        of removal or security of fissile materials, radiological 
        materials, and related equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide 
        (sec. 3116)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3132(f)(7) of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) to 
extend the Secretary of Energy's authority to accept, retain, 
and use contributions for the accelerated removal of and 
security for fissile materials, radiological materials, and 
related equipment at vulnerable sites worldwide through 2023.
Modification of limitation on development of low-yield nuclear weapons 
        (sec. 3117)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
several findings regarding the changes in the international 
security environment related to nuclear forces over the last 
decade. The provision would also modify section 3116(c) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public 
Law 108-136) to remove the requirement for specific 
authorization by the Congress prior to commencement of 
engineering development, or any subsequent phase, of a low-
yield nuclear weapon. Instead, the provision would require that 
the Secretary of Energy specifically request funding for such a 
weapon in the annual budget request before commencing 
engineering development, in accordance with section 4209(a) of 
the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2529(a)), which 
requires the Secretary to specifically request funds in the 
annual budget request for any activity related to the 
development of a new or modified nuclear weapon.
Prohibition on use of funds for terminating activities at MOX facility 
        (sec. 3118)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Department of Energy from obligating or expending any funds 
for fiscal year 2019 or prior fiscal years to terminate 
construction and project support activities at the Mixed Oxide 
Fuel Fabrication Facility or to convert such facility to be 
used for any purpose other than its original mission.

                     Subtitle C--Plans and Reports

Modifications to cost-benefit analyses for competition of management 
        and operating contracts (sec. 3121)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
requirement for the Administrator of the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees containing a cost-benefit 
analysis of competition of management and operating contracts 
for NNSA laboratories and production plants following each 
award of such a contract such that the report would be due 30 
days after the transition to a new contract is complete.
    Section 3121 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239) required the NNSA to 
provide this report. The committee notes that this section was 
amended to direct the Comptroller General of the United States 
to conduct comprehensive reviews of these reports after the 
award of the Consolidated Nuclear Security contract in January 
2013. The committee remains interested in whether the 
consolidation of the contracts for the Pantex Plant and the Y-
12 National Security Complex has resulted in the cost savings 
expected at contract award.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a comprehensive briefing, as defined in subsection 
(d)(2) of section 3121 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), as amended, of 
the contract awarded to Consolidated Nuclear Security in 
January of 2013.
Review of defense environmental cleanup activities (sec. 3122)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Energy to coordinate with the National Academies 
of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on a review of the 
cleanup activities in the Office of Environmental Management.
Survey of workforce of national security laboratories and nuclear 
        weapons production facilities (sec. 3123)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) to submit to the congressional defense committees a 
proposal to conduct a survey of the employees of the NNSA 
laboratories and production plants.
    The committee notes that several of the studies and 
commissions on the management of the NNSA over the last decade 
have recommended the collection and analysis of more data in 
order to monitor trends and document improvement where it 
exists. The committee believes that, because contract employees 
make up such a large percentage of the NNSA workforce, the NNSA 
should undertake a systematic survey program, similar to the 
Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, for staff at the labs and 
plants.
Elimination of certain reports (sec. 3124)
    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
certain reporting requirements for the Department of Energy's 
Environmental Management Office.
Implementation of Nuclear Posture Review by National Nuclear Security 
        Administration (sec. 3125)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) to submit to the congressional defense committees a 
report on the implementation of the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review 
(NPR) by the NNSA. The report would identify specific actions 
associated with the NPR, including the office of primary 
responsibility for each action and key milestones associated 
with it. The report would be required to be submitted no later 
than December 1, 2018.

                              Budget Items

W76-2
    The budget request for the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) included $4.7 billion for directed 
stockpile work, of which $113.9 million was for the W76-1 life 
extension program.
    The committee understands that at the time of the 
compilation of the budget request, the Department of Defense 
had not yet finalized the Nuclear Posture Review, and as such 
the recommendations of that review were not included in the 
NNSA's budget request. The committee understands that the 
NNSA's preferred method for fielding the low-yield submarine-
launched ballistic missile recommended by the Nuclear Posture 
Review is a modification of a small number of W76-1 warheads 
currently undergoing life extension. The amendment to the 
fiscal year 2019 budget request submitted to the Congress on 
April 13, 2018, requests a transfer of $65 million from the 
W76-1 life extension program to the W76-2 warhead modification 
program.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $65.0 
million to the W76-1 life extension program line, for a total 
of $48.9 million, and an equivalent increase to the new W76-2 
warhead modification line.
Defense nuclear waste disposal
    The budget request for the Department of Energy included 
$120.0 million for the Yucca Mountain and Interim Storage 
programs, of which $30.0 million was from the Defense Nuclear 
Waste Disposal Fund. The committee recommends a decrease of 
$30.0 million to the Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal Fund.

                       Items of Special Interest

Comptroller General review of domestic uranium industrial base
    The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 
requires enriched uranium for several military purposes. To 
produce enriched uranium, the material is processed through a 
number of stages to concentrate and refine it. The NNSA has 
consistently asserted that international agreements to which 
the United States is a party prohibit the use of enriched 
uranium for military purposes if the uranium or its enrichment 
carry obligations for ``peaceful use'' under these agreements. 
The committee is unconvinced that the NNSA has thoroughly 
explored the possible interpretations of the relevant 
international agreements to take advantage of existing uranium 
processing capability in the United States.
    Accordingly, however, the NNSA intends to rely on the small 
domestic commercial uranium industry to provide uranium, 
technology, and facilities to produce unobligated enriched 
uranium that can be used for military purposes. The last 
operating enrichment facility that produced unobligated 
enriched uranium closed in 2013. The NNSA is in the process of 
evaluating new enrichment options, which is expected to produce 
a plan to construct a new domestic uranium enrichment facility 
beginning at the end of the next decade.
    Beyond enrichment, the committee is concerned that other 
stages of the nuclear fuel cycle, including mining, milling, 
and conversion, are at risk in the United States due to market 
conditions. The committee is also concerned that the NNSA is 
not appropriately planning mitigation strategies to ensure that 
these capabilities will be available to support a future 
domestic uranium enrichment plant.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Comptroller General 
of the United States to conduct a comprehensive review of the 
NNSA's planning and assumptions for the future unobligated 
uranium industrial base. The review should include: (1) The 
extent to which the NNSA has conducted studies evaluating the 
uranium industrial base critical to the U.S. nuclear fuel cycle 
and the conclusions of these studies; (2) The extent to which 
the NNSA has explored possible changes to the interpretation of 
the international agreements that lead to the ``peaceful use'' 
restrictions on uranium; (3) The extent to which the NNSA has 
developed plans for obtaining unobligated uranium services if 
any element of the domestic uranium process is disrupted; and 
(4) The extent to which the NNSA is incorporating this 
information into its ongoing analysis of alternatives for 
reestablishing a domestic uranium enrichment capability, 
including in terms of reference, selection of alternatives for 
analysis, or guiding documents for the analysis.
    The Comptroller General shall provide a preliminary 
briefing to the congressional defense committees no later than 
March 31, 2019, with a report to follow at a date to be agreed 
upon at the time of the briefing.

Comptroller General review of Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility

    The committee notes that the Department of Energy exercised 
the waiver authority outlined in section 3121(b) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public 
Law 115-91) to halt construction of the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel 
Fabrication Facility. The committee further notes that this 
certification was received by the Congress 1 day after the 
House Armed Service Committee completed its mark-up and less 
than 2 weeks before committee mark-up in the Senate for the 
fiscal year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act. This has 
made it extremely difficult for the committees to determine the 
correct funding level for the program in the fiscal year 2019 
National Defense Authorization Act, as the committee does not 
know if the certification followed the requirements for cost 
evaluation as called for in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91).
    Therefore, the committee directs the Comptroller General of 
the United States to review the cost analyses conducted by the 
Secretary of Energy to support the exercise of the waiver 
relating to construction and project support activities at the 
MOX facility and the dilute and dispose alternative. This 
review shall determine, at a minimum, if the cost analyses 
followed best practices as required by section 3121(b) and 
shall also evaluate whether the cost analyses for the life-
cycle cost estimates for both the MOX facility and the dilute 
and dispose alternative are comparable, credible, accurate, and 
meet appropriate costing standards for Government 
Accountability Office.
    A written report on the findings shall be submitted to the 
congressional defense committees no later than August 31, 2018, 
with a briefing to follow.

Comptroller General review of strategic radiation-hardened 
        microelectronics

    The trustworthiness of the supply chain that provides 
specialized components for U.S. nuclear weapons must be 
sustained to deal with potential sabotage, malicious 
introduction of an unwanted function, and subversion of a 
function without detection. The National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) has a single radiation-hardened silicon 
microelectronics facility, Microsystems and Engineering 
Sciences Applications at Sandia National Laboratories, which 
relies on tools and capabilities that are no longer supported 
by manufacturers. Following a determination of mission need in 
2016, the NNSA recently concluded an analysis of alternatives 
for a trusted microsystem capability to ensure that needs are 
met in the 2025-2040 timeframe.
    The committee is concerned that required critical decisions 
and planning for budget resources at the NNSA are not being 
made sufficiently quickly to ensure that the required flexible 
and responsive operational capability is maintained after 2025.
    The committee therefore directs the Administrator of the 
NNSA to brief the congressional defense committees no later 
than November 1, 2018, on the status, plans, and estimated 
budget requirements, including any required facility expansion 
or new construction, to meet the Nation's program requirements 
for unique strategic radiation-hardened microsystem 
capabilities after 2025.
    The committee also directs the Comptroller General of the 
United States to review NNSA's efforts to recapitalize its 
strategic radiation-hardened microelectronics design and 
production capacity, addressing the following questions: (1) 
What is known about the extent of risks to NNSA's supply chain, 
and what steps are being taken to address these risks in the 
near-term? (2) To what extent did NNSA's analysis of 
alternatives and related cost estimates meet best practices for 
such studies? (3) To what extent is the NNSA managing 
radiation-hardened microelectronics as a strategic commodity?
    The Comptroller General shall provide a briefing to the 
congressional defense committees no later than March 15, 2019, 
with a report to follow at a date agreed to at the time of the 
briefing.

Independent review of Engineering Assessment of plutonium pit 
        production

    In April of 2018, the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) completed an engineering assessment 
report on plutonium pit production. The report provides the 
Administrator's recommended alternative for the NNSA's 
plutonium capabilities. The proposed strategy repurposes the 
Mixed-Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah River 
Site combined with expanded capabilities at Plutonium Facility-
4 at Los Alamos National Laboratory.
    On May 4, 2018, the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council 
(NWC) provided the written certification required by section 
3141 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018 (Public Law 115-91). In making the required certification 
accepting NNSA's recommendation, the Chairman stated there are 
``major construction and certification schedule risks inherent 
in the plan. [The Department of Energy] must address these 
risks to preclude failure to meet military requirements by 
2030.'' The NWC's certification letter went on to state, ``To 
reduce risk, the recurring and non-recurring cost estimates for 
the recommended alternative must be refined prior to the next 
construction major milestone decision point, estimated to be in 
year 2021.''
    In light of the specific concerns raised by the Chairman of 
the NWC, the committee directs the Administrator of the NNSA, 
no later than July 1, 2018, to enter into an arrangement with a 
federally-funded research and development center (FFRDC) to 
conduct an independent review and assessment of the soundness 
and validity of the estimated construction and life-cycle costs 
of each of the alternatives analyzed in NNSA's April 2018 
engineering assessment report on plutonium pit production. Not 
later than October 1, 2018, the report of the FFRDC shall be 
submitted to the Administrator of the NNSA, and, 10 days after 
receiving the report of the FFRDC, the Administrator shall 
submit the report to the congressional defense committees.

Nuclear smuggling detection in Iraq

    The committee directs the Administrator of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration to submit a report no later 
than March 29, 2019, to the congressional defense committees on 
a plan to work with the Iraqi government to develop the 
capability to detect nuclear smuggling using both fixed and 
mobile systems. Such plan shall also include assisting Iraq in 
minimizing the use of isotopic sources where appropriate and 
developing the infrastructure necessary to meet regulatory 
requirements to safely handle and store such devices.

Repackaging of Transuranic Waste Drums at the Idaho National Laboratory

    On April 11, a drum of transuranic waste ruptured at the 
Idaho National Laboratory's Radioactive Waste Management 
Complex, resulting in spilled sludge in the facility and the 
contamination of several responding firemen with plutonium. In 
the immediate aftermath of this incident, the Department of 
Energy (DOE) found three other drums with similar contents that 
had also ruptured, and additional investigations on the cause 
of the event are ongoing. Additionally disturbing, however, is 
the confirmation from DOE officials that at least the initial 
ruptured drum had already undergone remediation to prepare it 
for shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), 
although it had not yet been certified for shipment. After a 
2014 accident in which a transuranic waste drum prepared at Los 
Alamos National Laboratory ruptured in the WIPP underground, 
the DOE required that all of its cleanup undergo a complete 
review of waste preparation and certification procedures to 
ensure such an accident was not repeated. However, if these 
drums had not ruptured at the Idaho National Laboratory, it is 
conceivable that the incident could have occurred at the WIPP, 
causing further setbacks for the waste repository that is still 
recovering from the prior incident.
    Therefore the committee directs the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) to report on the repackaging of 
transuranic waste at the Idaho National Laboratory and 
determine the extent to which there are procedures in place to 
prevent such an incident and whether deficiencies exist in 
these procedures or their implementation that must be remedied. 
The GAO shall work with the committee on a date suitable to 
both parties for the final report with interim briefings on the 
findings.

Review of National Nuclear Security Administration regulation

    The committee is aware that many of the commissions and 
reviews examining the governance and operations of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) have reported complaints 
about overlapping, overly restrictive, and inefficient 
regulation from the NNSA and its laboratories and plants. Some 
have identified this as one source of increasing costs and 
failures to meet mission requirements on time. The committee 
believes excessive regulation may also encourage haphazard 
enforcement by the NNSA and extreme risk-avoidance on the part 
of contractors. Without a more detailed understanding of 
exactly which practices create unnecessary burden, however, the 
committee believes that NNSA will be unable to improve its 
regulatory practices.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Administrator of the 
NNSA to solicit from each of its eight national security 
laboratories and plants specific regulations or sources of 
regulation that are particularly burdensome. The Administrator 
shall provide such input unedited to the congressional defense 
committees, along with input from NNSA itself, no later than 
March 15, 2019. These reports shall include data supporting the 
frequency with which negative consequences from these practices 
are observed and descriptions of the specific impact of each 
practice in areas such as: morale, recruiting, and retention; 
increased costs to the government; and damage to mission 
capability. The reports should also identify a given practice's 
intended purpose and how these benefits could otherwise be 
achieved.
    The Administrator shall also provide the complete findings 
to the Comptroller General of the United States, who shall 
brief the congressional defense committees on the extent to 
which findings are consistent with recommendations made by 
other external oversight bodies, along with any other 
assessment of the report.

Roadmap for National Nuclear Security Administration production 
        capability improvements

    The committee commends the Secretary of Defense for the 
attention in the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) to 
infrastructure at the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA). As the NPR states, ``[a]ll previous NPRs highlighted 
the need to maintain a modern nuclear weapons infrastructure, 
but the United States has fallen short in sustaining a modern 
infrastructure that is resilient and has the capacity to 
respond to unforeseen developments.''
    The committee is particularly concerned about the capacity 
of the complex's production infrastructure, as the NNSA enters 
full-scale production on four life extension programs and 
begins planning for follow-on work as well. Resilient 
production infrastructure and workforce at the Pantex Plant, 
Savannah River Site, Kansas City National Security Campus, and 
Y-12 National Security Complex are just as critical to 
maintaining a credible nuclear deterrent as laboratory 
infrastructure. The committee was pleased to see the NPR 
recommend that NNSA develop a ``roadmap that sizes production 
capacity to modernization and hedging requirements'' and is 
interested in the details of this roadmap.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator of the 
NNSA to submit the detailed roadmap described in the NPR to the 
congressional defense committees no later than March 15, 2019, 
including infrastructure and staffing requirements, key 
milestones, and an assessment of any additional capacity needed 
at the NNSA's production sites in order to meet modernization 
and hedging requirements.

Status of Russian nuclear security upgrades

    Recognizing the significant investment the United States 
made in the past to improving nuclear material security at 
dozens of sites in Russia, through the National Nuclear 
Security Administration's (NNSA) former Material Protection, 
Control, and Accounting program and related programs, the 
Committee directs the Administrator of the NNSA to provide a 
report to the committee no later than January 1, 2019 on NNSA's 
current efforts related to Russian nuclear security.
    In particular, the committee requests that this report 
focus on how NNSA is monitoring nuclear material security in 
Russia, and the extent to which NNSA-funded security 
improvements have been sustained over time, in light of reduced 
Russian cooperation. In addition, the committee directs the 
Comptroller General of the United States to report to the 
committee on these issues no later than February 1, 2019. The 
Comptroller General's report should address: (1) NNSA's ability 
to sustain investments it has made to ensure that Russia's 
nuclear complex and stockpiles of nuclear material remain 
secure; (2) How NNSA is verifying that Russia is sustaining and 
maintaining the nuclear material security equipment and 
technology supplied previously by the United States; (3) Any 
gaps or shortcomings that could jeopardize the sustainability 
of those security systems going forward; and (4) The extent to 
which other countries are working to support nuclear security 
in Russia.

          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 
$31.2 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.
Permanent authority of Secretary of Transportation to issue vessel war 
        risk insurance (sec. 3502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 539 of title 46, United States Code, to make permanent 
the authority of the Secretary of Transportation to provide 
vessel war risk insurance. This provision was requested by the 
Department of Defense.

                       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 2019

                         SUMMARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
                                            (In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Senate
                                                             FY 2019 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................................        3,782,558                           3,782,558
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY.................................        3,355,777           420,000         3,775,777
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY................................        4,489,118          -314,000         4,175,118
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY...........................        2,234,761          -106,700         2,128,061
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY...................................        7,999,529          -263,200         7,736,329
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY................................       19,041,799           175,400        19,217,199
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY.................................        3,702,393           -21,900         3,680,493
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC............................        1,006,209           -13,000           993,209
SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY.........................       21,871,437         1,255,500        23,126,937
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY...................................        9,414,355           -40,500         9,373,855
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS.................................        2,860,410          -113,476         2,746,934
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE...........................       16,206,937           413,800        16,620,737
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE............................        2,669,454             2,200         2,671,654
SPACE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE..............................        2,527,542                           2,527,542
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE......................        1,587,304                           1,587,304
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE..............................       20,890,164            78,096        20,968,260
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE.................................        6,786,271               500         6,786,771
JOINT URGENT OPERATIONAL NEEDS FUND.......................          100,025                             100,025
SUBTOTAL, TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................      130,526,043         1,472,720       131,998,763
 
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY..................       10,159,379           119,572        10,278,951
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY..................       18,481,666            55,177        18,536,843
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF....................       40,178,343           574,901        40,753,244
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW....................       22,016,553           399,038        22,415,591
OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL, DEFENSE..........................          221,009            10,900           231,909
SUBTOTAL, TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND              91,056,950         1,159,588        92,216,538
 EVALUATION...............................................
 
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY.............................       42,009,317          -385,700        41,623,617
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES.........................        2,916,909                           2,916,909
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG.............................        7,399,295                           7,399,295
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY.............................       49,003,633           362,700        49,366,333
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS.....................        6,832,510                           6,832,510
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES.........................        1,027,006                           1,027,006
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE.......................          271,570                             271,570
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE........................       42,060,568           902,700        42,963,268
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE.......................        3,260,234            54,800         3,315,034
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG..............................        6,427,622            12,600         6,440,222
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE...................       36,352,625           162,100        36,514,725
MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS..............................        1,908,347           -11,000         1,897,347
UNDISTRIBUTED.............................................                0          -216,520          -216,520
SUBTOTAL, TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............      199,469,636           881,680       200,351,316
 
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL........................................      140,689,301        -3,062,080       137,627,221
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS.......        7,533,090                           7,533,090
SUBTOTAL, TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL....................      148,222,391        -3,062,080       145,160,311
 
TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND......................................        1,542,115                           1,542,115
CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION.......................          993,816                             993,816
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF..............          787,525                             787,525
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL...........................          329,273                             329,273
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM....................................       33,729,192             2,500        33,731,692
SUBTOTAL, TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.................       37,381,921             2,500        37,384,421
 
TOTAL, DIVISION A: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS...      606,656,941           454,408       607,111,349
 
DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
 
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY......................................................        1,011,768           107,600         1,119,368
NAVY......................................................        2,543,189            29,563         2,572,752
AIR FORCE.................................................        1,725,707            26,450         1,752,157
DEFENSE-WIDE..............................................        2,693,324          -290,036         2,403,288
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD.......................................          180,122           126,000           306,122
AIR NATIONAL GUARD........................................          129,126            54,000           183,126
ARMY RESERVE..............................................           64,919                              64,919
NAVY RESERVE..............................................           43,065                              43,065
AIR FORCE RESERVE.........................................           50,163            14,400            64,563
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM..........................          171,064                             171,064
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...........................        8,612,447            67,977         8,680,424
 
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY........................................          330,660                             330,660
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY...........................          376,509                             376,509
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.......................          104,581                             104,581
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS..........          314,536                             314,536
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE...................................           78,446                              78,446
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE......................          317,274                             317,274
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE...................           58,373                              58,373
IMPROVEMENT FUND..........................................            1,653                               1,653
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND....................................              600                                 600
SUBTOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING..................................        1,582,632                 0         1,582,632
 
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY......................................................           62,796                              62,796
NAVY......................................................          151,839                             151,839
AIR FORCE.................................................           52,903                              52,903
SUBTOTAL, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE....................          267,538                 0           267,538
 
TOTAL, DIVISION B: MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS...       10,462,617            67,977        10,530,594
 
TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION      617,119,558           522,385       617,641,943
 051).....................................................
 
                            ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)
 
DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
 
                                       DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS
 
                                     DISCRETIONARY SUMMARY BY APPROPRIATION
                               ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
 
ENERGY PROGRAMS
NUCLEAR ENERGY............................................          136,090                             136,090
SUBTOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS.................................          136,090                 0           136,090
 
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES........................................       11,017,078                          11,017,078
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION..........................        1,862,825                           1,862,825
NAVAL REACTORS............................................        1,788,618                           1,788,618
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES.............................          422,529                             422,529
SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION........       15,091,050                 0        15,091,050
 
ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.............................        5,630,217                           5,630,217
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES..................................          853,300                             853,300
DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL............................           30,000           -30,000                 0
SUBTOTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES........        6,513,517           -30,000         6,483,517
 
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATIONS.............       21,740,657           -30,000        21,710,657
 
INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILTIIES SAFETY BOARD...................           31,200                              31,200
SUBTOTAL, INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATION........           31,200                 0            31,200
 
TOTAL, DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY        21,771,857           -30,000        21,741,857
 AND INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY AUTHORIZATIONS............
 
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 053)       21,771,857           -30,000        21,741,857
 
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE FUNDING, BASE BUDGET REQUEST......      638,891,415           492,385       639,383,800
 
                                       NATIONAL DEFENSE OCO BUDGET REQUEST
 
                             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (BUDGET SUB-FUNCTION 051)
 
PROCUREMENT
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY................................          363,363                             363,363
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY.................................        1,802,351                           1,802,351
PROCUREMENT OF W&TCV, ARMY................................        1,107,183                           1,107,183
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY...........................          309,525                             309,525
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY...................................        1,382,047                           1,382,047
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY................................           80,119                              80,119
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY.................................           14,134            82,800            96,934
PROCUREMENT OF AMMO, NAVY & MC............................          246,541            -2,000           244,541
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY...................................          187,173                             187,173
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS.................................           58,023                              58,023
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE...........................        1,018,888                           1,018,888
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE............................          493,526            22,800           516,326
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE......................        1,421,516                           1,421,516
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE..............................        3,725,944                           3,725,944
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE.................................          572,135                             572,135
SUBTOTAL, PROCUREMENT.....................................       12,782,468           103,600        12,886,068
 
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, ARMY..................          325,104                             325,104
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, NAVY..................          167,812                             167,812
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, AF....................          314,271                             314,271
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVAL, DW....................          500,544                             500,544
SUBTOTAL, RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION......        1,307,731                 0         1,307,731
 
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY.............................       18,210,500                          18,210,500
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES.........................           41,887                              41,887
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG.............................          110,729                             110,729
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND..........................        4,497,421                           4,497,421
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND..........................          702,029                             702,029
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY.............................        4,757,155                           4,757,155
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS.....................        1,121,900                           1,121,900
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES.........................           25,637                              25,637
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE.......................            3,345                               3,345
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE........................        9,285,789                           9,285,789
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE.......................           60,500                              60,500
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG..............................           15,870                              15,870
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE...................        8,549,908          -550,000         7,999,908
SUBTOTAL,OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE........................       47,382,670          -550,000        46,832,670
 
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL........................................        4,660,661                           4,660,661
SUBTOTAL,MILITARY PERSONNEL...............................        4,660,661                 0         4,660,661
 
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
WORKING CAPITAL FUND......................................           15,190                              15,190
DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF..............          153,100                             153,100
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL...........................           24,692                              24,692
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM....................................          352,068                             352,068
COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND.........................        1,400,000                           1,400,000
SUBTOTAL, OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS............................        1,945,050                 0         1,945,050
 
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY......................................................          261,250           -69,000           192,250
NAVY......................................................          227,320                             227,320
AIR FORCE.................................................          345,800                             345,800
DEFENSE-WIDE..............................................           87,050                              87,050
SUBTOTAL, MILITARY CONSTRUCTION...........................          921,420           -69,000           852,420
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050) OCO BUDGET         69,000,000          -515,400        68,484,600
 REQUEST..................................................
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (BUDGET FUNCTION 050).............      707,891,415           -23,015       707,868,400
 
 
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.......................       [5,000,000]                         [4,500,000]
TITLE XV--SPECIAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY......................       [4,500,000]                         [3,500,000]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION

                                  NATIONAL DEFENSE BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION
                                            (In Thousands of Dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      FY 2019                         Senate
                                                                      Request      Senate Change    Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           SUMMARY DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
 
NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY, BASE BUDGET (051)...............     617,119,558         522,385     617,641,943
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)..........................      21,771,857         -30,000      21,741,857
OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.................................      69,000,000        -515,400      68,484,600
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE (050)...................................     707,891,415         -23,015     707,868,400
 
 OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS PROGRAMS OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE OR
                                               ALREADY AUTHORIZED
 
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)
DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES................................          39,000                          39,000
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: DISPOSAL OF DOD REAL PROPERTY...............           8,000                           8,000
INDEFINITE ACCOUNT: LEASE OF DOD REAL PROPERTY..................          36,000                          36,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)..................          83,000               0          83,000
 
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITES (053)
FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM.................         120,000                         120,000
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)................         120,000               0         120,000
 
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)
OTHER DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS....................................       8,034,000                       8,034,000
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)......................       8,034,000               0       8,034,000
 
TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS (050).........       8,237,000               0       8,237,000
 
                                 DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
 
NATIONAL DEFENSE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY (051)...........................     686,202,558           6,985     686,209,543
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)..........................      21,891,857         -30,000      21,861,857
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)................................       8,034,000                       8,034,000
TOTAL, DISCRETIONARY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION, 050..........     716,128,415         -23,015     716,105,400
 
                         NATIONAL DEFENSE MANDATORY PROGRAMS, CURRENT LAW (CB0 BASELINE)
 
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)
CONCURRENT RECEIPT ACCRUAL PAYMENTS TO THE MILITARY RETIREMENT         7,720,000                       7,720,000
 FUND...........................................................
REVOLVING, TRUST AND OTHER DOD MANDATORY........................       1,794,000                       1,794,000
OFFSETTING RECEIPTS.............................................      -1,855,000                      -1,855,000
SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY (051)..................       7,659,000               0       7,659,000
 
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITES (053)
ENERGY EMPLOYEES OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS AND        1,277,000                       1,277,000
 OTHER..........................................................
SUBTOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)................       1,277,000               0       1,277,000
 
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)
RADIATION EXPOSURE COMPENSATION TRUST FUND......................          50,000                          50,000
PAYMENT TO CIA RETIREMENT FUND AND OTHER........................         514,000                         514,000
SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)......................         564,000               0         564,000
 
TOTAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE MANDATORY PROGRAMS (050)................       9,500,000               0       9,500,000
 
                          DISCRETIONARY AND MANDATORY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
 
DISCRETIONARY AND MANDATORY BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY (051)...........................     693,861,558           6,985     693,868,543
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (053)..........................      23,168,857         -30,000      23,138,857
DEFENSE-RELATED ACTIVITIES (054)................................       8,598,000                       8,598,000
TOTAL, BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION (050).......................     725,628,415         -23,015     725,605,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT

TITLE XLI--PROCUREMENT
 

SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                SEC. 4101. PROCUREMENT  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   FY 2019 Request              Senate Change              Senate Authorized
 Line           Item        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Qty          Cost           Qty           Cost           Qty          Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY
        FIXED WING
    2   UTILITY F/W                   0             744                                        0             744
         AIRCRAFT..........
    3   MQ-1 UAV...........           0          43,326                                        0          43,326
    4   RQ-11 (RAVEN)......           0          46,416                                        0          46,416
        ROTARY
    7   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK           48         753,248                                       48         753,248
         IIIA REMAN........
    8   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK            0         174,550                                        0         174,550
         IIIA REMAN AP.....
    9   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK           12         284,687                                       12         284,687
         IIIB NEW BUILD....
   10   AH-64 APACHE BLOCK            0          58,600                                        0          58,600
         IIIB NEW BUILD AP.
   11   UH-60 BLACKHAWK M            49         988,810                                       49         988,810
         MODEL (MYP).......
   12   UH-60 BLACKHAWK M             0         106,150                                        0         106,150
         MODEL (MYP) AP....
   13   UH-60 BLACK HAWK A           18         146,138                                       18         146,138
         AND L MODELS......
   14   CH-47 HELICOPTER...           6          99,278                                        6          99,278
   15   CH-47 HELICOPTER AP           0          24,235                                        0          24,235
        MODIFICATION OF
         AIRCRAFT
   18   UNIVERSAL GROUND              0          27,114                                        0          27,114
         CONTROL EQUIPMENT
         (UAS).............
   19   GRAY EAGLE MODS2...           0          97,781                                        0          97,781
   20   MULTI SENSOR ABN              0          52,274                                        0          52,274
         RECON (MIP).......
   21   AH-64 MODS.........           0         104,996                                        0         104,996
   22   CH-47 CARGO                   0           7,807                                        0           7,807
         HELICOPTER MODS
         (MYP).............
   23   GRCS SEMA MODS                0           5,573                                        0           5,573
         (MIP).............
   24   ARL SEMA MODS (MIP)           0           7,522                                        0           7,522
   25   EMARSS SEMA MODS              0          20,448                                        0          20,448
         (MIP).............
   26   UTILITY/CARGO                 0          17,719                                        0          17,719
         AIRPLANE MODS.....
   27   UTILITY HELICOPTER            0           6,443                                        0           6,443
         MODS..............
   28   NETWORK AND MISSION           0         123,614                                        0         123,614
         PLAN..............
   29   COMMS, NAV                    0         161,969                                        0         161,969
         SURVEILLANCE......
   30   DEGRADED VISUAL               0          30,000                                        0          30,000
         ENVIRONMENT.......
   31   GATM ROLLUP........           0          26,848                                        0          26,848
   32   RQ-7 UAV MODS......           0         103,246                                        0         103,246
   33   UAS MODS...........           0          17,644                                        0          17,644
        GROUND SUPPORT
         AVIONICS
   34   AIRCRAFT                      0          57,170                                        0          57,170
         SURVIVABILITY
         EQUIPMENT.........
   35   SURVIVABILITY CM...           0           5,853                                        0           5,853
   36   CMWS...............           0          13,496                                        0          13,496
   37   COMMON INFRARED               0          36,839                                        0          36,839
         COUNTERMEASURES
         (CIRCM)...........
        OTHER SUPPORT
   38   AVIONICS SUPPORT              0           1,778                                        0           1,778
         EQUIPMENT.........
   39   COMMON GROUND                 0          34,818                                        0          34,818
         EQUIPMENT.........
   40   AIRCREW INTEGRATED            0          27,243                                        0          27,243
         SYSTEMS...........
   41   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL           0          63,872                                        0          63,872
   42   INDUSTRIAL                    0           1,417                                        0           1,417
         FACILITIES........
   43   LAUNCHER, 2.75                0           1,901                                        0           1,901
         ROCKET............
   44   LAUNCHER GUIDED               0             991                                        0             991
         MISSILE: LONGBOW
         HELLFIRE XM2......
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT              133       3,782,558          0                0          133       3,782,558
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        MISSILE
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY
        SURFACE-TO-AIR
         MISSILE SYSTEM
    1   LOWER TIER AIR AND            0         111,395                                        0         111,395
         MISSILE DEFENSE
         (AMD).............
    2   MSE MISSILE........         179         871,276                                      179         871,276
    3   INDIRECT FIRE                 0         145,636          0          500,000            0         645,636
         PROTECTION
         CAPABILITY INC 2-I
            Acceleration of                                     [0]        [500,000]
            cruise missile
            defense........
    4   INDIRECT FIRE                 0          31,286                                        0          31,286
         PROTECTION
         CAPABILITY INC 2-I
         AP................
        AIR-TO-SURFACE
         MISSILE SYSTEM
    6   JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND       1,046         276,462                                    1,046         276,462
         MSLS (JAGM).......
        ANTI-TANK/ASSAULT
         MISSILE SYS
    8   JAVELIN (AAWS-M)            709         303,665                                      709         303,665
         SYSTEM SUMMARY....
    9   TOW 2 SYSTEM              1,472         105,014                                    1,472         105,014
         SUMMARY...........
   10   TOW 2 SYSTEM                  0          19,949                                        0          19,949
         SUMMARY AP........
   11   GUIDED MLRS ROCKET        3,267         359,613                                    3,267         359,613
         (GMLRS)...........
   12   MLRS REDUCED RANGE        2,214          20,964                                    2,214          20,964
         PRACTICE ROCKETS
         (RRPR)............
        MODIFICATIONS
   15   PATRIOT MODS.......           0         313,228                                        0         313,228
   16   ATACMS MODS........           0         221,656        -82          -80,000          -82         141,656
            Requested                                         [-82]        [-80,000]
            quantity
            exceeds maximum
   17   GMLRS MOD..........           0             266                                        0             266
   18   STINGER MODS.......           0          94,756                                        0          94,756
   19   AVENGER MODS.......           0          48,670                                        0          48,670
   20   ITAS/TOW MODS......           0           3,173                                        0           3,173
   21   MLRS MODS..........           0         383,216                                        0         383,216
   22   HIMARS                        0          10,196                                        0          10,196
         MODIFICATIONS.....
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   23   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          27,737                                        0          27,737
         PARTS.............
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   24   AIR DEFENSE TARGETS           0           6,417                                        0           6,417
   25   PRODUCTION BASE               0           1,202                                        0           1,202
         SUPPORT...........
        TOTAL MISSILE             8,887       3,355,777        -82          420,000        8,805       3,775,777
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         W&TCV, ARMY
        TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    2   ARMORED MULTI               131         479,801          0         -100,000          131         379,801
         PURPOSE VEHICLE
         (AMPV)............
            Program                                             [0]       [-100,000]
            decrease.......
        MODIFICATION OF
         TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    4   STRYKER (MOD)......           0         287,490          0         -149,390            0         138,100
            Army requested                                      [0]       [-149,390]
            transfer.......
    5   STRYKER UPGRADE....           3          21,900          0          149,390            3         171,290
            Army requested                                      [0]        [149,390]
            transfer.......
    6   BRADLEY PROGRAM               0         625,424          0         -324,000            0         301,424
         (MOD).............
            Program                                             [0]       [-324,000]
            decrease.......
    7   M109 FOV                      0          26,482                                        0          26,482
         MODIFICATIONS.....
    8   PALADIN INTEGRATED           30         351,802          0          110,000           30         461,802
         MANAGEMENT (PIM)..
            Program                                             [0]        [110,000]
            increase.......
    9   IMPROVED RECOVERY            26         110,500                                       26         110,500
         VEHICLE (M88A2
         HERCULES).........
   10   ASSAULT BRIDGE                0           2,120                                        0           2,120
         (MOD).............
   11   ASSAULT BREACHER             12          62,407                                       12          62,407
         VEHICLE...........
   12   M88 FOV MODS.......           0           4,517                                        0           4,517
   13   JOINT ASSAULT                30         142,255                                       30         142,255
         BRIDGE............
   14   M1 ABRAMS TANK                0         927,600                                        0         927,600
         (MOD).............
   15   ABRAMS UPGRADE               95       1,075,999                                       95       1,075,999
         PROGRAM...........
        WEAPONS & OTHER
         COMBAT VEHICLES
   18   M240 MEDIUM MACHINE           0           1,955                                        0           1,955
         GUN (7.62MM)......
   19   MULTI-ROLE ANTI-              0          23,345                                        0          23,345
         ARMOR ANTI-
         PERSONNEL WEAPON S
   20   GUN AUTOMATIC 30MM            0           7,434                                        0           7,434
         M230..............
   21   MACHINE GUN, CAL              0          22,330                                        0          22,330
         .50 M2 ROLL.......
   22   MORTAR SYSTEMS.....           0          12,470                                        0          12,470
   23   XM320 GRENADE                 0             697                                        0             697
         LAUNCHER MODULE
         (GLM).............
   24   COMPACT SEMI-                 0          46,236                                        0          46,236
         AUTOMATIC SNIPER
         SYSTEM............
   25   CARBINE............           0          69,306                                        0          69,306
   26   SMALL ARMS--FIRE              0           7,929                                        0           7,929
         CONTROL...........
   27   COMMON REMOTELY               0          35,968                                        0          35,968
         OPERATED WEAPONS
         STATION...........
   28   HANDGUN............           0          48,251                                        0          48,251
        MOD OF WEAPONS AND
         OTHER COMBAT VEH
   29   MK-19 GRENADE                 0           1,684                                        0           1,684
         MACHINE GUN MODS..
   30   M777 MODS..........           0           3,086                                        0           3,086
   31   M4 CARBINE MODS....           0          31,575                                        0          31,575
   32   M2 50 CAL MACHINE             0          21,600                                        0          21,600
         GUN MODS..........
   33   M249 SAW MACHINE              0           3,924                                        0           3,924
         GUN MODS..........
   34   M240 MEDIUM MACHINE           0           6,940                                        0           6,940
         GUN MODS..........
   35   SNIPER RIFLES                 0           2,747                                        0           2,747
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   36   M119 MODIFICATIONS.           0           5,704                                        0           5,704
   37   MORTAR MODIFICATION           0           3,965                                        0           3,965
   38   MODIFICATIONS LESS            0           5,577                                        0           5,577
         THAN $5.0M (WOCV-
         WTCV).............
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   39   ITEMS LESS THAN               0           3,174                                        0           3,174
         $5.0M (WOCV-WTCV).
   40   PRODUCTION BASE               0           3,284                                        0           3,284
         SUPPORT (WOCV-
         WTCV).............
   41   SMALL ARMS                    0           1,640                                        0           1,640
         EQUIPMENT (SOLDIER
         ENH PROG).........
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           327       4,489,118          0         -314,000          327       4,175,118
         OF W&TCV, ARMY....
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, ARMY
        SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
         AMMUNITION
    1   CTG, 5.56MM, ALL              0          41,848          0           -6,700            0          35,148
         TYPES.............
            FY2018 Omnibus                                      [0]         [-6,700]
            forward finance
    2   CTG, 7.62MM, ALL              0          86,199                                        0          86,199
         TYPES.............
    3   CTG, HANDGUN, ALL             0          20,158                                        0          20,158
         TYPES.............
    4   CTG, .50 CAL, ALL             0          65,573                                        0          65,573
         TYPES.............
    5   CTG, 20MM, ALL                0           8,198                                        0           8,198
         TYPES.............
    7   CTG, 30MM, ALL                0          77,995                                        0          77,995
         TYPES.............
    8   CTG, 40MM, ALL                0          69,781                                        0          69,781
         TYPES.............
        MORTAR AMMUNITION
    9   60MM MORTAR, ALL              0          45,280                                        0          45,280
         TYPES.............
   10   81MM MORTAR, ALL              0          46,853                                        0          46,853
         TYPES.............
   11   120MM MORTAR, ALL             0          83,003                                        0          83,003
         TYPES.............
        TANK AMMUNITION
   12   CARTRIDGES, TANK,             0         168,101                                        0         168,101
         105MM AND 120MM,
         ALL TYPES.........
        ARTILLERY
         AMMUNITION
   13   ARTILLERY                     0          39,341                                        0          39,341
         CARTRIDGES, 75MM &
         105MM, ALL TYPES..
   14   ARTILLERY                     0         211,442                                        0         211,442
         PROJECTILE, 155MM,
         ALL TYPES.........
   15   PROJ 155MM EXTENDED       1,189         100,906                                    1,189         100,906
         RANGE M982........
   16   ARTILLERY                     0         236,677          0         -100,000            0         136,677
         PROPELLANTS, FUZES
         AND PRIMERS, ALL..
            Ammunition Cuts                                     [0]       [-100,000]
        MINES
   17   MINES & CLEARING              0          15,905                                        0          15,905
         CHARGES, ALL TYPES
        ROCKETS
   18   SHOULDER LAUNCHED             0           4,503                                        0           4,503
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
   19   ROCKET, HYDRA 70,             0         211,211                                        0         211,211
         ALL TYPES.........
        OTHER AMMUNITION
   20   CAD/PAD, ALL TYPES.           0          10,428                                        0          10,428
   21   DEMOLITION                    0          44,656                                        0          44,656
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
   22   GRENADES, ALL TYPES           0          19,896                                        0          19,896
   23   SIGNALS, ALL TYPES.           0          10,121                                        0          10,121
   24   SIMULATORS, ALL               0          11,464                                        0          11,464
         TYPES.............
        MISCELLANEOUS
   25   AMMO COMPONENTS,              0           5,224                                        0           5,224
         ALL TYPES.........
   26   NON-LETHAL                    0           4,310                                        0           4,310
         AMMUNITION, ALL
         TYPES.............
   27   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          11,193                                        0          11,193
         MILLION (AMMO)....
   28   AMMUNITION PECULIAR           0          10,500                                        0          10,500
         EQUIPMENT.........
   29   FIRST DESTINATION             0          18,456                                        0          18,456
         TRANSPORTATION
         (AMMO)............
   30   CLOSEOUT                      0             100                                        0             100
         LIABILITIES.......
        PRODUCTION BASE
         SUPPORT
   32   INDUSTRIAL                    0         394,133                                        0         394,133
         FACILITIES........
   33   CONVENTIONAL                  0         157,535                                        0         157,535
         MUNITIONS
         DEMILITARIZATION..
   34   ARMS INITIATIVE....           0           3,771                                        0           3,771
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT         1,189       2,234,761          0         -106,700        1,189       2,128,061
         OF AMMUNITION,
         ARMY..............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         ARMY
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
    1   TACTICAL TRAILERS/            0          16,512                                        0          16,512
         DOLLY SETS........
    2   SEMITRAILERS,                 0          16,951                                        0          16,951
         FLATBED:..........
    3   AMBULANCE, 4                  0          50,123                                        0          50,123
         LITTER, 5/4 TON,
         4X4...............
    4   GROUND MOBILITY               0          46,988                                        0          46,988
         VEHICLES (GMV)....
    6   JOINT LIGHT                   0       1,319,436          0         -250,000            0       1,069,436
         TACTICAL VEHICLE..
            Program                                             [0]       [-250,000]
            reduction......
    7   TRUCK, DUMP, 20T              0           6,480                                        0           6,480
         (CCE).............
    8   FAMILY OF MEDIUM              0         132,882                                        0         132,882
         TACTICAL VEH
         (FMTV)............
    9   FIRETRUCKS &                  0          14,842                                        0          14,842
         ASSOCIATED
         FIREFIGHTING EQUIP
   10   FAMILY OF HEAVY               0         138,105                                        0         138,105
         TACTICAL VEHICLES
         (FHTV)............
   12   HVY EXPANDED MOBILE           0          31,892                                        0          31,892
         TACTICAL TRUCK EXT
         SERV..............
   13   TACTICAL WHEELED              0          38,128                                        0          38,128
         VEHICLE PROTECTION
         KITS..............
   14   MODIFICATION OF IN            0          78,507                                        0          78,507
         SVC EQUIP.........
        NON-TACTICAL
         VEHICLES
   16   HEAVY ARMORED                 0             790                                        0             790
         VEHICLE...........
   17   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           1,390                                        0           1,390
         VEHICLES..........
   18   NONTACTICAL                   0          15,415                                        0          15,415
         VEHICLES, OTHER...
        COMM--JOINT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   20   SIGNAL                        0         150,777                                        0         150,777
         MODERNIZATION
         PROGRAM...........
   21   TACTICAL NETWORK              0         469,117                                        0         469,117
         TECHNOLOGY MOD IN
         SVC...............
   22   SITUATION                     0          62,727                                        0          62,727
         INFORMATION
         TRANSPORT.........
   23   JOINT INCIDENT SITE           0          13,895                                        0          13,895
         COMMUNICATIONS
         CAPABILITY........
   24   JCSE EQUIPMENT                0           4,866                                        0           4,866
         (USREDCOM)........
        COMM--SATELLITE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   27   DEFENSE ENTERPRISE            0         108,133                                        0         108,133
         WIDEBAND SATCOM
         SYSTEMS...........
   28   TRANSPORTABLE                 0          56,737                                        0          56,737
         TACTICAL COMMAND
         COMMUNICATIONS....
   29   SHF TERM...........           0          13,100                                        0          13,100
   30   SMART-T (SPACE)....           0           9,160                                        0           9,160
   31   GLOBAL BRDCST SVC--           0          25,647                                        0          25,647
         GBS...............
   32   ENROUTE MISSION               0          37,401                                        0          37,401
         COMMAND (EMC).....
        COMM--C3 SYSTEM
   36   COE TACTICAL SERVER           0          20,500                                        0          20,500
         INFRASTRUCTURE
         (TSI).............
        COMM--COMBAT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   38   HANDHELD MANPACK              0         351,565                                        0         351,565
         SMALL FORM FIT
         (HMS).............
   40   RADIO TERMINAL SET,           0           4,641                                        0           4,641
         MIDS LVT(2).......
   41   TRACTOR DESK.......           0           2,187                                        0           2,187
   42   TRACTOR RIDE.......           0           9,411                                        0           9,411
   44   SPIDER FAMILY OF              0          17,515                                        0          17,515
         NETWORKED
         MUNITIONS INCR....
   45   TACTICAL                      0             819                                        0             819
         COMMUNICATIONS AND
         PROTECTIVE SYSTEM.
   46   UNIFIED COMMAND               0          17,807                                        0          17,807
         SUITE.............
   47   COTS COMMUNICATIONS           0         191,835                                        0         191,835
         EQUIPMENT.........
   48   FAMILY OF MED COMM            0          25,177                                        0          25,177
         FOR COMBAT
         CASUALTY CARE.....
        COMM--INTELLIGENCE
         COMM
   50   CI AUTOMATION                 0           9,740                                        0           9,740
         ARCHITECTURE (MIP)
   51   DEFENSE MILITARY              0           2,667                                        0           2,667
         DECEPTION
         INITIATIVE........
        INFORMATION
         SECURITY
   53   FAMILY OF                     0           8,319                                        0           8,319
         BIOMETRICS........
   54   INFORMATION SYSTEM            0           2,000                                        0           2,000
         SECURITY PROGRAM-
         ISSP..............
   55   COMMUNICATIONS                0          88,337                                        0          88,337
         SECURITY (COMSEC).
   56   DEFENSIVE CYBER               0          51,343                                        0          51,343
         OPERATIONS........
   57   INSIDER THREAT                0             330                                        0             330
         PROGRAM--UNIT
         ACTIVITY MONITO...
   58   PERSISTENT CYBER              0           3,000                                        0           3,000
         TRAINING
         ENVIRONMENT.......
        COMM--LONG HAUL
         COMMUNICATIONS
   59   BASE SUPPORT                  0          34,434                                        0          34,434
         COMMUNICATIONS....
        COMM--BASE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   60   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0          95,558                                        0          95,558
   61   EMERGENCY                     0           4,736                                        0           4,736
         MANAGEMENT
         MODERNIZATION
         PROGRAM...........
   62   HOME STATION                  0          24,479                                        0          24,479
         MISSION COMMAND
         CENTERS (HSMCC)...
   63   INSTALLATION INFO             0         216,433                                        0         216,433
         INFRASTRUCTURE MOD
         PROGRAM...........
        ELECT EQUIP--TACT
         INT REL ACT
         (TIARA)
   66   JTT/CIBS-M (MIP)...           0          10,268                                        0          10,268
   68   DCGS-A (MIP).......           0         261,863                                        0         261,863
   69   JOINT TACTICAL                0           5,434                                        0           5,434
         GROUND STATION
         (JTAGS) (MIP).....
   70   TROJAN (MIP).......           0          20,623                                        0          20,623
   71   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0          45,998          0            1,800            0          47,798
         (INTEL SPT) (MIP).
            SOUTHCOM SIGINT                                     [0]          [1,800]
            Suite COMSAT RF
   72   CI HUMINT AUTO                0             296                                        0             296
         REPRTING &
         COLL(CHARCS)(MIP).
   76   ITEMS LESS THAN               0             410                                        0             410
         $5.0M (MIP).......
        ELECT EQUIP--
         ELECTRONIC WARFARE
         (EW)
   77   LIGHTWEIGHT COUNTER           0           9,165                                        0           9,165
         MORTAR RADAR......
   78   EW PLANNING &                 0           5,875                                        0           5,875
         MANAGEMENT TOOLS
         (EWPMT)...........
   79   AIR VIGILANCE (AV)            0           8,497                                        0           8,497
         (MIP).............
   83   CI MODERNIZATION              0             486                                        0             486
         (MIP).............
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL SURV.
         (TAC SURV)
   84   SENTINEL MODS......           0          79,629                                        0          79,629
   85   NIGHT VISION                  0         153,180                                        0         153,180
         DEVICES...........
   87   SMALL TACTICAL                0          22,882                                        0          22,882
         OPTICAL RIFLE
         MOUNTED MLRF......
   88   RADIATION                     0          17,393                                        0          17,393
         MONITORING SYSTEMS
   90   INDIRECT FIRE                 0          46,740                                        0          46,740
         PROTECTION FAMILY
         OF SYSTEMS........
   91   FAMILY OF WEAPON              0         140,737                                        0         140,737
         SIGHTS (FWS)......
   93   PROFILER...........           0             171                                        0             171
   94   JOINT BATTLE                  0         405,239                                        0         405,239
         COMMAND--PLATFORM
         (JBC-P)...........
   95   JOINT EFFECTS                 0          66,574                                        0          66,574
         TARGETING SYSTEM
         (JETS)............
   96   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0          20,783                                        0          20,783
         (LLDR)............
   97   COMPUTER                      0           8,553                                        0           8,553
         BALLISTICS: LHMBC
         XM32..............
   98   MORTAR FIRE CONTROL           0          21,489                                        0          21,489
         SYSTEM............
   99   COUNTERFIRE RADARS.           0         162,121                                        0         162,121
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL C2
         SYSTEMS
  100   ARMY COMMAND POST             0           2,855                                        0           2,855
         INTEGRATED
         INFRASTRUCTURE (..
  101   FIRE SUPPORT C2               0          19,153                                        0          19,153
         FAMILY............
  102   AIR & MSL DEFENSE             0          33,837                                        0          33,837
         PLANNING & CONTROL
         SYS...............
  103   LIFE CYCLE SOFTWARE           0           5,136                                        0           5,136
         SUPPORT (LCSS)....
  104   NETWORK MANAGEMENT            0          18,329                                        0          18,329
         INITIALIZATION AND
         SERVICE...........
  105   MANEUVER CONTROL              0          38,015                                        0          38,015
         SYSTEM (MCS)......
  106   GLOBAL COMBAT                 0          15,164                                        0          15,164
         SUPPORT SYSTEM-
         ARMY (GCSS-A).....
  107   INTEGRATED                    0          29,239                                        0          29,239
         PERSONNEL AND PAY
         SYSTEM-ARMY (IPP..
  109   RECONNAISSANCE AND            0           6,823                                        0           6,823
         SURVEYING
         INSTRUMENT SET....
  110   MOD OF IN-SVC                 0           1,177                                        0           1,177
         EQUIPMENT (ENFIRE)
        ELECT EQUIP--
         AUTOMATION
  111   ARMY TRAINING                 0          12,265                                        0          12,265
         MODERNIZATION.....
  112   AUTOMATED DATA                0         201,875          0          -15,000            0         186,875
         PROCESSING EQUIP..
            Consolidating                                       [0]        [-15,000]
            more IT
            purchases......
  113   GENERAL FUND                  0          10,976                                        0          10,976
         ENTERPRISE
         BUSINESS SYSTEMS
         FAM...............
  114   HIGH PERF COMPUTING           0          66,330                                        0          66,330
         MOD PGM (HPCMP)...
  115   CONTRACT WRITING              0           5,927                                        0           5,927
         SYSTEM............
  116   RESERVE COMPONENT             0          27,896                                        0          27,896
         AUTOMATION SYS
         (RCAS)............
        ELECT EQUIP--AUDIO
         VISUAL SYS (A/V)
  117   TACTICAL DIGITAL              0           4,392                                        0           4,392
         MEDIA.............
  118   ITEMS LESS THAN $5M           0           1,970                                        0           1,970
         (SURVEYING
         EQUIPMENT)........
        ELECT EQUIP--
         SUPPORT
  119   PRODUCTION BASE               0             506                                        0             506
         SUPPORT (C-E).....
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0           4,501                                        0           4,501
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
         EQUIPMENT
  121   PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS.           0           2,314                                        0           2,314
  122   FAMILY OF NON-                0           7,478                                        0           7,478
         LETHAL EQUIPMENT
         (FNLE)............
  124   CBRN DEFENSE.......           0         173,954                                        0         173,954
        BRIDGING EQUIPMENT
  125   TACTICAL BRIDGING..           0          98,229                                        0          98,229
  126   TACTICAL BRIDGE,              0          64,438                                        0          64,438
         FLOAT-RIBBON......
  127   COMMON BRIDGE                 0          79,916                                        0          79,916
         TRANSPORTER (CBT)
         RECAP.............
        ENGINEER (NON-
         CONSTRUCTION)
         EQUIPMENT
  128   HANDHELD STANDOFF             0           8,471                                        0           8,471
         MINEFIELD
         DETECTION SYS-HST.
  129   GRND STANDOFF MINE            0          29,883                                        0          29,883
         DETECTN SYSM
         (GSTAMIDS)........
  130   AREA MINE DETECTION           0          11,594                                        0          11,594
         SYSTEM (AMDS).....
  131   HUSKY MOUNTED                 0          40,834                                        0          40,834
         DETECTION SYSTEM
         (HMDS)............
  132   ROBOTIC COMBAT                0           4,029                                        0           4,029
         SUPPORT SYSTEM
         (RCSS)............
  133   EOD ROBOTICS                  0          14,208                                        0          14,208
         SYSTEMS
         RECAPITALIZATION..
  134   ROBOTICS AND                  0          31,456                                        0          31,456
         APPLIQUE SYSTEMS..
  136   REMOTE DEMOLITION             0           1,748                                        0           1,748
         SYSTEMS...........
  137   RAIL)
        GENERATORS
  165   GENERATORS AND                0         133,772                                        0         133,772
         ASSOCIATED EQUIP..
  166   TACTICAL ELECTRIC             0           8,333                                        0           8,333
         POWER
         RECAPITALIZATION..
        MATERIAL HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
  167   FAMILY OF FORKLIFTS           0          12,901                                        0          12,901
        TRAINING EQUIPMENT
  168   COMBAT TRAINING               0         123,228                                        0         123,228
         CENTERS SUPPORT...
  169   TRAINING DEVICES,             0         228,598                                        0         228,598
         NONSYSTEM.........
  170   CLOSE COMBAT                  0          33,080                                        0          33,080
         TACTICAL TRAINER..
  171   AVIATION COMBINED             0          32,700                                        0          32,700
         ARMS TACTICAL
         TRAINER...........
  172   GAMING TECHNOLOGY             0          25,161                                        0          25,161
         IN SUPPORT OF ARMY
         TRAINING..........
        TEST MEASURE AND
         DIG EQUIPMENT
         (TMD)
  173   CALIBRATION SETS              0           4,270                                        0           4,270
         EQUIPMENT.........
  174   INTEGRATED FAMILY             0          76,295                                        0          76,295
         OF TEST EQUIPMENT
         (IFTE)............
  175   TEST EQUIPMENT                0           9,806                                        0           9,806
         MODERNIZATION
         (TEMOD)...........
        OTHER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  176   M25 STABILIZED                0           4,368                                        0           4,368
         BINOCULAR.........
  177   RAPID EQUIPPING               0           9,879                                        0           9,879
         SOLDIER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT.........
  178   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0          54,043                                        0          54,043
         SYSTEMS (OPA3)....
  179   BASE LEVEL COMMON             0           6,633                                        0           6,633
         EQUIPMENT.........
  180   MODIFICATION OF IN-           0          49,797                                        0          49,797
         SVC EQUIPMENT (OPA-
         3)................
  181   PRODUCTION BASE               0           2,301                                        0           2,301
         SUPPORT (OTH).....
  182   SPECIAL EQUIPMENT             0          11,608                                        0          11,608
         FOR USER TESTING..
  183   TRACTOR YARD.......           0           4,956                                        0           4,956
        OPA2
  184   INITIAL SPARES--C&E           0           9,817                                        0           9,817
        TOTAL OTHER                   0       7,999,529          0         -263,200            0       7,736,329
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        COMBAT AIRCRAFT
    1   F/A-18E/F (FIGHTER)          24       1,937,553                                       24       1,937,553
         HORNET............
    2   F/A-18E/F (FIGHTER)           0          58,799                                        0          58,799
         HORNET AP.........
    3   JOINT STRIKE                  9       1,144,958         -1         -121,000            8       1,023,958
         FIGHTER CV........
            Program                                            [-1]       [-121,000]
            Realignment....
    4   JOINT STRIKE                  0         140,010                                        0         140,010
         FIGHTER CV AP.....
    5   JSF STOVL..........          20       2,312,847                                       20       2,312,847
    6   JSF STOVL AP.......           0         228,492                                        0         228,492
    7   CH-53K (HEAVY LIFT)           8       1,113,804                                        8       1,113,804
    8   CH-53K (HEAVY LIFT)           0         161,079                                        0         161,079
         AP................
    9   V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT).           7         806,337                                        7         806,337
   10   V-22 (MEDIUM LIFT)            0          36,955                                        0          36,955
         AP................
   11   H-1 UPGRADES (UH-1Y/         25         820,755                                       25         820,755
         AH-1Z)............
   14   P-8A POSEIDON......          10       1,803,753                                       10       1,803,753
   15   P-8A POSEIDON AP...           0         180,000                                        0         180,000
   16   E-2D ADV HAWKEYE...           4         742,693          1          175,000            5         917,693
            UPL--1                                              [1]        [175,000]
            additional
            Aircraft.......
   17   E-2D ADV HAWKEYE AP           0         240,734                                        0         240,734
   71   O/A-X LIGHT ATTACK            0               0          0          100,000            0         100,000
         AIRCRAFT..........
            Initial                                             [0]        [100,000]
            procurement for
            light attack
            aircraft.......
        AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
   18   C-40A..............           2         206,000         -2         -206,000            0               0
            Funded in FY18                                     [-2]       [-206,000]
            Omnibus........
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   20   KC-130J............           2         160,433                                        2         160,433
   21   KC-130J AP.........           0         110,013                                        0         110,013
   22   MQ-4 TRITON........           3         568,743                                        3         568,743
   23   MQ-4 TRITON AP.....           0          58,522                                        0          58,522
   24   MQ-8 UAV...........           0          54,761                                        0          54,761
   25   STUASL0 UAV........           0          14,866                                        0          14,866
   26   VH-92A EXECUTIVE              6         649,015                                        6         649,015
         HELO..............
   72   UAV................           0               0          0          100,000            0         100,000
            Procurement of                                      [0]        [100,000]
            UAV............
        MODIFICATION OF
         AIRCRAFT
   27   AEA SYSTEMS........           0          25,277                                        0          25,277
   28   AV-8 SERIES........           0          58,577                                        0          58,577
   29   ADVERSARY..........           0          14,606                                        0          14,606
   30   F-18 SERIES........           0       1,213,482          0           13,900            0       1,227,382
            UPL--EA-18G                                         [0]         [13,900]
            Advanced Modes /
             Cognitive EW..
   31   H-53 SERIES........           0          70,997                                        0          70,997
   32   SH-60 SERIES.......           0         130,661                                        0         130,661
   33   H-1 SERIES.........           0          87,143                                        0          87,143
   34   EP-3 SERIES........           0           3,633                                        0           3,633
   35   P-3 SERIES.........           0             803                                        0             803
   36   E-2 SERIES.........           0          88,780                                        0          88,780
   37   TRAINER A/C SERIES.           0          11,660                                        0          11,660
   38   C-2A...............           0          11,327                                        0          11,327
   39   C-130 SERIES.......           0          79,075                                        0          79,075
   40   FEWSG..............           0             597                                        0             597
   41   CARGO/TRANSPORT A/C           0           8,932                                        0           8,932
         SERIES............
   42   E-6 SERIES.........           0         181,821                                        0         181,821
   43   EXECUTIVE                     0          23,566                                        0          23,566
         HELICOPTERS SERIES
   44   SPECIAL PROJECT               0           7,620                                        0           7,620
         AIRCRAFT..........
   45   T-45 SERIES........           0         195,475                                        0         195,475
   46   POWER PLANT CHANGES           0          21,521                                        0          21,521
   47   JPATS SERIES.......           0          27,644                                        0          27,644
   48   AVIATION LIFE                 0          15,864                                        0          15,864
         SUPPORT MODS......
   49   COMMON ECM                    0         166,306         43           25,000           43         191,306
         EQUIPMENT.........
            UPL--F/A-18 E/F                                    [43]         [25,000]
            Adaptative
            Radar
            Countermeasures
   50   COMMON AVIONICS               0         117,551                                        0         117,551
         CHANGES...........
   51   COMMON DEFENSIVE              0           1,994                                        0           1,994
         WEAPON SYSTEM.....
   52   ID SYSTEMS.........           0          40,696                                        0          40,696
   53   P-8 SERIES.........           0          71,251                                        0          71,251
   54   MAGTF EW FOR                  0          11,590                                        0          11,590
         AVIATION..........
   55   MQ-8 SERIES........           0          37,907                                        0          37,907
   57   V-22 (TILT/ROTOR              0         214,820                                        0         214,820
         ACFT) OSPREY......
   58   NEXT GENERATION               0             952                                        0             952
         JAMMER (NGJ)......
   59   F-35 STOVL SERIES..           0          36,618          0           33,500            0          70,118
            F-35B                                               [0]         [33,500]
            Modifications
            Increase.......
   60   F-35 CV SERIES.....           0          21,236          0            5,000            0          26,236
            F-35C                                               [0]          [5,000]
            Modifications
            Increase.......
   61   QRC................           0         101,499                                        0         101,499
   62   MQ-4 SERIES........           0          48,278                                        0          48,278
   63   RQ-21 SERIES.......           0           6,904                                        0           6,904
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   64   SPARES AND REPAIR             0       1,792,920          0           50,000            0       1,842,920
         PARTS.............
            F-35B and F-35C                                     [0]         [50,000]
            spares quantity
            increase.......
        AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
         EQUIP & FACILITIES
   65   COMMON GROUND                 0         421,606                                        0         421,606
         EQUIPMENT.........
   66   AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIAL           0          24,496                                        0          24,496
         FACILITIES........
   67   WAR CONSUMABLES....           0          42,108                                        0          42,108
   68   OTHER PRODUCTION              0           1,444                                        0           1,444
         CHARGES...........
   69   SPECIAL SUPPORT               0          49,489                                        0          49,489
         EQUIPMENT.........
   70   FIRST DESTINATION             0           1,951                                        0           1,951
         TRANSPORTATION....
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT              120      19,041,799         41          175,400          161      19,217,199
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        WEAPONS
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        MODIFICATION OF
         MISSILES
    1   TRIDENT II MODS....           0       1,078,750                                        0       1,078,750
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
    2   MISSILE INDUSTRIAL            0           6,998                                        0           6,998
         FACILITIES........
        STRATEGIC MISSILES
    3   TOMAHAWK...........           0          98,570                                        0          98,570
        TACTICAL MISSILES
    4   AMRAAM.............         140         211,058                                      140         211,058
    5   SIDEWINDER.........         191          77,927         58           45,000          249         122,927
            Navy UPL:                                          [58]         [45,000]
            Increase to
            maximum
            capacity.......
    6   JSOW...............           0           1,330                                        0           1,330
    7   STANDARD MISSILE...         125         490,210                                      125         490,210
    8   STANDARD MISSILE AP           0         125,683                                        0         125,683
    9   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB         750          91,272                                      750          91,272
         II................
   10   RAM................         120          96,221                                      120          96,221
   11   JOINT AIR GROUND             75          24,109                                       75          24,109
         MISSILE (JAGM)....
   14   STAND OFF PRECISION          31          11,378                                       31          11,378
         GUIDED MUNITIONS
         (SOPGM)...........
   15   AERIAL TARGETS.....           0         137,137                                        0         137,137
   16   OTHER MISSILE                 0           3,318                                        0           3,318
         SUPPORT...........
   17   LRASM..............          25          81,190         10           30,000           35         111,190
            Navy UPL:                                          [10]         [30,000]
            Increase to
            maximum
            capacity.......
   18   LCS OTH MISSILE....           8          18,156                                        8          18,156
        MODIFICATION OF
         MISSILES
   19   ESSM...............          45          98,384                                       45          98,384
   20   HARPOON MODS.......           0          14,840         48           12,000           48          26,840
            Navy UPL:                                          [48]         [12,000]
            Increase to max
            capacity.......
   21   HARM MODS..........           0         187,985       -200         -113,900         -200          74,085
            Reduce                                           [-200]       [-113,900]
            procurement due
            to test results
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   23   WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL            0           2,006                                        0           2,006
         FACILITIES........
   24   FLEET SATELLITE               0          66,779                                        0          66,779
         COMM FOLLOW-ON....
        ORDNANCE SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   25   ORDNANCE SUPPORT              0          62,008                                        0          62,008
         EQUIPMENT.........
        TORPEDOES AND
         RELATED EQUIP
   26   SSTD...............           0           6,353                                        0           6,353
   27   MK-48 TORPEDO......          45          92,616          5           11,000           50         103,616
            Navy UPL:                                           [5]         [11,000]
            Increase to
            maximum
            capacity.......
   28   ASW TARGETS........           0          12,324                                        0          12,324
        MOD OF TORPEDOES
         AND RELATED EQUIP
   29   MK-54 TORPEDO MODS.           0         105,946                                        0         105,946
   30   MK-48 TORPEDO ADCAP           0          40,005                                        0          40,005
         MODS..............
   31   QUICKSTRIKE MINE...           0           9,758                                        0           9,758
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
   32   TORPEDO SUPPORT               0          79,371                                        0          79,371
         EQUIPMENT.........
   33   ASW RANGE SUPPORT..           0           3,872                                        0           3,872
        DESTINATION
         TRANSPORTATION
   34   FIRST DESTINATION             0           3,726                                        0           3,726
         TRANSPORTATION....
        GUNS AND GUN MOUNTS
   35   SMALL ARMS AND                0          15,067                                        0          15,067
         WEAPONS...........
        MODIFICATION OF
         GUNS AND GUN
         MOUNTS
   36   CIWS MODS..........           0          63,318                                        0          63,318
   37   COAST GUARD WEAPONS           0          40,823                                        0          40,823
   38   GUN MOUNT MODS.....           0          74,618                                        0          74,618
   39   LCS MODULE WEAPONS.          90          11,350        -50           -6,000           40           5,350
            Early to need..                                   [-50]         [-6,000]
   41   AIRBORNE MINE                 0          22,249                                        0          22,249
         NEUTRALIZATION
         SYSTEMS...........
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   43   SPARES AND REPAIR             0         135,688                                        0         135,688
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL WEAPONS             1,645       3,702,393       -129          -21,900        1,516       3,680,493
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMO, NAVY & MC
        NAVY AMMUNITION
    1   GENERAL PURPOSE               0          79,871                                        0          79,871
         BOMBS.............
    2   JDAM...............       3,688          87,900                                    3,688          87,900
    3   AIRBORNE ROCKETS,             0         151,431                                        0         151,431
         ALL TYPES.........
    4   MACHINE GUN                   0          11,344                                        0          11,344
         AMMUNITION........
    5   PRACTICE BOMBS.....           0          49,471                                        0          49,471
    6   CARTRIDGES & CART             0          56,227                                        0          56,227
         ACTUATED DEVICES..
    7   AIR EXPENDABLE                0          66,382                                        0          66,382
         COUNTERMEASURES...
    8   JATOS..............           0           2,907                                        0           2,907
    9   5 INCH/54 GUN                 0          72,657                                        0          72,657
         AMMUNITION........
   10   INTERMEDIATE                  0          33,613     -1,000          -13,000       -1,000          20,613
         CALIBER GUN
         AMMUNITION........
            Alamo LRIP                                     [-1,000]        [-13,000]
            ahead of
            testing........
   11   OTHER SHIP GUN                0          42,142                                        0          42,142
         AMMUNITION........
   12   SMALL ARMS &                  0          49,888                                        0          49,888
         LANDING PARTY AMMO
   13   PYROTECHNIC AND               0          10,931                                        0          10,931
         DEMOLITION........
   15   AMMUNITION LESS               0           1,106                                        0           1,106
         THAN $5 MILLION...
        MARINE CORPS
         AMMUNITION
   19   MORTARS............           0          28,266                                        0          28,266
   21   DIRECT SUPPORT                0          63,664                                        0          63,664
         MUNITIONS.........
   22   INFANTRY WEAPONS              0          59,295                                        0          59,295
         AMMUNITION........
   26   COMBAT SUPPORT                0          31,577                                        0          31,577
         MUNITIONS.........
   28   AMMO MODERNIZATION.           0          15,001                                        0          15,001
   29   ARTILLERY MUNITIONS           0          86,297                                        0          86,297
   30   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           6,239                                        0           6,239
         MILLION...........
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT         3,688       1,006,209     -1,000          -13,000        2,688         993,209
         OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
 
        SHIPBUILDING AND
         CONVERSION, NAVY
        FLEET BALLISTIC
         MISSILE SHIPS
    1   OHIO REPLACEMENT              0       3,005,330                                        0       3,005,330
         SUBMARINE AP......
        OTHER WARSHIPS
    2   CARRIER REPLACEMENT           0       1,598,181                                        0       1,598,181
         PROGRAM...........
    4   VIRGINIA CLASS                2       4,373,382                                        2       4,373,382
         SUBMARINE.........
    5   VIRGINIA CLASS                0       2,796,401          0          250,000            0       3,046,401
         SUBMARINE AP......
            FY19-23 MYP EOQ                                     [0]        [250,000]
            or SIB
            expansion......
    7   CVN REFUELING                 0         449,597                                        0         449,597
         OVERHAULS AP......
    8   DDG 1000...........           0         270,965          0         -270,965            0               0
            Cost growth                                         [0]       [-270,965]
            transfer to
            Line 28........
    9   DDG-51.............           3       5,253,327          0          -27,500            3       5,225,827
            Multiyear                                           [0]        [-27,500]
            procurement
            contract
            savings........
   10   DDG-51 AP..........           0         391,928          0          250,000            0         641,928
            Enable greater                                      [0]        [250,000]
            long lead
            material
            procurement....
   11   LITTORAL COMBAT               1         646,244          0          -70,000            1         576,244
         SHIP..............
            Align Plans and                                     [0]        [-70,000]
            Other costs
            with end of
            production.....
        AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
   12   LPD -17............           0               0          0          650,000            0         650,000
            AP for FY2020                                       [0]        [650,000]
            LPD Flight II
            and/or MYP EOQ.
   13   EXPEDITIONARY SEA             1         650,000                                        1         650,000
         BASE (ESB)........
        AUXILIARIES, CRAFT
         AND PRIOR YR
         PROGRAM COST
   16   TAO FLEET OILER....           2         977,104                                        2         977,104
   17   TAO FLEET OILER AP.           0          75,046                                        0          75,046
   18   TOWING, SALVAGE,              1          80,517                                        1          80,517
         AND RESCUE SHIP
         (ATS).............
   20   LCU 1700...........           2          41,520                                        2          41,520
   21   OUTFITTING.........           0         634,038          0          -72,000            0         562,038
            Unjustified                                         [0]        [-72,000]
            cost growth....
   22   SHIP TO SHORE                 5         325,375                                        5         325,375
         CONNECTOR.........
   23   SERVICE CRAFT......           0          72,062          0           25,000            0          97,062
            Accelerate                                          [0]         [25,000]
            detail design
            and
            construction of
            YP-703 Flight
            II.............
   24   LCAC SLEP..........           1          23,321                                        1          23,321
   25   USCG ICEBREAKERS...           0               0                                        0               0
   28   COMPLETION OF PY              0         207,099          0          270,965            0         478,064
         SHIPBUILDING
         PROGRAMS..........
            Cost growth                                         [0]        [270,965]
            transfer from
            Line 8.........
   29   CABLE SHIP.........           0               0          1          250,000            1         250,000
            Program                                             [1]        [250,000]
            increase.......
        TOTAL SHIPBUILDING           18      21,871,437          1        1,255,500           19      23,126,937
         AND CONVERSION,
         NAVY..............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         NAVY
        SHIP PROPULSION
         EQUIPMENT
    1   SURFACE POWER                 0          19,700                                        0          19,700
         EQUIPMENT.........
        GENERATORS
    3   SURFACE COMBATANT             0          23,495                                        0          23,495
         HM&E..............
        NAVIGATION
         EQUIPMENT
    4   OTHER NAVIGATION              0          63,330          0           10,000            0          73,330
         EQUIPMENT.........
            Accelerate                                          [0]         [10,000]
            ECDIS-N 9.3,
            9.4, 9.5
            implementation.
        OTHER SHIPBOARD
         EQUIPMENT
    5   SUB PERISCOPE,                0         178,421                                        0         178,421
         IMAGING AND SUPT
         EQUIP PROG........
    6   DDG MOD............           0         487,999                                        0         487,999
    7   FIREFIGHTING                  0          28,143                                        0          28,143
         EQUIPMENT.........
    8   COMMAND AND CONTROL           0           2,248                                        0           2,248
         SWITCHBOARD.......
    9   LHA/LHD MIDLIFE....           0          37,694                                        0          37,694
   10   POLLUTION CONTROL             0          20,883                                        0          20,883
         EQUIPMENT.........
   11   SUBMARINE SUPPORT             0          37,155                                        0          37,155
         EQUIPMENT.........
   12   VIRGINIA CLASS                0          66,328                                        0          66,328
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
   13   LCS CLASS SUPPORT             0          47,241                                        0          47,241
         EQUIPMENT.........
   14   SUBMARINE BATTERIES           0          27,987                                        0          27,987
   15   LPD CLASS SUPPORT             0          65,033                                        0          65,033
         EQUIPMENT.........
   16   DDG 1000 CLASS                0          89,700          0          -38,400            0          51,300
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
            Procurement                                         [0]        [-38,400]
            early to need..
   17   STRATEGIC PLATFORM            0          22,254                                        0          22,254
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
   18   DSSP EQUIPMENT.....           0           3,629                                        0           3,629
   19   CG MODERNIZATION...           0         276,446                                        0         276,446
   20   LCAC...............           0           3,709                                        0           3,709
   21   UNDERWATER EOD                0          78,807                                        0          78,807
         PROGRAMS..........
   22   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0         126,865          0          -25,000            0         101,865
         MILLION...........
            Insufficient                                        [0]        [-25,000]
            justification
            for CVN-78 in-
            service
            requirements...
   23   CHEMICAL WARFARE              0           2,966                                        0           2,966
         DETECTORS.........
   24   SUBMARINE LIFE                0          11,968                                        0          11,968
         SUPPORT SYSTEM....
        REACTOR PLANT
         EQUIPMENT
   25   REACTOR POWER UNITS           0         346,325                                        0         346,325
   26   REACTOR COMPONENTS.           0         497,063                                        0         497,063
        OCEAN ENGINEERING
   27   DIVING AND SALVAGE            0          10,706                                        0          10,706
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SMALL BOATS
   28   STANDARD BOATS.....           0          49,771                                        0          49,771
        PRODUCTION
         FACILITIES
         EQUIPMENT
   29   OPERATING FORCES              0         225,181                                        0         225,181
         IPE...............
        OTHER SHIP SUPPORT
   31   LCS COMMON MISSION            0          46,732                                        0          46,732
         MODULES EQUIPMENT.
   32   LCS MCM MISSION               0         124,147          0           27,916            0         152,063
         MODULES...........
            Transfer Cobra                                      [0]          [8,616]
            trainer from
            Line 53........
            Transfer                                            [0]         [19,300]
            Knifefish and
            UISS trainers
            from Line 52...
   33   LCS ASW MISSION               0          57,294          0          -18,000            0          39,294
         MODULES...........
            Excess                                              [0]        [-18,000]
            procurement
            ahead of
            satisfactory
            testing........
   34   LCS SUW MISSION               0          26,006          0          -11,500            0          14,506
         MODULES...........
            Excess                                              [0]        [-11,500]
            procurement
            ahead of
            satisfactory
            testing........
   35   LCS IN-SERVICE                0          70,526                                        0          70,526
         MODERNIZATION.....
        LOGISTIC SUPPORT
   36   LSD MIDLIFE &                 0           4,784                                        0           4,784
         MODERNIZATION.....
        SHIP SONARS
   37   SPQ-9B RADAR.......           0          20,309                                        0          20,309
   38   AN/SQQ-89 SURF ASW            0         115,459                                        0         115,459
         COMBAT SYSTEM.....
   39   SSN ACOUSTIC                  0         318,189                                        0         318,189
         EQUIPMENT.........
   40   UNDERSEA WARFARE              0          10,134                                        0          10,134
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
        ASW ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   41   SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC            0          23,815                                        0          23,815
         WARFARE SYSTEM....
   42   SSTD...............           0          11,277          0           -5,000            0           6,277
            AN/SLQ-32E                                          [0]         [-5,000]
            contract delay.
   43   FIXED SURVEILLANCE            0         237,780                                        0         237,780
         SYSTEM............
   44   SURTASS............           0          57,872                                        0          57,872
        ELECTRONIC WARFARE
         EQUIPMENT
   45   AN/SLQ-32..........           0         420,344                                        0         420,344
        RECONNAISSANCE
         EQUIPMENT
   46   SHIPBOARD IW                  0         220,883                                        0         220,883
         EXPLOIT...........
   47   AUTOMATED                     0           4,028                                        0           4,028
         IDENTIFICATION
         SYSTEM (AIS)......
        OTHER SHIP
         ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   48   COOPERATIVE                   0          44,173          0           -6,000            0          38,173
         ENGAGEMENT
         CAPABILITY........
            Common Array                                        [0]         [-6,000]
            Block antenna
            program delay..
   49   NAVAL TACTICAL                0          10,991                                        0          10,991
         COMMAND SUPPORT
         SYSTEM (NTCSS)....
   50   ATDLS..............           0          34,526                                        0          34,526
   51   NAVY COMMAND AND              0           3,769                                        0           3,769
         CONTROL SYSTEM
         (NCCS)............
   52   MINESWEEPING SYSTEM           0          35,709          0          -19,300            0          16,409
         REPLACEMENT.......
            Transfer                                            [0]        [-19,300]
            Knifefish and
            UISS trainers
            to Line 32.....
   53   SHALLOW WATER MCM..           0           8,616          0           -8,616            0               0
            Transfer Cobra                                      [0]         [-8,616]
            trainer to Line
            32.............
   54   NAVSTAR GPS                   0          10,703                                        0          10,703
         RECEIVERS (SPACE).
   55   AMERICAN FORCES               0           2,626                                        0           2,626
         RADIO AND TV
         SERVICE...........
   56   STRATEGIC PLATFORM            0           9,467                                        0           9,467
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
        AVIATION ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   57   ASHORE ATC                    0          70,849                                        0          70,849
         EQUIPMENT.........
   58   AFLOAT ATC                    0          47,890                                        0          47,890
         EQUIPMENT.........
   59   ID SYSTEMS.........           0          26,163                                        0          26,163
   60   JOINT PRECISION               0          38,094                                        0          38,094
         APPROACH AND
         LANDING SYSTEM (..
   61   NAVAL MISSION                 0          11,966                                        0          11,966
         PLANNING SYSTEMS..
        OTHER SHORE
         ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   62   TACTICAL/MOBILE C4I           0          42,010                                        0          42,010
         SYSTEMS...........
   63   DCGS-N.............           0          12,896                                        0          12,896
   64   CANES..............           0         423,027                                        0         423,027
   65   RADIAC.............           0           8,175                                        0           8,175
   66   CANES-INTELL.......           0          54,465                                        0          54,465
   67   GPETE..............           0           5,985                                        0           5,985
   68   MASF...............           0           5,413                                        0           5,413
   69   INTEG COMBAT SYSTEM           0           6,251                                        0           6,251
         TEST FACILITY.....
   70   EMI CONTROL                   0           4,183                                        0           4,183
         INSTRUMENTATION...
   71   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0         148,350          0           -5,400            0         142,950
         MILLION...........
            NGSSR                                               [0]         [-5,400]
            installation
            funding early
            to need........
        SHIPBOARD
         COMMUNICATIONS
   72   SHIPBOARD TACTICAL            0          45,450                                        0          45,450
         COMMUNICATIONS....
   73   SHIP COMMUNICATIONS           0         105,087                                        0         105,087
         AUTOMATION........
   74   COMMUNICATIONS                0          41,123                                        0          41,123
         ITEMS UNDER $5M...
        SUBMARINE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   75   SUBMARINE BROADCAST           0          30,897                                        0          30,897
         SUPPORT...........
   76   SUBMARINE                     0          78,580                                        0          78,580
         COMMUNICATION
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SATELLITE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   77   SATELLITE                     0          41,205                                        0          41,205
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SYSTEMS...........
   78   NAVY MULTIBAND                0         113,885                                        0         113,885
         TERMINAL (NMT)....
        SHORE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   79   JOINT                         0           4,292                                        0           4,292
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SUPPORT ELEMENT
         (JCSE)............
        CRYPTOGRAPHIC
         EQUIPMENT
   80   INFO SYSTEMS                  0         153,526                                        0         153,526
         SECURITY PROGRAM
         (ISSP)............
   81   MIO INTEL                     0             951                                        0             951
         EXPLOITATION TEAM.
        CRYPTOLOGIC
         EQUIPMENT
   82   CRYPTOLOGIC                   0          14,209          0            2,800            0          17,009
         COMMUNICATIONS
         EQUIP.............
            SOUTHCOM CCO                                        [0]          [2,800]
            Sensor (2
            suites)........
        OTHER ELECTRONIC
         SUPPORT
   86   COAST GUARD                   0          40,713                                        0          40,713
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SONOBUOYS
   88   SONOBUOYS--ALL                0         177,891          0           36,000            0         213,891
         TYPES.............
            Navy UPL.......                                     [0]         [36,000]
        AIRCRAFT SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   89   WEAPONS RANGE                 0          93,864                                        0          93,864
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
   90   AIRCRAFT SUPPORT              0         111,724                                        0         111,724
         EQUIPMENT.........
   91   ADVANCED ARRESTING            0          11,054                                        0          11,054
         GEAR (AAG)........
   92   METEOROLOGICAL                0          21,072                                        0          21,072
         EQUIPMENT.........
   93   DCRS/DPL...........           0             656                                        0             656
   94   AIRBORNE MINE                 0          11,299                                        0          11,299
         COUNTERMEASURES...
   95   LAMPS EQUIPMENT....           0             594                                        0             594
   96   AVIATION SUPPORT              0          39,374                                        0          39,374
         EQUIPMENT.........
   97   UMCS-UNMAN CARRIER            0          35,405                                        0          35,405
         AVIATION(UCA)MISSI
         ON CNTRL..........
        SHIP GUN SYSTEM
         EQUIPMENT
   98   SHIP GUN SYSTEMS              0           5,337                                        0           5,337
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SHIP MISSILE
         SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
   99   SHIP MISSILE                  0         213,090                                        0         213,090
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  100   TOMAHAWK SUPPORT              0          92,890                                        0          92,890
         EQUIPMENT.........
        FBM SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  101   STRATEGIC MISSILE             0         271,817                                        0         271,817
         SYSTEMS EQUIP.....
        ASW SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  102   SSN COMBAT CONTROL            0         129,501                                        0         129,501
         SYSTEMS...........
  103   ASW SUPPORT                   0          19,436                                        0          19,436
         EQUIPMENT.........
        OTHER ORDNANCE
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  104   EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE            0          14,258                                        0          14,258
         DISPOSAL EQUIP....
  105   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           5,378                                        0           5,378
         MILLION...........
        OTHER EXPENDABLE
         ORDNANCE
  106   SUBMARINE TRAINING            0          65,543                                        0          65,543
         DEVICE MODS.......
  107   SURFACE TRAINING              0         230,425                                        0         230,425
         EQUIPMENT.........
        CIVIL ENGINEERING
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  108   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           4,867                                        0           4,867
         VEHICLES..........
  109   GENERAL PURPOSE               0           2,674                                        0           2,674
         TRUCKS............
  110   CONSTRUCTION &                0          20,994                                        0          20,994
         MAINTENANCE EQUIP.
  111   FIRE FIGHTING                 0          17,189                                        0          17,189
         EQUIPMENT.........
  112   TACTICAL VEHICLES..           0          19,916                                        0          19,916
  113   AMPHIBIOUS                    0           7,400                                        0           7,400
         EQUIPMENT.........
  114   POLLUTION CONTROL             0           2,713                                        0           2,713
         EQUIPMENT.........
  115   ITEMS UNDER $5                0          35,540                                        0          35,540
         MILLION...........
  116   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0           1,155                                        0           1,155
         VEHICLES..........
        SUPPLY SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  117   SUPPLY EQUIPMENT...           0          18,786                                        0          18,786
  118   FIRST DESTINATION             0           5,375                                        0           5,375
         TRANSPORTATION....
  119   SPECIAL PURPOSE               0         580,371                                        0         580,371
         SUPPLY SYSTEMS....
        TRAINING DEVICES
  120   TRAINING SUPPORT              0           3,400                                        0           3,400
         EQUIPMENT.........
  121   TRAINING AND                  0          24,283                                        0          24,283
         EDUCATION
         EQUIPMENT.........
        COMMAND SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  122   COMMAND SUPPORT               0          66,681                                        0          66,681
         EQUIPMENT.........
  123   MEDICAL SUPPORT               0           3,352                                        0           3,352
         EQUIPMENT.........
  125   NAVAL MIP SUPPORT             0           1,984                                        0           1,984
         EQUIPMENT.........
  126   OPERATING FORCES              0          15,131                                        0          15,131
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  127   C4ISR EQUIPMENT....           0           3,576                                        0           3,576
  128   ENVIRONMENTAL                 0          31,902                                        0          31,902
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  129   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0         175,436          0           20,000            0         195,436
         EQUIPMENT.........
            New Navy port                                       [0]         [20,000]
            waterborne
            security
            barriers
            increase.......
  130   ENTERPRISE                    0          25,393                                        0          25,393
         INFORMATION
         TECHNOLOGY........
        OTHER
  133   NEXT GENERATION               0          96,269                                        0          96,269
         ENTERPRISE SERVICE
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0          15,681                                        0          15,681
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
  134   SPARES AND REPAIR             0         326,838                                        0         326,838
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL OTHER                   0       9,414,355          0          -40,500            0       9,373,855
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT, MARINE
         CORPS
        TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    1   AAV7A1 PIP.........           0         156,249          0          -78,100            0          78,149
            Unjustified                                         [0]        [-78,100]
            investment in a
            vehicle with
            low/limited
            combat utility.
    2   AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT            30         167,478                                       30         167,478
         VEHICLE 1.1.......
    3   LAV PIP............           0          43,701                                        0          43,701
        ARTILLERY AND OTHER
         WEAPONS
    5   155MM LIGHTWEIGHT             0          47,158                                        0          47,158
         TOWED HOWITZER....
    6   ARTILLERY WEAPONS             0         134,246                                        0         134,246
         SYSTEM............
    7   WEAPONS AND COMBAT            0          40,687                                        0          40,687
         VEHICLES UNDER $5
         MILLION...........
        OTHER SUPPORT
    8   MODIFICATION KITS..           0          22,904                                        0          22,904
        GUIDED MISSILES
    9   GROUND BASED AIR              0          18,334                                        0          18,334
         DEFENSE...........
   10   ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE-           5           3,020                                        5           3,020
         JAVELIN...........
   11   FAMILY ANTI-ARMOR             0          13,760                                        0          13,760
         WEAPON SYSTEMS
         (FOAAWS)..........
   12   ANTI-ARMOR MISSILE-           0          59,702                                        0          59,702
         TOW...............
        COMMAND AND CONTROL
         SYSTEMS
   13   COMMON AVIATION               0          35,467                                        0          35,467
         COMMAND AND
         CONTROL SYSTEM (C.
        REPAIR AND TEST
         EQUIPMENT
   14   REPAIR AND TEST               0          46,081                                        0          46,081
         EQUIPMENT.........
        OTHER SUPPORT (TEL)
   15   MODIFICATION KITS..           0             971                                        0             971
        COMMAND AND CONTROL
         SYSTEM (NON-TEL)
   16   ITEMS UNDER $5                0          69,203                                        0          69,203
         MILLION (COMM &
         ELEC).............
   17   AIR OPERATIONS C2             0          14,269                                        0          14,269
         SYSTEMS...........
        RADAR + EQUIPMENT
         (NON-TEL)
   18   RADAR SYSTEMS......           0           6,694                                        0           6,694
   19   GROUND/AIR TASK               6         224,969                                        6         224,969
         ORIENTED RADAR (G/
         ATOR).............
        INTELL/COMM
         EQUIPMENT (NON-
         TEL)
   21   GCSS-MC............           0           1,187                                        0           1,187
   22   FIRE SUPPORT SYSTEM           0          60,189                                        0          60,189
   23   INTELLIGENCE                  0          73,848                                        0          73,848
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
   25   UNMANNED AIR                  0           3,848                                        0           3,848
         SYSTEMS (INTEL)...
   26   DCGS-MC............           0          16,081                                        0          16,081
        OTHER SUPPORT (NON-
         TEL)
   30   NEXT GENERATION               0          87,120                                        0          87,120
         ENTERPRISE NETWORK
         (NGEN)............
   31   COMMON COMPUTER               0          68,914                                        0          68,914
         RESOURCES.........
   32   COMMAND POST                  0         124,838          0          -24,968            0          99,870
         SYSTEMS...........
            Operational                                         [0]        [-24,968]
            limitations of
            NOTM...........
   33   RADIO SYSTEMS......           0         279,680                                        0         279,680
   34   COMM SWITCHING &              0          36,649                                        0          36,649
         CONTROL SYSTEMS...
   35   COMM & ELEC                   0          83,971                                        0          83,971
         INFRASTRUCTURE
         SUPPORT...........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0           3,626                                        0           3,626
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        ADMINISTRATIVE
         VEHICLES
   36   COMMERCIAL CARGO              0          25,441                                        0          25,441
         VEHICLES..........
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
   37   MOTOR TRANSPORT               0          11,392                                        0          11,392
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   38   JOINT LIGHT                   0         607,011                                        0         607,011
         TACTICAL VEHICLE..
   39   FAMILY OF TACTICAL            0           2,393                                        0           2,393
         TRAILERS..........
   40   TRAILERS...........           0           6,540                                        0           6,540
        ENGINEER AND OTHER
         EQUIPMENT
   41   ENVIRONMENTAL                 0             496                                        0             496
         CONTROL EQUIP
         ASSORT............
   42   TACTICAL FUEL                 0              54                                        0              54
         SYSTEMS...........
   43   POWER EQUIPMENT               0          21,062                                        0          21,062
         ASSORTED..........
   44   AMPHIBIOUS SUPPORT            0           5,290                                        0           5,290
         EQUIPMENT.........
   45   EOD SYSTEMS........           0          47,854                                        0          47,854
        MATERIALS HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
   46   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0          28,306                                        0          28,306
         EQUIPMENT.........
        GENERAL PROPERTY
   47   FIELD MEDICAL                 0          33,513                                        0          33,513
         EQUIPMENT.........
   48   TRAINING DEVICES...           0          52,040          0          -10,408            0          41,632
            Excess to need.                                     [0]        [-10,408]
   49   FAMILY OF                     0          36,156                                        0          36,156
         CONSTRUCTION
         EQUIPMENT.........
   50   FAMILY OF                     0             606                                        0             606
         INTERNALLY
         TRANSPORTABLE VEH
         (ITV).............
        OTHER SUPPORT
   51   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          11,608                                        0          11,608
         MILLION...........
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   53   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          25,804                                        0          25,804
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT,           41       2,860,410          0         -113,476           41       2,746,934
         MARINE CORPS......
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        TACTICAL FORCES
    1   F-35...............          48       4,261,021         -1          -67,500           47       4,193,521
            Program                                            [-1]        [-67,500]
            Realignment....
    2   F-35 AP............           0         406,000                                        0         406,000
   18   O/A-X LIGHT ATTACK            0               0          0          350,000            0         350,000
         AIRCRAFT..........
            Procurement of                                      [0]        [350,000]
            OA-X aircraft
            and long lead
            materials......
        OTHER COMBAT
         AIRCRAFT
    3   C-135B.............           2         222,176                                        2         222,176
        TACTICAL AIRLIFT
    4   KC-46A TANKER......          15       2,559,911         -1         -247,900           14       2,312,011
            Interim                                             [0]       [-102,700]
            contractor
            support........
            Restore program                                    [-1]       [-145,200]
            accountability.
        OTHER AIRLIFT
    5   C-130J.............           0          35,858                                        0          35,858
    6   HC-130J............           1         129,437                                        1         129,437
    8   MC-130J............           6         770,201                                        6         770,201
    9   MC-130J AP.........           0         218,000                                        0         218,000
        HELICOPTERS
   11   COMBAT RESCUE                10         680,201                                       10         680,201
         HELICOPTER........
        MISSION SUPPORT
         AIRCRAFT
   13   CIVIL AIR PATROL A/           4           2,719                                        4           2,719
         C.................
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   14   TARGET DRONES......          48         139,053                                       48         139,053
   15   COMPASS CALL MODS..           1         108,113                                        1         108,113
   17   MQ-9...............           8         221,707          6          120,000           14         341,707
            Increase to                                         [6]        [120,000]
            accelerate
            Advanced Battle
            Management
            System.........
        STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
   19   B-2A...............           0          60,301                                        0          60,301
   20   B-1B...............           0          51,290                                        0          51,290
   21   B-52...............           0         105,519          0           -4,800            0         100,719
            Air Force                                           [0]        [-14,800]
            requested
            realignment....
            LRASM                                               [0]         [10,000]
            certification..
        TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
   23   A-10...............           0          98,720          0           65,000            0         163,720
            Additional                                          [0]         [65,000]
            replacement
            wings..........
   24   C-130J.............           0          10,831                                        0          10,831
   25   F-15...............           0         548,109                                        0         548,109
   26   F-16...............           0         324,323                                        0         324,323
   27   F-22A..............           0         250,710                                        0         250,710
   29   F-35 MODIFICATIONS.           0         247,271          0           50,000            0         297,271
            F-35A                                               [0]         [50,000]
            Modifications
            increase.......
   30   F-15 EPAW..........           0         147,685                                        0         147,685
   31   INCREMENT 3.2B.....           0           9,007                                        0           9,007
   33   KC-46A TANKER......           0           8,547                                        0           8,547
        AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
   34   C-5................           0          77,845                                        0          77,845
   36   C-17A..............           0         102,121                                        0         102,121
   37   C-21...............           0          17,516                                        0          17,516
   38   C-32A..............           0           4,537                                        0           4,537
   39   C-37A..............           0             419                                        0             419
        TRAINER AIRCRAFT
   41   GLIDER MODS........           0             137                                        0             137
   42   T-6................           0          22,550                                        0          22,550
   43   T-1................           0          21,952                                        0          21,952
   44   T-38...............           0          70,623                                        0          70,623
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   45   U-2 MODS...........           0          48,774                                        0          48,774
   46   KC-10A (ATCA)......           0          11,104                                        0          11,104
   47   C-12...............           0           4,900                                        0           4,900
   48   VC-25A MOD.........           0          36,938                                        0          36,938
   49   C-40...............           0             251                                        0             251
   50   C-130..............           0          22,094          0           74,000            0          96,094
            T56 Series 3.5                                      [0]         [74,000]
            Engine
            Enhancement
            packages.......
   51   C-130J MODS........           0         132,045                                        0         132,045
   52   C-135..............           0         113,076                                        0         113,076
   53   OC-135B............           0           5,913                                        0           5,913
   54   COMPASS CALL MODS..           0          49,885                                        0          49,885
   55   COMBAT FLIGHT                 0             499                                        0             499
         INSPECTION (CFIN).
   56   RC-135.............           0         394,532                                        0         394,532
   57   E-3................           0         133,906                                        0         133,906
   58   E-4................           0          67,858                                        0          67,858
   59   E-8................           0           9,919          0           25,000            0          34,919
            Central                                             [0]         [25,000]
            Computer
            upgrade design.
   60   AIRBORNE WARNING              0          57,780                                        0          57,780
         AND CNTR SYS
         (AWACS) 40/45.....
   61   FAMILY OF BEYOND              0          14,293                                        0          14,293
         LINE-OF-SIGHT
         TERMINALS.........
   62   H-1................           0           2,940                                        0           2,940
   63   H-60...............           0          55,466                                        0          55,466
   64   RQ-4 MODS..........           0          23,715                                        0          23,715
   65   HC/MC-130                     0          37,754                                        0          37,754
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   66   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0          62,010                                        0          62,010
   67   MQ-9 MODS..........           0         171,548                                        0         171,548
   69   CV-22 MODS.........           0          60,416                                        0          60,416
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   70   INITIAL SPARES/               0         956,408          0           50,000            0       1,006,408
         REPAIR PARTS......
            F-35A spares...                                     [0]         [50,000]
        COMMON SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   71   AIRCRAFT                      0          81,241                                        0          81,241
         REPLACEMENT
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
        POST PRODUCTION
         SUPPORT
   74   B-2A...............           0           1,763                                        0           1,763
   75   B-2B...............           0          35,861                                        0          35,861
   76   B-52...............           0          12,819                                        0          12,819
   77   C-17A..............           0          10,114                                        0          10,114
   79   F-15...............           0           2,545                                        0           2,545
   81   F-16...............           0          11,718                                        0          11,718
   82   F-22A..............           0          14,489                                        0          14,489
   83   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0           9,928                                        0           9,928
   84   RQ-4 POST                     0          40,641                                        0          40,641
         PRODUCTION CHARGES
        INDUSTRIAL
         PREPAREDNESS
   86   INDUSTRIAL                    0          17,378                                        0          17,378
         RESPONSIVENESS....
        WAR CONSUMABLES
   88   WAR CONSUMABLES....           0          29,342                                        0          29,342
        OTHER PRODUCTION
         CHARGES
   89   OTHER PRODUCTION              0       1,502,386                                        0       1,502,386
         CHARGES...........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0          28,278                                        0          28,278
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT              143      16,206,937          4          413,800          147      16,620,737
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        MISSILE
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        MISSILE REPLACEMENT
         EQUIPMENT--BALLIST
         IC
    1   MISSILE REPLACEMENT           0          36,786                                        0          36,786
         EQ-BALLISTIC......
        TACTICAL
    2   JOINT AIR-SURFACE           312         430,708                                      312         430,708
         STANDOFF MISSILE..
    3   LRASM0.............          12          44,185          3           10,200           15          54,385
            Restore                                             [3]         [10,200]
            reduction......
    4   SIDEWINDER (AIM-9X)         256         121,253                                      256         121,253
    5   AMRAAM.............         220         337,886                                      220         337,886
    6   PREDATOR HELLFIRE         1,338         113,765                                    1,338         113,765
         MISSILE...........
    7   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB       2,917         105,034                                    2,917         105,034
    8   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB         510         100,861          0           -8,000          510          92,861
         II................
            Unit price                                          [0]         [-8,000]
            adjustment.....
        INDUSTRIAL
         FACILITIES
    9   INDUSTR'L                     0             787                                        0             787
         PREPAREDNS/POL
         PREVENTION........
        CLASS IV
   10   ICBM FUZE MOD......           0          15,767                                        0          15,767
   11   ICBM FUZE MOD AP...           0           4,100                                        0           4,100
   12   MM III                        0         129,199                                        0         129,199
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   13   AGM-65D MAVERICK...           0             288                                        0             288
   14   AIR LAUNCH CRUISE             0          47,632                                        0          47,632
         MISSILE (ALCM)....
        MISSILE SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   16   REPLEN SPARES/                0          97,481                                        0          97,481
         REPAIR PARTS......
        SPECIAL PROGRAMS
   18   SPECIAL UPDATE                0         188,539                                        0         188,539
         PROGRAMS..........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0         895,183                                        0         895,183
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        TOTAL MISSILE             5,565       2,669,454          3            2,200        5,568       2,671,654
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        SPACE PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        SPACE PROGRAMS
    1   ADVANCED EHF.......           0          29,829                                        0          29,829
    2   AF SATELLITE COMM             0          35,400                                        0          35,400
         SYSTEM............
    3   COUNTERSPACE                  0           1,121                                        0           1,121
         SYSTEMS...........
    4   FAMILY OF BEYOND              0          27,867                                        0          27,867
         LINE-OF-SIGHT
         TERMINALS.........
    5   WIDEBAND GAPFILLER            0          61,606                                        0          61,606
         SATELLITES(SPACE).
    6   GENERAL INFORMATION           0           3,425                                        0           3,425
         TECH--SPACE.......
    7   GPS III SPACE                 0          69,386                                        0          69,386
         SEGMENT...........
    8   GLOBAL POSTIONING             0           2,181                                        0           2,181
         (SPACE)...........
    9   INTEG BROADCAST               0          16,445                                        0          16,445
         SERV..............
   10   SPACEBORNE EQUIP              0          31,895                                        0          31,895
         (COMSEC)..........
   12   MILSATCOM..........           0          11,265                                        0          11,265
   13   EVOLVED EXPENDABLE            0         709,981                                        0         709,981
         LAUNCH CAPABILITY.
   14   EVOLVED EXPENDABLE            5         994,555                                        5         994,555
         LAUNCH VEH(SPACE).
   15   SBIR HIGH (SPACE)..           0         138,397                                        0         138,397
   17   NUDET DETECTION               0           7,705                                        0           7,705
         SYSTEM............
   18   ROCKET SYSTEMS                0          47,609                                        0          47,609
         LAUNCH PROGRAM....
   19   SPACE FENCE........           0          51,361                                        0          51,361
   20   SPACE MODS.........           0         148,065                                        0         148,065
   21   SPACELIFT RANGE               0         117,637                                        0         117,637
         SYSTEM SPACE......
        SPARES
   22   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          21,812                                        0          21,812
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL SPACE                   5       2,527,542          0                0            5       2,527,542
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE
        ROCKETS
    1   ROCKETS............           0         345,911                                        0         345,911
        CARTRIDGES
    2   CARTRIDGES.........           0         163,840                                        0         163,840
        BOMBS
    3   PRACTICE BOMBS.....           0          20,876                                        0          20,876
    4   GENERAL PURPOSE               0         259,308                                        0         259,308
         BOMBS.............
    5   MASSIVE ORDNANCE              0          38,111                                        0          38,111
         PENETRATOR (MOP)..
    6   JOINT DIRECT ATTACK       7,899         234,198                                    7,899         234,198
         MUNITION..........
    7   B61................         250         109,292                                      250         109,292
    8   B61 AP.............           0          52,731                                        0          52,731
        OTHER ITEMS
    9   CAD/PAD............           0          51,455                                        0          51,455
   10   EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE            0           6,038                                        0           6,038
         DISPOSAL (EOD)....
   11   SPARES AND REPAIR             0             524                                        0             524
         PARTS.............
   12   MODIFICATIONS......           0           1,270                                        0           1,270
   13   ITEMS LESS THAN               0           4,604                                        0           4,604
         $5,000,000........
        FLARES
   15   FLARES.............           0         125,286                                        0         125,286
        FUZES
   16   FUZES..............           0         109,358                                        0         109,358
        SMALL ARMS
   17   SMALL ARMS.........           0          64,502                                        0          64,502
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT         8,149       1,587,304          0                0        8,149       1,587,304
         OF AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        PASSENGER CARRYING
         VEHICLES
    1   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           6,949                                        0           6,949
         VEHICLES..........
        CARGO AND UTILITY
         VEHICLES
    2   MEDIUM TACTICAL               0          36,002                                        0          36,002
         VEHICLE...........
    3   CAP VEHICLES.......           0           1,022                                        0           1,022
    4   CARGO AND UTILITY             0          42,696          0            7,183            0          49,879
         VEHICLES..........
            Procurement of                                      [0]          [7,183]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
        SPECIAL PURPOSE
         VEHICLES
    5   JOINT LIGHT                   0          30,145                                        0          30,145
         TACTICAL VEHICLE..
    6   SECURITY AND                  0           1,230          0            2,673            0           3,903
         TACTICAL VEHICLES.
            Procurement of                                      [0]          [2,673]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
    7   SPECIAL PURPOSE               0          43,003          0           10,690            0          53,693
         VEHICLES..........
            Procurement of                                      [0]         [10,690]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
        FIRE FIGHTING
         EQUIPMENT
    8   FIRE FIGHTING/CRASH           0          23,328          0            8,980            0          32,308
         RESCUE VEHICLES...
            Procurement of                                      [0]          [8,980]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
        MATERIALS HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
    9   MATERIALS HANDLING            0          11,537          0           19,772            0          31,309
         VEHICLES..........
            Procurement of                                      [0]         [19,772]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
        BASE MAINTENANCE
         SUPPORT
   10   RUNWAY SNOW REMOV             0          37,600          0            2,753            0          40,353
         AND CLEANING EQU..
            Procurement of                                      [0]          [2,753]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
   11   BASE MAINTENANCE              0         104,923                                        0         104,923
         SUPPORT VEHICLES..
        COMM SECURITY
         EQUIPMENT(COMSEC)
   12   COMSEC EQUIPMENT...           0         114,372                                        0         114,372
        INTELLIGENCE
         PROGRAMS
   13   INTERNATIONAL INTEL           0           8,290                                        0           8,290
         TECH &
         ARCHITECTURES.....
   14   INTELLIGENCE                  0           2,099                                        0           2,099
         TRAINING EQUIPMENT
   15   INTELLIGENCE COMM             0          37,415                                        0          37,415
         EQUIPMENT.........
        ELECTRONICS
         PROGRAMS
   16   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL           0          57,937                                        0          57,937
         & LANDING SYS.....
   18   BATTLE CONTROL                0           3,012                                        0           3,012
         SYSTEM--FIXED.....
   19   THEATER AIR CONTROL           0          19,989                                        0          19,989
         SYS IMPROVEMEN....
   20   WEATHER OBSERVATION           0          45,020                                        0          45,020
         FORECAST..........
   21   STRATEGIC COMMAND             0          32,836                                        0          32,836
         AND CONTROL.......
   22   CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN             0          12,454                                        0          12,454
         COMPLEX...........
   23   MISSION PLANNING              0          14,263                                        0          14,263
         SYSTEMS...........
   25   INTEGRATED STRAT              0           7,769                                        0           7,769
         PLAN & ANALY
         NETWORK (ISPAN)...
        SPCL COMM-
         ELECTRONICS
         PROJECTS
   26   GENERAL INFORMATION           0          40,450                                        0          40,450
         TECHNOLOGY........
   27   AF GLOBAL COMMAND &           0           6,619                                        0           6,619
         CONTROL SYS.......
   28   MOBILITY COMMAND              0          10,192                                        0          10,192
         AND CONTROL.......
   29   AIR FORCE PHYSICAL            0         159,313          0            2,002            0         161,315
         SECURITY SYSTEM...
            Procurement of                                      [0]          [2,002]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
   30   COMBAT TRAINING               0         132,675                                        0         132,675
         RANGES............
   31   MINIMUM ESSENTIAL             0         140,875                                        0         140,875
         EMERGENCY COMM N..
   32   WIDE AREA                     0          92,104                                        0          92,104
         SURVEILLANCE (WAS)
   33   C3 COUNTERMEASURES.           0          45,152                                        0          45,152
   34   GCSS-AF FOS........           0             483                                        0             483
   35   DEFENSE ENTERPRISE            0             802                                        0             802
         ACCOUNTING & MGT
         SYS...............
   36   MAINTENANCE REPAIR            0          12,207                                        0          12,207
         & OVERHAUL
         INITIATIVE........
   37   THEATER BATTLE MGT            0           7,644                                        0           7,644
         C2 SYSTEM.........
   38   AIR & SPACE                   0          40,066                                        0          40,066
         OPERATIONS CENTER
         (AOC).............
        AIR FORCE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   41   BASE INFORMATION              0          22,357                                        0          22,357
         TRANSPT INFRAST
         (BITI) WIRED......
   42   AFNET..............           0         102,836                                        0         102,836
   43   JOINT                         0           3,145                                        0           3,145
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SUPPORT ELEMENT
         (JCSE)............
   44   USCENTCOM..........           0          13,194                                        0          13,194
        ORGANIZATION AND
         BASE
   45   TACTICAL C-E                  0         161,231                                        0         161,231
         EQUIPMENT.........
   47   RADIO EQUIPMENT....           0          12,142                                        0          12,142
   48   CCTV/AUDIOVISUAL              0           6,505                                        0           6,505
         EQUIPMENT.........
   49   BASE COMM                     0         169,404                                        0         169,404
         INFRASTRUCTURE....
        MODIFICATIONS
   50   COMM ELECT MODS....           0          10,654                                        0          10,654
        PERSONAL SAFETY &
         RESCUE EQUIP
   51   PERSONAL SAFETY AND           0          51,906                                        0          51,906
         RESCUE EQUIPMENT..
        DEPOT PLANT+MTRLS
         HANDLING EQ
   52   MECHANIZED MATERIAL           0          88,298                                        0          88,298
         HANDLING EQUIP....
        BASE SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   53   BASE PROCURED                 0          17,031                                        0          17,031
         EQUIPMENT.........
   54   ENGINEERING AND EOD           0          82,635                                        0          82,635
         EQUIPMENT.........
   55   MOBILITY EQUIPMENT.           0           9,549                                        0           9,549
   56   BASE MAINTENANCE              0          24,005          0           24,043            0          48,048
         AND SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT.........
            Procurement of                                      [0]         [24,043]
            7 DABs for
            PACOM..........
        SPECIAL SUPPORT
         PROJECTS
   58   DARP RC135.........           0          26,262                                        0          26,262
   59   DCGS-AF............           0         448,290                                        0         448,290
   61   SPECIAL UPDATE                0         913,813                                        0         913,813
         PROGRAM...........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0      17,258,069                                        0      17,258,069
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        SPARES AND REPAIR
         PARTS
   63   SPARES AND REPAIR             0          86,365                                        0          86,365
         PARTS.............
        TOTAL OTHER                   0      20,890,164          0           78,096            0      20,968,260
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT,
         DEFENSE-WIDE
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         OSD
   43   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0          35,295                                        0          35,295
         OSD...............
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         NSA
   42   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0           5,403                                        0           5,403
         SECURITY PROGRAM
         (ISSP)............
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         WHS
   46   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0             497                                        0             497
         WHS...............
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DISA
    7   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0          21,590          0           20,000            0          41,590
         SECURITY..........
            Sharkseer......                                     [0]         [20,000]
    8   TELEPORT PROGRAM...           0          33,905                                        0          33,905
    9   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0          27,886                                        0          27,886
         MILLION...........
   10   NET CENTRIC                   0           1,017                                        0           1,017
         ENTERPRISE
         SERVICES (NCES)...
   11   DEFENSE INFORMATION           0         150,674                                        0         150,674
         SYSTEM NETWORK....
   13   WHITE HOUSE                   0          94,610                                        0          94,610
         COMMUNICATION
         AGENCY............
   14   SENIOR LEADERSHIP             0         197,246                                        0         197,246
         ENTERPRISE........
   15   JOINT REGIONAL                0         140,338                                        0         140,338
         SECURITY STACKS
         (JRSS)............
   16   JOINT SERVICE                 0         107,182          0          -19,500            0          87,682
         PROVIDER..........
            General                                             [0]        [-19,500]
            reduction......
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DLA
   18   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0           5,225                                        0           5,225
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DSS
   21   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0           1,196                                        0           1,196
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DCAA
    1   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0           2,542                                        0           2,542
         MILLION...........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         TJS
   44   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0           4,360                                        0           4,360
         TJS...............
   45   MAJOR EQUIPMENT,              0             904                                        0             904
         TJS--CE2T2........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         MISSILE DEFENSE
         AGENCY
   26   THAAD..............          82         874,068                                       82         874,068
   27   GROUND BASED                 14         409,000                                       14         409,000
         MIDCOURSE.........
   28   GROUND BASED                  0         115,000                                        0         115,000
         MIDCOURSE AP......
   29   AEGIS BMD..........          43         593,488                                       43         593,488
   30   AEGIS BMD AP.......           0         115,206                                        0         115,206
   31   BMDS AN/TPY-2                 0          13,185                                        0          13,185
         RADARS............
   32   ISRAELI PROGRAMS...           0          80,000                                        0          80,000
   33   SHORT RANGE                   0          50,000                                        0          50,000
         BALLISTIC MISSILE
         DEFENSE (SRBMD)...
   34   AEGIS ASHORE PHASE            0          15,000                                        0          15,000
         III...............
   35   IRON DOME..........           0          70,000                                        0          70,000
   36   AEGIS BMD HARDWARE           28          97,057                                       28          97,057
         AND SOFTWARE......
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DHRA
    3   PERSONNEL                     0          10,630                                        0          10,630
         ADMINISTRATION....
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DEFENSE THREAT
         REDUCTION AGENCY
   23   VEHICLES...........           0             207                                        0             207
   24   OTHER MAJOR                   0           5,592                                        0           5,592
         EQUIPMENT.........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DODEA
   20   AUTOMATION/                   0           1,723                                        0           1,723
         EDUCATIONAL
         SUPPORT &
         LOGISTICS.........
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DCMA
    2   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0           3,873                                        0           3,873
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DMACT
   19   MAJOR EQUIPMENT....           0          13,106                                        0          13,106
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0         589,691                                        0         589,691
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        AVIATION PROGRAMS
   50   ROTARY WING                   0         148,351                                        0         148,351
         UPGRADES AND
         SUSTAINMENT.......
   51   UNMANNED ISR.......           0          57,708                                        0          57,708
   52   NON-STANDARD                  0          18,731                                        0          18,731
         AVIATION..........
   53   U-28...............           0          32,301                                        0          32,301
   54   MH-47 CHINOOK......           0         131,033                                        0         131,033
   55   CV-22 MODIFICATION.           0          32,529                                        0          32,529
   56   MQ-9 UNMANNED                 0          24,621                                        0          24,621
         AERIAL VEHICLE....
   57   PRECISION STRIKE              0         226,965                                        0         226,965
         PACKAGE...........
   58   AC/MC-130J.........           0         165,813                                        0         165,813
   59   C-130 MODIFICATIONS           0          80,274                                        0          80,274
        SHIPBUILDING
   60   UNDERWATER SYSTEMS.           0         136,723                                        0         136,723
        AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
   61   ORDNANCE ITEMS SURFACE
         SYSTEMS...........
   64   OTHER ITEMS ASSAULT
         MISSILE SYS
    8   JAVELIN (AAWS-M)             75          31,120          0                            75          31,120
         SYSTEM SUMMARY....
   11   GUIDED MLRS ROCKET        7,584         624,500          0                         7,584         624,500
         (GMLRS)...........
   13   HIGH MOBILITY                24         171,138          0                            24         171,138
         ARTILLERY ROCKET
         SYSTEM (HIMARS....
   14   LETHAL MINIATURE          1,318         112,973          0                         1,318         112,973
         AERIAL MISSILE
         SYSTEM (LMAMS.....
        MODIFICATIONS
   16   ATACMS MODS........           0         225,580          0                             0         225,580
   21   MLRS MODS..........           0         122,000          0                             0         122,000
        TOTAL MISSILE            11,746       1,802,351          0                0       11,746       1,802,351
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         W&TCV, ARMY
        TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    1   BRADLEY PROGRAM....          61         205,000          0                            61         205,000
    2   ARMORED MULTI                66         230,359          0                            66         230,359
         PURPOSE VEHICLE
         (AMPV)............
        MODIFICATION OF
         TRACKED COMBAT
         VEHICLES
    6   BRADLEY PROGRAM               0          50,000          0                             0          50,000
         (MOD).............
    8   PALADIN INTEGRATED            6          67,000          0                             6          67,000
         MANAGEMENT (PIM)..
    9   IMPROVED RECOVERY            12          42,354          0                            12          42,354
         VEHICLE (M88A2
         HERCULES).........
   14   M1 ABRAMS TANK                0          34,000          0                             0          34,000
         (MOD).............
   15   ABRAMS UPGRADE               40         455,000          0                            40         455,000
         PROGRAM...........
        WEAPONS & OTHER
         COMBAT VEHICLES
   18   M240 MEDIUM MACHINE           0             126          0                             0             126
         GUN (7.62MM)......
   22   MORTAR SYSTEMS.....           0          11,842          0                             0          11,842
   25   CARBINE............           0           1,800          0                             0           1,800
   27   COMMON REMOTELY               0           3,378          0                             0           3,378
         OPERATED WEAPONS
         STATION...........
        MOD OF WEAPONS AND
         OTHER COMBAT VEH
   32   M2 50 CAL MACHINE             0           4,920          0                             0           4,920
         GUN MODS..........
   34   M240 MEDIUM MACHINE           0               7          0                             0               7
         GUN MODS..........
        SUPPORT EQUIPMENT &
         FACILITIES
   39   ITEMS LESS THAN               0           1,397          0                             0           1,397
         $5.0M (WOCV-WTCV).
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           185       1,107,183          0                0          185       1,107,183
         OF W&TCV, ARMY....
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, ARMY
        SMALL/MEDIUM CAL
         AMMUNITION
    1   CTG, 5.56MM, ALL              0           3,392          0                             0           3,392
         TYPES.............
    2   CTG, 7.62MM, ALL              0              40          0                             0              40
         TYPES.............
    3   CTG, HANDGUN, ALL             0              17          0                             0              17
         TYPES.............
    4   CTG, .50 CAL, ALL             0             189          0                             0             189
         TYPES.............
    5   CTG, 20MM, ALL                0           1,605          0                             0           1,605
         TYPES.............
    7   CTG, 30MM, ALL                0          25,000          0                             0          25,000
         TYPES.............
        MORTAR AMMUNITION
    9   60MM MORTAR, ALL              0             218          0                             0             218
         TYPES.............
   10   81MM MORTAR, ALL              0             484          0                             0             484
         TYPES.............
        ARTILLERY
         AMMUNITION
   14   ARTILLERY                     0          79,400          0                             0          79,400
         PROJECTILE, 155MM,
         ALL TYPES.........
   15   PROJ 155MM EXTENDED         973          72,985          0                           973          72,985
         RANGE M982........
   16   ARTILLERY                     0          63,900          0                             0          63,900
         PROPELLANTS, FUZES
         AND PRIMERS, ALL..
        ROCKETS
   18   SHOULDER LAUNCHED             0          22,242          0                             0          22,242
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
   19   ROCKET, HYDRA 70,             0          39,974          0                             0          39,974
         ALL TYPES.........
        OTHER AMMUNITION
   21   DEMOLITION                    0               5          0                             0               5
         MUNITIONS, ALL
         TYPES.............
   22   GRENADES, ALL TYPES           0               8          0                             0               8
        MISCELLANEOUS
   27   ITEMS LESS THAN $5            0              66          0                             0              66
         MILLION (AMMO)....
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT           973         309,525          0                0          973         309,525
         OF AMMUNITION,
         ARMY..............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         ARMY
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
    2   SEMITRAILERS,                 0           8,000          0                             0           8,000
         FLATBED:..........
    3   AMBULANCE, 4                  0          20,770          0                             0          20,770
         LITTER, 5/4 TON,
         4X4...............
   10   FAMILY OF HEAVY             596         115,400          0                           596         115,400
         TACTICAL VEHICLES
         (FHTV)............
   12   HVY EXPANDED MOBILE           0           6,682          0                             0           6,682
         TACTICAL TRUCK EXT
         SERV..............
   13   TACTICAL WHEELED              0          50,000          0                             0          50,000
         VEHICLE PROTECTION
         KITS..............
   14   MODIFICATION OF IN            0         186,377          0                             0         186,377
         SVC EQUIP.........
        COMM--SATELLITE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   28   TRANSPORTABLE                 0           7,100          0                             0           7,100
         TACTICAL COMMAND
         COMMUNICATIONS....
        COMM--COMBAT
         COMMUNICATIONS
   37   JOINT TACTICAL                0           1,560          0                             0           1,560
         RADIO SYSTEM......
   42   TRACTOR RIDE.......           0          13,190          0                             0          13,190
   45   TACTICAL                      0           9,549          0                             0           9,549
         COMMUNICATIONS AND
         PROTECTIVE SYSTEM.
   47   COTS COMMUNICATIONS           0          22,000          0                             0          22,000
         EQUIPMENT.........
        COMM--INTELLIGENCE
         COMM
   50   CI AUTOMATION                 0           9,800          0                             0           9,800
         ARCHITECTURE (MIP)
        INFORMATION
         SECURITY
   55   COMMUNICATIONS                0               3          0                             0               3
         SECURITY (COMSEC).
        COMM--LONG HAUL
         COMMUNICATIONS
   59   BASE SUPPORT                  0             690          0                             0             690
         COMMUNICATIONS....
        COMM--BASE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   60   INFORMATION SYSTEMS           0           8,750          0                             0           8,750
   63   INSTALLATION INFO             0          60,337          0                             0          60,337
         INFRASTRUCTURE MOD
         PROGRAM...........
        ELECT EQUIP--TACT
         INT REL ACT
         (TIARA)
   68   DCGS-A (MIP).......           0          37,806          0                             0          37,806
   70   TROJAN (MIP).......           0           6,926          0                             0           6,926
   71   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0           2,011          0                             0           2,011
         (INTEL SPT) (MIP).
   75   BIOMETRIC TACTICAL            0           5,370          0                             0           5,370
         COLLECTION DEVICES
         (MIP).............
        ELECT EQUIP--
         ELECTRONIC WARFARE
         (EW)
   80   CREW...............           0          42,651          0                             0          42,651
   81   FAMILY OF                     0          20,050          0                             0          20,050
         PERSISTENT
         SURVEILLANCE CAP.
         (MIP).............
   82   COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/          0          12,974          0                             0          12,974
         SECURITY
         COUNTERMEASURES...
        ELECT EQUIP--
         TACTICAL SURV.
         (TAC SURV)
   85   NIGHT VISION                  0             463          0                             0             463
         DEVICES...........
   86   LONG RANGE ADVANCED           0           2,861          0                             0           2,861
         SCOUT SURVEILLANCE
         SYSTEM............
   87   SMALL TACTICAL                0              60          0                             0              60
         OPTICAL RIFLE
         MOUNTED MLRF......
   88   RADIATION                     0              11          0                             0              11
         MONITORING SYSTEMS
   90   INDIRECT FIRE                 0         251,062          0                             0         251,062
         PROTECTION FAMILY
         OF SYSTEMS........
   91   FAMILY OF WEAPON              0             525          0                             0             525
         SIGHTS (FWS)......
   94   JOINT BATTLE                  0          26,146          0                             0          26,146
         COMMAND--PLATFORM
         (JBC-P)...........
   96   MOD OF IN-SVC EQUIP           0           4,050          0                             0           4,050
         (LLDR)............
   97   COMPUTER                      0             960          0                             0             960
         BALLISTICS: LHMBC
         XM32..............
   98   MORTAR FIRE CONTROL           0           7,660          0                             0           7,660
         SYSTEM............
   99   COUNTERFIRE RADARS.           0         165,200          0                             0         165,200
        ELECT EQUIP--
         AUTOMATION
  112   AUTOMATED DATA                0          28,475          0                             0          28,475
         PROCESSING EQUIP..
        CHEMICAL DEFENSIVE
         EQUIPMENT
  121   PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS.           0              27          0                             0              27
  122   FAMILY OF NON-                0          20,200          0                             0          20,200
         LETHAL EQUIPMENT
         (FNLE)............
  123   BASE DEFENSE                  0          39,200          0                             0          39,200
         SYSTEMS (BDS).....
  124   CBRN DEFENSE.......           0           2,317          0                             0           2,317
        ENGINEER (NON-
         CONSTRUCTION)
         EQUIPMENT
  129   GRND STANDOFF MINE            0          16,000          0                             0          16,000
         DETECTN SYSM
         (GSTAMIDS)........
  130   AREA MINE DETECTION           0               1          0                             0               1
         SYSTEM (AMDS).....
  132   ROBOTIC COMBAT                0           4,850          0                             0           4,850
         SUPPORT SYSTEM
         (RCSS)............
  136   REMOTE DEMOLITION             0               1          0                             0               1
         SYSTEMS...........
        COMBAT SERVICE
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  139   HEATERS AND ECU'S..           0             270          0                             0             270
  141   PERSONNEL RECOVERY            0           4,300          0                             0           4,300
         SUPPORT SYSTEM
         (PRSS)............
  142   GROUND SOLDIER                0           1,725          0                             0           1,725
         SYSTEM............
  144   FORCE PROVIDER.....           0          55,800          0                             0          55,800
  145   FIELD FEEDING                 0           1,035          0                             0           1,035
         EQUIPMENT.........
  146   CARGO AERIAL DEL &            0           1,980          0                             0           1,980
         PERSONNEL
         PARACHUTE SYSTEM..
        MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
  151   COMBAT SUPPORT                0          17,527          0                             0          17,527
         MEDICAL...........
        MAINTENANCE
         EQUIPMENT
  153   ITEMS LESS THAN               0             268          0                             0             268
         $5.0M (MAINT EQ)..
        CONSTRUCTION
         EQUIPMENT
  159   HIGH MOBILITY                 0          25,700          0                             0          25,700
         ENGINEER EXCAVATOR
         (HMEE)............
        GENERATORS
  165   GENERATORS AND                0             569          0                             0             569
         ASSOCIATED EQUIP..
        TEST MEASURE AND
         DIG EQUIPMENT
         (TMD)
  174   INTEGRATED FAMILY             0           9,495          0                             0           9,495
         OF TEST EQUIPMENT
         (IFTE)............
        OTHER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  176   M25 STABILIZED                0              33          0                             0              33
         BINOCULAR.........
  177   RAPID EQUIPPING               0          18,000          0                             0          18,000
         SOLDIER SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT.........
  178   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0           6,000          0                             0           6,000
         SYSTEMS (OPA3)....
  179   BASE LEVEL COMMON             0           2,080          0                             0           2,080
         EQUIPMENT.........
  180   MODIFICATION OF IN-           0          19,200          0                             0          19,200
         SVC EQUIPMENT (OPA-
         3)................
        TOTAL OTHER                 596       1,382,047          0                0          596       1,382,047
         PROCUREMENT, ARMY.
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   25   STUASL0 UAV........           0          35,065          0                             0          35,065
        MODIFICATION OF
         AIRCRAFT
   32   SH-60 SERIES.......           0           4,858          0                             0           4,858
   34   EP-3 SERIES........           0           5,380          0                             0           5,380
   44   SPECIAL PROJECT               0           2,165          0                             0           2,165
         AIRCRAFT..........
   49   COMMON ECM                    0           9,820          0                             0           9,820
         EQUIPMENT.........
   51   COMMON DEFENSIVE              0           3,206          0                             0           3,206
         WEAPON SYSTEM.....
   61   QRC................           0           2,410          0                             0           2,410
   63   RQ-21 SERIES.......           0          17,215          0                             0          17,215
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT                0          80,119          0                0            0          80,119
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        WEAPONS
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY
        STRATEGIC MISSILES
    3   TOMAHAWK...........           0                         69           82,800           69          82,800
            Buy-back                                           [69]         [82,800]
            Tomahawk.......
        TACTICAL MISSILES
    4   AMRAAM.............           1           1,183          0                             1           1,183
    5   SIDEWINDER.........           1             381          0                             1             381
   12   HELLFIRE...........          23           1,530          0                            23           1,530
   15   AERIAL TARGETS.....           0           6,500          0                             0           6,500
        GUNS AND GUN MOUNTS
   35   SMALL ARMS AND                0           1,540          0                             0           1,540
         WEAPONS...........
        MODIFICATION OF
         GUNS AND GUN
         MOUNTS
   38   GUN MOUNT MODS.....           0           3,000          0                             0           3,000
        TOTAL WEAPONS                25          14,134         69           82,800           94          96,934
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMO, NAVY & MC
        NAVY AMMUNITION
    1   GENERAL PURPOSE               0          62,530          0                             0          62,530
         BOMBS.............
    2   JDAM...............       3,906          93,019          0                         3,906          93,019
    3   AIRBORNE ROCKETS,             0           2,163          0                             0           2,163
         ALL TYPES.........
    4   MACHINE GUN                   0           5,000          0                             0           5,000
         AMMUNITION........
    6   CARTRIDGES & CART             0           5,334          0                             0           5,334
         ACTUATED DEVICES..
    7   AIR EXPENDABLE                0          36,580          0                             0          36,580
         COUNTERMEASURES...
    8   JATOS..............           0             747          0                             0             747
   11   OTHER SHIP GUN                0           2,538          0                             0           2,538
         AMMUNITION........
   13   PYROTECHNIC AND               0           1,807          0                             0           1,807
         DEMOLITION........
   15   AMMUNITION LESS               0           2,229          0           -2,000            0             229
         THAN $5 MILLION...
            Excess balances                                     [0]         [-2,000]
        MARINE CORPS
         AMMUNITION
   19   MORTARS............           0           2,018          0                             0           2,018
   21   DIRECT SUPPORT                0             632          0                             0             632
         MUNITIONS.........
   22   INFANTRY WEAPONS              0             779          0                             0             779
         AMMUNITION........
   26   COMBAT SUPPORT                0             164          0                             0             164
         MUNITIONS.........
   29   ARTILLERY MUNITIONS           0          31,001          0                             0          31,001
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT         3,906         246,541          0           -2,000        3,906         244,541
         OF AMMO, NAVY & MC
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         NAVY
        OTHER SHIPBOARD
         EQUIPMENT
   21   UNDERWATER EOD                0           9,200          0                             0           9,200
         PROGRAMS..........
        SMALL BOATS
   28   STANDARD BOATS.....           0          19,060          0                             0          19,060
        ASW ELECTRONIC
         EQUIPMENT
   43   FIXED SURVEILLANCE            0          56,950          0                             0          56,950
         SYSTEM............
        SATELLITE
         COMMUNICATIONS
   77   SATELLITE                     0           3,200          0                             0           3,200
         COMMUNICATIONS
         SYSTEMS...........
        CRYPTOLOGIC
         EQUIPMENT
   82   CRYPTOLOGIC                   0           2,000          0                             0           2,000
         COMMUNICATIONS
         EQUIP.............
        SONOBUOYS
   88   SONOBUOYS--ALL                0          21,156          0                             0          21,156
         TYPES.............
        OTHER ORDNANCE
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  104   EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE            0          33,580          0                             0          33,580
         DISPOSAL EQUIP....
        CIVIL ENGINEERING
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
  108   PASSENGER CARRYING            0             170          0                             0             170
         VEHICLES..........
  109   GENERAL PURPOSE               0             400          0                             0             400
         TRUCKS............
  111   FIRE FIGHTING                 0             770          0                             0             770
         EQUIPMENT.........
  112   TACTICAL VEHICLES..           0           7,298          0                             0           7,298
        SUPPLY SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  118   FIRST DESTINATION             0             500          0                             0             500
         TRANSPORTATION....
        COMMAND SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
  123   MEDICAL SUPPORT               0           6,500          0                             0           6,500
         EQUIPMENT.........
  128   ENVIRONMENTAL                 0           2,200          0                             0           2,200
         SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.
  129   PHYSICAL SECURITY             0          19,389          0                             0          19,389
         EQUIPMENT.........
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0           4,800          0                             0           4,800
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        TOTAL OTHER                   0         187,173          0                0            0         187,173
         PROCUREMENT, NAVY.
 
        PROCUREMENT, MARINE
         CORPS
        INTELL/COMM
         EQUIPMENT (NON-
         TEL)
   22   FIRE SUPPORT SYSTEM           0           5,583          0                             0           5,583
        TACTICAL VEHICLES
   37   MOTOR TRANSPORT               0          44,440          0                             0          44,440
         MODIFICATIONS.....
        ENGINEER AND OTHER
         EQUIPMENT
   45   EOD SYSTEMS........           0           8,000          0                             0           8,000
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT,            0          58,023          0                0            0          58,023
         MARINE CORPS......
 
        AIRCRAFT
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        OTHER AIRLIFT
    6   HC-130J............           1         100,000          0                             1         100,000
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   17   MQ-9...............          21         339,740          0                            21         339,740
   18   RQ-20B PUMA........           0          13,500          0                             0          13,500
        STRATEGIC AIRCRAFT
   20   B-1B...............           0           4,000          0                             0           4,000
   22   LARGE AIRCRAFT                0         149,778          0                             0         149,778
         INFRARED
         COUNTERMEASURES...
        TACTICAL AIRCRAFT
   23   A-10...............           0          10,350          0                             0          10,350
        OTHER AIRCRAFT
   45   U-2 MODS...........           0           7,900          0                             0           7,900
   54   COMPASS CALL MODS..           0          36,400          0                             0          36,400
   59   E-8................           0          13,000          0                             0          13,000
   63   H-60...............           0          40,560          0                             0          40,560
   65   HC/MC-130                     0          87,900          0                             0          87,900
         MODIFICATIONS.....
   66   OTHER AIRCRAFT.....           0          53,731          0                             0          53,731
   68   MQ-9 UAS PAYLOADS..           0          16,000          0                             0          16,000
        AIRCRAFT SPARES AND
         REPAIR PARTS
   70   INITIAL SPARES/               0          91,500          0                             0          91,500
         REPAIR PARTS......
        COMMON SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   71   AIRCRAFT                      0          32,529          0                             0          32,529
         REPLACEMENT
         SUPPORT EQUIP.....
   72   OTHER PRODUCTION              0          22,000          0                             0          22,000
         CHARGES...........
        TOTAL AIRCRAFT               22       1,018,888          0                0           22       1,018,888
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        MISSILE
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE
        TACTICAL
    2   JOINT AIR-SURFACE            48          61,600         19           22,800           67          84,400
         STANDOFF MISSILE..
            Buy-back JASSM-                                    [19]         [22,800]
            ER.............
    5   AMRAAM.............           2           2,600          0                             2           2,600
    6   PREDATOR HELLFIRE         3,000         255,000          0                         3,000         255,000
         MISSILE...........
    7   SMALL DIAMETER BOMB       3,909         140,724          0                         3,909         140,724
        CLASS IV
   13   AGM-65D MAVERICK...           0          33,602          0                             0          33,602
        TOTAL MISSILE             6,959         493,526         19           22,800        6,978         516,326
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT OF
         AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE
        CARTRIDGES
    2   CARTRIDGES.........           0          29,587          0                             0          29,587
        BOMBS
    4   GENERAL PURPOSE               0         551,862          0                             0         551,862
         BOMBS.............
    6   JOINT DIRECT ATTACK      28,101         738,451          0                        28,101         738,451
         MUNITION..........
        FLARES
   15   FLARES.............           0          12,116          0                             0          12,116
        FUZES
   16   FUZES..............           0          81,000          0                             0          81,000
        SMALL ARMS
   17   SMALL ARMS.........           0           8,500          0                             0           8,500
        TOTAL PROCUREMENT        28,101       1,421,516          0                0       28,101       1,421,516
         OF AMMUNITION, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        OTHER PROCUREMENT,
         AIR FORCE
        PASSENGER CARRYING
         VEHICLES
    1   PASSENGER CARRYING            0           9,680          0                             0           9,680
         VEHICLES..........
        CARGO AND UTILITY
         VEHICLES
    2   MEDIUM TACTICAL               0           9,680          0                             0           9,680
         VEHICLE...........
    4   CARGO AND UTILITY             0          19,680          0                             0          19,680
         VEHICLES..........
        SPECIAL PURPOSE
         VEHICLES
    6   SECURITY AND                  0          24,880          0                             0          24,880
         TACTICAL VEHICLES.
    7   SPECIAL PURPOSE               0          34,680          0                             0          34,680
         VEHICLES..........
        FIRE FIGHTING
         EQUIPMENT
    8   FIRE FIGHTING/CRASH           0           9,736          0                             0           9,736
         RESCUE VEHICLES...
        MATERIALS HANDLING
         EQUIPMENT
    9   MATERIALS HANDLING            0          24,680          0                             0          24,680
         VEHICLES..........
        BASE MAINTENANCE
         SUPPORT
   10   RUNWAY SNOW REMOV             0           9,680          0                             0           9,680
         AND CLEANING EQU..
   11   BASE MAINTENANCE              0           9,680          0                             0           9,680
         SUPPORT VEHICLES..
        INTELLIGENCE
         PROGRAMS
   15   INTELLIGENCE COMM             0           6,156          0                             0           6,156
         EQUIPMENT.........
        ELECTRONICS
         PROGRAMS
   16   AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL           0          56,884          0                             0          56,884
         & LANDING SYS.....
        SPCL COMM-
         ELECTRONICS
         PROJECTS
   29   AIR FORCE PHYSICAL            0          46,236          0                             0          46,236
         SECURITY SYSTEM...
   37   THEATER BATTLE MGT            0           2,500          0                             0           2,500
         C2 SYSTEM.........
        ORGANIZATION AND
         BASE
   45   TACTICAL C-E                  0          27,911          0                             0          27,911
         EQUIPMENT.........
        PERSONAL SAFETY &
         RESCUE EQUIP
   51   PERSONAL SAFETY AND           0          13,600          0                             0          13,600
         RESCUE EQUIPMENT..
        BASE SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT
   53   BASE PROCURED                 0          28,800          0                             0          28,800
         EQUIPMENT.........
   54   ENGINEERING AND EOD           0          53,500          0                             0          53,500
         EQUIPMENT.........
   55   MOBILITY EQUIPMENT.           0          78,562          0                             0          78,562
   56   BASE MAINTENANCE              0          28,055          0                             0          28,055
         AND SUPPORT
         EQUIPMENT.........
        SPECIAL SUPPORT
         PROJECTS
   59   DCGS-AF............           0           2,000          0                             0           2,000
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0       3,229,364          0                             0       3,229,364
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        TOTAL OTHER                   0       3,725,944          0                0            0       3,725,944
         PROCUREMENT, AIR
         FORCE.............
 
        PROCUREMENT,
         DEFENSE-WIDE
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DISA
    8   TELEPORT PROGRAM...           0           3,800          0                             0           3,800
   17   DEFENSE INFORMATION           0          12,000          0                             0          12,000
         SYSTEMS NETWORK...
        MAJOR EQUIPMENT,
         DEFENSE THREAT
         REDUCTION AGENCY
   25   COUNTER IED &                 0           5,534          0                             0           5,534
         IMPROVISED THREAT
         TECHNOLOGIES......
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS           0          41,559          0                             0          41,559
        CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
        AVIATION PROGRAMS
   47   MANNED ISR.........           0           5,000          0                             0           5,000
   48   MC-12..............           0           5,000          0                             0           5,000
   49   MH-60 BLACKHAWK....           0          27,600          0                             0          27,600
   51   UNMANNED ISR.......           0          17,000          0                             0          17,000
   52   NON-STANDARD                  0          13,000          0                             0          13,000
         AVIATION..........
   53   U-28...............           0          51,722          0                             0          51,722
   54   MH-47 CHINOOK......           0          36,500          0                             0          36,500
        AMMUNITION PROGRAMS
   61   ORDNANCE ITEMS                                  [-5,000]
                                    engine and drives
                                    coordination.
   10    0602270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   25,571                               25,571
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   11    0602303A               MISSILE TECHNOLOGY.......            50,183                               50,183
   12    0602307A               ADVANCED WEAPONS                     29,502                               29,502
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   13    0602308A               ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND                28,500            10,000             38,500
                                 SIMULATION.
         .....................      Pilot for cyber                                   [10,000]
                                    modeling and
                                    simulation.
   14    0602601A               COMBAT VEHICLE AND                   70,450                               70,450
                                 AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY.
   15    0602618A               BALLISTICS TECHNOLOGY....            75,541                               75,541
   16    0602622A               CHEMICAL, SMOKE AND                   5,032                                5,032
                                 EQUIPMENT DEFEATING
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   17    0602623A               JOINT SERVICE SMALL ARMS             12,394                               12,394
                                 PROGRAM.
   18    0602624A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                40,444             2,500             42,944
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Advanced warheads                                  [2,500]
                                    technology.
   19    0602705A               ELECTRONICS AND                      58,283                               58,283
                                 ELECTRONIC DEVICES.
   20    0602709A               NIGHT VISION TECHNOLOGY..            29,582                               29,582
   21    0602712A               COUNTERMINE SYSTEMS......            21,244                               21,244
   22    0602716A               HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING            24,131             2,500             26,631
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      General program                                    [2,500]
                                    increase.
   23    0602720A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                13,242                               13,242
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   24    0602782A               COMMAND, CONTROL,                    55,003            -5,000             50,003
                                 COMMUNICATIONS
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      General Program                                   [-5,000]
                                    Reduction.
   25    0602783A               COMPUTER AND SOFTWARE                14,958                               14,958
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   26    0602784A               MILITARY ENGINEERING                 78,159                               78,159
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   27    0602785A               MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/                  21,862                               21,862
                                 TRAINING TECHNOLOGY.
   28    0602786A               WARFIGHTER TECHNOLOGY....            40,566                               40,566
   29    0602787A               MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.......            90,075                               90,075
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH           919,609            10,000            929,609
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   30    0603001A               WARFIGHTER ADVANCED                  39,338                               39,338
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   31    0603002A               MEDICAL ADVANCED                     62,496                               62,496
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   32    0603003A               AVIATION ADVANCED                   124,958            -5,000            119,958
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Platform design and                               [-5,000]
                                    structures systems.
   33    0603004A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS               102,686            20,000            122,686
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Accelerate ERCA gun..                             [20,000]
   34    0603005A               COMBAT VEHICLE AND                  119,739            72,500            192,239
                                 AUTOMOTIVE ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Modular scalable                                   [2,500]
                                    powertrain.
         .....................      Prototype Next                                    [70,000]
                                    Generation Combat
                                    Vehicle.
   35    0603006A               SPACE APPLICATION                    13,000                               13,000
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   36    0603007A               MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND               8,044                                8,044
                                 TRAINING ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   37    0603009A               TRACTOR HIKE.............            22,631                               22,631
   38    0603015A               NEXT GENERATION TRAINING             25,682                               25,682
                                 & SIMULATION SYSTEMS.
   40    0603125A               COMBATING TERRORISM--                 3,762                                3,762
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   41    0603130A               TRACTOR NAIL.............             4,896                                4,896
   42    0603131A               TRACTOR EGGS.............             6,041                                6,041
   43    0603270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   31,491                               31,491
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   44    0603313A               MISSILE AND ROCKET                   61,132                               61,132
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
   45    0603322A               TRACTOR CAGE.............            16,845                               16,845
   46    0603461A               HIGH PERFORMANCE                    183,322             5,000            188,322
                                 COMPUTING MODERNIZATION
                                 PROGRAM.
         .....................      Program increase.....                              [5,000]
   47    0603606A               LANDMINE WARFARE AND                 11,104                               11,104
                                 BARRIER ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   48    0603607A               JOINT SERVICE SMALL ARMS              5,885                                5,885
                                 PROGRAM.
   49    0603710A               NIGHT VISION ADVANCED                61,376                               61,376
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   50    0603728A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                 9,136                                9,136
                                 TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
   51    0603734A               MILITARY ENGINEERING                 25,864            13,000             38,864
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Minor MILCON.........                              [8,000]
         .....................      Program increase.....                              [5,000]
   52    0603772A               ADVANCED TACTICAL                    34,883             2,500             37,383
                                 COMPUTER SCIENCE AND
                                 SENSOR TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      PNT research.........                              [2,500]
   53    0603794A               C3 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY...            52,387            -5,000             47,387
         .....................      General program                                   [-5,000]
                                    decrease.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 1,026,698           103,000          1,129,698
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   54    0603305A               ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE                  10,777                               10,777
                                 SYSTEMS INTEGRATION.
   56    0603327A               AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE              42,802                               42,802
                                 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
   57    0603619A               LANDMINE WARFARE AND                 45,254                               45,254
                                 BARRIER--ADV DEV.
   58    0603627A               SMOKE, OBSCURANT AND                 22,700                               22,700
                                 TARGET DEFEATING SYS-ADV
                                 DEV.
   59    0603639A               TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER              41,974            14,000             55,974
                                 AMMUNITION.
         .....................      Army UPL: Test and                                [14,000]
                                    evaluation of M999
                                    155mm.
   60    0603645A               ARMORED SYSTEM                      119,395                              119,395
                                 MODERNIZATION--ADV DEV.
   61    0603747A               SOLDIER SUPPORT AND                   8,746                                8,746
                                 SURVIVABILITY.
   62    0603766A               TACTICAL ELECTRONIC                  35,667             8,000             43,667
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--ADV
                                 DEV.
         .....................      ISR capabilities to                                [8,000]
                                    support long range
                                    field artillery.
   63    0603774A               NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS                  7,350                                7,350
                                 ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
   64    0603779A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                14,749                               14,749
                                 TECHNOLOGY--DEM/VAL.
   65    0603790A               NATO RESEARCH AND                     3,687                                3,687
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   66    0603801A               AVIATION--ADV DEV........            10,793                               10,793
   67    0603804A               LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER               14,248                               14,248
                                 EQUIPMENT--ADV DEV.
   68    0603807A               MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV.            34,284                               34,284
   69    0603827A               SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED            18,044                               18,044
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   70    0604017A               ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT.....            95,660                               95,660
   71    0604020A               CROSS FUNCTIONAL TEAM                38,000                               38,000
                                 (CFT) ADVANCED
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPING.
   72    0604100A               ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES.             9,765                                9,765
   73    0604113A               FUTURE TACTICAL UNMANNED             12,393                               12,393
                                 AIRCRAFT SYSTEM (FTUAS).
   74    0604114A               LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE              120,374                              120,374
                                 DEFENSE (LTAMD) SENSOR.
   75    0604115A               TECHNOLOGY MATURATION                95,347                               95,347
                                 INITIATIVES.
   76    0604117A               MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR            95,085                               95,085
                                 DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
   77    0604118A               TRACTOR BEAM.............            52,894                               52,894
   79    0604121A               SYNTHETIC TRAINING                   77,939                               77,939
                                 ENVIRONMENT REFINEMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPING.
   80    0604319A               INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION             51,030            30,000             81,030
                                 CAPABILITY INCREMENT 2-
                                 INTERCEPT (IFPC2).
         .....................      Accelerate delivery                               [30,000]
                                    and capacity for IFPC.
   81    0305251A               CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS                65,817             5,000             70,817
                                 FORCES AND FORCE SUPPORT.
         .....................      Army Cyber Center of                               [5,000]
                                    Excellence.
   82    1206120A               ASSURED POSITIONING,                146,300                              146,300
                                 NAVIGATION AND TIMING
                                 (PNT).
   83    1206308A               ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS                   38,319                               38,319
                                 INTEGRATION.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 1,329,393            57,000          1,386,393
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION
   84    0604201A               AIRCRAFT AVIONICS........            32,293                               32,293
   85    0604270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   78,699                               78,699
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   88    0604328A               TRACTOR CAGE.............            17,050                               17,050
   89    0604601A               INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS.            83,155                               83,155
   90    0604604A               MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES.             3,704                                3,704
   91    0604611A               JAVELIN..................            10,623                               10,623
   92    0604622A               FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL             11,950                               11,950
                                 VEHICLES.
   93    0604633A               AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL......            12,347                               12,347
   95    0604642A               LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED                8,212                                8,212
                                 VEHICLES.
   96    0604645A               ARMORED SYSTEMS                     393,613           -75,000            318,613
                                 MODERNIZATION (ASM)--ENG
                                 DEV.
         .....................      Mobile Protected                                 [-75,000]
                                    Firepower decrease.
   97    0604710A               NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG           139,614                              139,614
                                 DEV.
   98    0604713A               COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING,             4,507                                4,507
                                 AND EQUIPMENT.
   99    0604715A               NON-SYSTEM TRAINING                  49,436                               49,436
                                 DEVICES--ENG DEV.
  100    0604741A               AIR DEFENSE COMMAND,                 95,172                               95,172
                                 CONTROL AND
                                 INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
  101    0604742A               CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION              22,628                               22,628
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
  102    0604746A               AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT             13,297                               13,297
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  103    0604760A               DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE              9,145                                9,145
                                 SIMULATIONS (DIS)--ENG
                                 DEV.
  104    0604768A               BRILLIANT ANTI-ARMOR                  9,894                                9,894
                                 SUBMUNITION (BAT).
  105    0604780A               COMBINED ARMS TACTICAL               21,964                               21,964
                                 TRAINER (CATT) CORE.
  106    0604798A               BRIGADE ANALYSIS,                    49,288                               49,288
                                 INTEGRATION AND
                                 EVALUATION.
  107    0604802A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--             183,100                              183,100
                                 ENG DEV.
  108    0604804A               LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER               79,706                               79,706
                                 EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
  109    0604805A               COMMAND, CONTROL,                    15,970                               15,970
                                 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--
                                 ENG DEV.
  110    0604807A               MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL             44,542                               44,542
                                 BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE
                                 EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV.
  111    0604808A               LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER--           50,817                               50,817
                                 ENG DEV.
  112    0604818A               ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND &             178,693                              178,693
                                 CONTROL HARDWARE &
                                 SOFTWARE.
  113    0604820A               RADAR DEVELOPMENT........            39,338                               39,338
  114    0604822A               GENERAL FUND ENTERPRISE              37,851                               37,851
                                 BUSINESS SYSTEM (GFEBS).
  115    0604823A               FIREFINDER...............            45,473                               45,473
  116    0604827A               SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR             10,395                               10,395
                                 DEM/VAL.
  117    0604852A               SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY               69,204             9,000             78,204
                                 ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS--EMD.
         .....................      Suite of Vehicle                                   [9,000]
                                    Protection Systems.
  118    0604854A               ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD...             1,781                                1,781
  119    0605013A               INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY              113,758                              113,758
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  120    0605018A               INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND            166,603                              166,603
                                 PAY SYSTEM-ARMY (IPPS-A).
  121    0605028A               ARMORED MULTI-PURPOSE               118,239                              118,239
                                 VEHICLE (AMPV).
  122    0605029A               INTEGRATED GROUND                     3,211                                3,211
                                 SECURITY SURVEILLANCE
                                 RESPONSE CAPABILITY
                                 (IGSSR-C).
  123    0605030A               JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               15,889                               15,889
                                 CENTER (JTNC).
  124    0605031A               JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK               41,972                               41,972
                                 (JTN).
  125    0605032A               TRACTOR TIRE.............            41,166                               41,166
  126    0605033A               GROUND-BASED OPERATIONAL              5,175                                5,175
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM--
                                 EXPEDITIONARY (GBOSS-E).
  127    0605034A               TACTICAL SECURITY SYSTEM              4,496                                4,496
                                 (TSS).
  128    0605035A               COMMON INFRARED                      51,178                               51,178
                                 COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
  129    0605036A               COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS            11,311                               11,311
                                 DESTRUCTION (CWMD).
  131    0605038A               NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL                   17,154                               17,154
                                 CHEMICAL RECONNAISSANCE
                                 VEHICLE (NBCRV) SENSOR
                                 SUITE.
  132    0605041A               DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL                 36,626                               36,626
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  133    0605042A               TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO                3,829                                3,829
                                 SYSTEMS (LOW-TIER).
  134    0605047A               CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM..            41,928           -41,928                  0
         .....................      Duplication concern                              [-41,928]
                                    in contract writing
                                    systems.
  135    0605049A               MISSILE WARNING SYSTEM               28,276                               28,276
                                 MODERNIZATION (MWSM).
  136    0605051A               AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY               21,965                               21,965
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  137    0605052A               INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION            157,710                              157,710
                                 CAPABILITY INC 2--BLOCK
                                 1.
  138    0605053A               GROUND ROBOTICS..........            86,167                               86,167
  139    0605054A               EMERGING TECHNOLOGY                  42,866                               42,866
                                 INITIATIVES.
  140    0605380A               AMF JOINT TACTICAL RADIO             15,984                               15,984
                                 SYSTEM (JTRS).
  141    0605450A               JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND                  11,773                               11,773
                                 MISSILE (JAGM).
  142    0605457A               ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND             277,607                              277,607
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD).
  143    0605766A               NATIONAL CAPABILITIES                12,340                               12,340
                                 INTEGRATION (MIP).
  144    0605812A               JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL                  2,686                                2,686
                                 VEHICLE (JLTV)
                                 ENGINEERING AND
                                 MANUFACTURING
                                 DEVELOPMENT PH.
  145    0605830A               AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT               2,706                                2,706
                                 EQUIPMENT.
  147    0303032A               TROJAN--RH12.............             4,521                                4,521
  150    0304270A               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                    8,922                                8,922
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  151    1205117A               TRACTOR BEARS............            23,170                               23,170
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                   3,192,689          -107,928          3,084,761
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  152    0604256A               THREAT SIMULATOR                     12,835                               12,835
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  153    0604258A               TARGET SYSTEMS                       12,135                               12,135
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  154    0604759A               MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.....            82,996            25,000            107,996
         .....................      Program increase.....                             [25,000]
  155    0605103A               RAND ARROYO CENTER.......            19,821                               19,821
  156    0605301A               ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL.....           246,574                              246,574
  157    0605326A               CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION             30,430                               30,430
                                 PROGRAM.
  159    0605601A               ARMY TEST RANGES AND                305,759            15,000            320,759
                                 FACILITIES.
         .....................      Increase to help                                  [15,000]
                                    manage directed
                                    energy workloads.
  160    0605602A               ARMY TECHNICAL TEST                  62,379                               62,379
                                 INSTRUMENTATION AND
                                 TARGETS.
  161    0605604A               SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY              40,496                               40,496
                                 ANALYSIS.
  162    0605606A               AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION...             3,941                                3,941
  163    0605702A               METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT TO             9,767                                9,767
                                 RDT&E ACTIVITIES.
  164    0605706A               MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS            21,226                               21,226
  165    0605709A               EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN              13,026                               13,026
                                 ITEMS.
  166    0605712A               SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL               52,718                               52,718
                                 TESTING.
  167    0605716A               ARMY EVALUATION CENTER...            57,049                               57,049
  168    0605718A               ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD             2,801                                2,801
                                 COLLABORATION & INTEG.
  169    0605801A               PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES...            60,942                               60,942
  170    0605803A               TECHNICAL INFORMATION                29,050                               29,050
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  171    0605805A               MUNITIONS                            42,332                               42,332
                                 STANDARDIZATION,
                                 EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.
  172    0605857A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                 3,216                                3,216
                                 TECHNOLOGY MGMT SUPPORT.
  173    0605898A               ARMY DIRECT REPORT                   54,145                               54,145
                                 HEADQUARTERS--R&D - MHA.
  174    0606001A               MILITARY GROUND-BASED                 4,896                                4,896
                                 CREW TECHNOLOGY.
  175    0606002A               RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC              63,011                               63,011
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE TEST
                                 SITE.
  176    0606003A               COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN                2,636                                2,636
                                 INTEL MODERNIZATION.
  177    0606942A               ASSESSMENTS AND                      88,300                               88,300
                                 EVALUATIONS CYBER
                                 VULNERABILITIES.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL RDT&E MANAGEMENT         1,322,481            40,000          1,362,481
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......             5,955                                5,955
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  181    0603778A               MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT              8,886                                8,886
                                 PROGRAM.
  182    0603813A               TRACTOR PULL.............             4,067                                4,067
  183    0605024A               ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY                4,254                                4,254
                                 SUPPORT.
  184    0607131A               WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                16,022                               16,022
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                 PROGRAMS.
  185    0607133A               TRACTOR SMOKE............             4,577                                4,577
  186    0607134A               LONG RANGE PRECISION                186,475                              186,475
                                 FIRES (LRPF).
  187    0607135A               APACHE PRODUCT                       31,049                               31,049
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  188    0607136A               BLACKHAWK PRODUCT                    35,240                               35,240
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  189    0607137A               CHINOOK PRODUCT                     157,822                              157,822
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  190    0607138A               FIXED WING PRODUCT                    4,189                                4,189
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  191    0607139A               IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE             192,637                              192,637
                                 PROGRAM.
  194    0607142A               AVIATION ROCKET SYSTEM               60,860                               60,860
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT AND
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  195    0607143A               UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM             52,019                               52,019
                                 UNIVERSAL PRODUCTS.
  196    0607665A               FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS.....             2,400                                2,400
  197    0607865A               PATRIOT PRODUCT                      65,369                               65,369
                                 IMPROVEMENT.
  198    0202429A               AEROSTAT JOINT PROJECT--                  1                                    1
                                 COCOM EXERCISE.
  199    0203728A               JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP                 30,954                               30,954
                                 OPERATION COORDINATION
                                 SYSTEM (JADOCS).
  200    0203735A               COMBAT VEHICLE                      411,927                              411,927
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
  202    0203743A               155MM SELF-PROPELLED                 40,676                               40,676
                                 HOWITZER IMPROVEMENTS.
  203    0203744A               AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS/              17,706                               17,706
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                 PROGRAMS.
  204    0203752A               AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT               146                                  146
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  205    0203758A               DIGITIZATION.............             6,316                                6,316
  206    0203801A               MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE                   1,643                                1,643
                                 PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                 PROGRAM.
  207    0203802A               OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT                 4,947                                4,947
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS.
  208    0203808A               TRACTOR CARD.............            34,050                               34,050
  210    0205410A               MATERIALS HANDLING                    1,464                                1,464
                                 EQUIPMENT.
  211    0205412A               ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY                   249                                  249
                                 TECHNOLOGY--OPERATIONAL
                                 SYSTEM DEV.
  212    0205456A               LOWER TIER AIR AND                   79,283                               79,283
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE (AMD)
                                 SYSTEM.
  213    0205778A               GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH              154,102                              154,102
                                 ROCKET SYSTEM (GMLRS).
  216    0303028A               SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE            12,280                               12,280
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  217    0303140A               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  68,533                               68,533
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  218    0303141A               GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                68,619                               68,619
                                 SYSTEM.
  220    0303150A               WWMCCS/GLOBAL COMMAND AND             2,034                                2,034
                                 CONTROL SYSTEM.
  223    0305172A               COMBINED ADVANCED                     1,500                                1,500
                                 APPLICATIONS.
  224    0305179A               INTEGRATED BROADCAST                    450                                  450
                                 SERVICE (IBS).
  225    0305204A               TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL              6,000                                6,000
                                 VEHICLES.
  226    0305206A               AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE              12,416                               12,416
                                 SYSTEMS.
  227    0305208A               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           38,667                               38,667
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  229    0305232A               RQ-11 UAV................             6,180                                6,180
  230    0305233A               RQ-7 UAV.................            12,863                               12,863
  231    0307665A               BIOMETRICS ENABLED                    4,310                                4,310
                                 INTELLIGENCE.
  233    0708045A               END ITEM INDUSTRIAL                  53,958                               53,958
                                 PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES.
  234    1203142A               SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT            12,119                               12,119
                                 (SPACE).
  235    1208053A               JOINT TACTICAL GROUND                 7,400                                7,400
                                 SYSTEM.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              1,922,614                 0          1,922,614
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  10,159,379           119,572         10,278,951
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, ARMY.
         .....................
         .....................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                 TEST & EVAL, NAVY
         .....................  BASIC RESEARCH
    1    0601103N               UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                 119,433             5,000            124,433
                                 INITIATIVES.
         .....................      Basic research                                     [5,000]
                                    program increase.
    2    0601152N               IN-HOUSE LABORATORY                  19,237                               19,237
                                 INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
    3    0601153N               DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES           458,708            10,000            468,708
         .....................      Basic research                                     [5,000]
                                    program increase.
         .....................      Quantum information                                [5,000]
                                    sciences.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH..           597,378            15,000            612,378
         .....................
         .....................  APPLIED RESEARCH
    4    0602114N               POWER PROJECTION APPLIED             14,643             2,500             17,143
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      Directed energy......                              [2,500]
    5    0602123N               FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED            124,049                              124,049
                                 RESEARCH.
    6    0602131M               MARINE CORPS LANDING                 59,607                               59,607
                                 FORCE TECHNOLOGY.
    7    0602235N               COMMON PICTURE APPLIED               36,348                               36,348
                                 RESEARCH.
    8    0602236N               WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT               56,197            -7,500             48,697
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
         .....................      ONR global growth....                             [-7,500]
    9    0602271N               ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS              83,800                               83,800
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
   10    0602435N               OCEAN WARFIGHTING                    42,998                               42,998
                                 ENVIRONMENT APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
   11    0602651M               JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS              6,349                                6,349
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
   12    0602747N               UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED             58,049            20,000             78,049
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      General program                                   [20,000]
                                    increase.
   13    0602750N               FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES           147,771                              147,771
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
   14    0602782N               MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY               37,545                               37,545
                                 WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH.
   15    0602792N               INNOVATIVE NAVAL                    159,697             5,000            164,697
                                 PROTOTYPES (INP) APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      Directed energy and                                [5,000]
                                    electronic warfare/
                                    unmanned and
                                    autonomous systems.
   16    0602861N               SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY               64,418                               64,418
                                 MANAGEMENT--ONR FIELD
                                 ACITIVITIES.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH           891,471            20,000            911,471
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   19    0603123N               FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED             2,423                                2,423
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   21    0603640M               USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY            150,245           -10,000            140,245
                                 DEMONSTRATION (ATD).
         .....................      Unjustified growth...                            [-10,000]
   22    0603651M               JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS             13,313                               13,313
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   23    0603671N               NAVY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY            131,502                              131,502
                                 DEVELOPMENT (ATD).
   24    0603673N               FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES           232,996                              232,996
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   25    0603680N               MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             58,657                               58,657
                                 PROGRAM.
   30    0603801N               INNOVATIVE NAVAL                    161,859             4,500            166,359
                                 PROTOTYPES (INP)
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      DE & EW/unmanned and                               [4,500]
                                    autonomous systems.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   750,995            -5,500            745,495
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   31    0603207N               AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL                   29,747                               29,747
                                 APPLICATIONS.
   32    0603216N               AVIATION SURVIVABILITY...             7,050                                7,050
   33    0603251N               AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.........               793                                  793
   34    0603254N               ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT..             7,058                                7,058
   35    0603261N               TACTICAL AIRBORNE                     3,540                                3,540
                                 RECONNAISSANCE.
   36    0603382N               ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS              59,741             2,500             62,241
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Locust/HCUS/INP                                    [2,500]
                                    Transition.
   37    0603502N               SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER            62,727           -26,000             36,727
                                 MINE COUNTERMEASURES.
         .....................      Barracuda EDMs ahead                             [-26,000]
                                    of PDR and CDR.
   38    0603506N               SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO                  8,570                                8,570
                                 DEFENSE.
   39    0603512N               CARRIER SYSTEMS                       5,440                                5,440
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   40    0603525N               PILOT FISH...............           162,222                              162,222
   41    0603527N               RETRACT LARCH............            11,745                               11,745
   42    0603536N               RETRACT JUNIPER..........           114,265                              114,265
   43    0603542N               RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL.....               740                                  740
   44    0603553N               SURFACE ASW..............             1,122                                1,122
   45    0603561N               ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM           109,086             3,500            112,586
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Advanced submarine                                 [3,500]
                                    propulsion
                                    development.
   46    0603562N               SUBMARINE TACTICAL                    9,374                                9,374
                                 WARFARE SYSTEMS.
   47    0603563N               SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED                89,419            18,000            107,419
                                 DESIGN.
         .....................      CHAMP acceleration...                             [18,000]
   48    0603564N               SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN &            13,348                               13,348
                                 FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
   49    0603570N               ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER              256,137                              256,137
                                 SYSTEMS.
   50    0603573N               ADVANCED SURFACE                     22,109                               22,109
                                 MACHINERY SYSTEMS.
   51    0603576N               CHALK EAGLE..............            29,744                               29,744
   52    0603581N               LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP                 27,997                               27,997
                                 (LCS).
   53    0603582N               COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION            16,351                               16,351
   54    0603595N               OHIO REPLACEMENT.........           514,846                              514,846
   55    0603596N               LCS MISSION MODULES......           103,633            29,400            133,033
         .....................      Project 2552: Align                               [-5,000]
                                    with deferred LCS-6
                                    SSMM test.
         .....................      Transfer from PE                                  [16,700]
                                    64028N.
         .....................      Transfer from PE                                  [10,100]
                                    64126N.
         .....................      Transfer from PE                                   [7,600]
                                    64127N.
   56    0603597N               AUTOMATED TEST AND                    7,931                                7,931
                                 ANALYSIS.
   57    0603599N               FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT......           134,772                              134,772
   58    0603609N               CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS...             9,307                                9,307
   60    0603635M               MARINE CORPS GROUND                   1,828                                1,828
                                 COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM.
   61    0603654N               JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE              43,148                               43,148
                                 ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
   62    0603713N               OCEAN ENGINEERING                     5,915                                5,915
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   63    0603721N               ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.            19,811                               19,811
   64    0603724N               NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM......            25,656                               25,656
   65    0603725N               FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT...             5,301                                5,301
   66    0603734N               CHALK CORAL..............           267,985                              267,985
   67    0603739N               NAVY LOGISTIC                         4,059                                4,059
                                 PRODUCTIVITY.
   68    0603746N               RETRACT MAPLE............           377,878                              377,878
   69    0603748N               LINK PLUMERIA............           381,770                              381,770
   70    0603751N               RETRACT ELM..............            60,535                               60,535
   73    0603790N               NATO RESEARCH AND                     9,652                                9,652
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   74    0603795N               LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY...            15,529           -15,529
         .....................      Program delay and no                             [-15,529]
                                    GLGP EMD FYDP funding.
   75    0603851M               JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS             27,581                               27,581
                                 TESTING.
   76    0603860N               JOINT PRECISION APPROACH            101,566                              101,566
                                 AND LANDING SYSTEMS--DEM/
                                 VAL.
   77    0603925N               DIRECTED ENERGY AND                 223,344                              223,344
                                 ELECTRIC WEAPON SYSTEMS.
   78    0604014N               F/A -18 INFRARED SEARCH             108,700            24,000            132,700
                                 AND TRACK (IRST).
         .....................      IRST block II risk                                [24,000]
                                    reduction.
   79    0604027N               DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE...            26,691                               26,691
   80    0604028N               SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED            16,717           -16,717
                                 UNDERSEA VEHICLES.
         .....................      Transfer to PE 63596N                            [-16,717]
   81    0604029N               UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE            30,187                               30,187
                                 CORE TECHNOLOGIES.
   82    0604030N               RAPID PROTOTYPING,                   48,796                               48,796
                                 EXPERIMENTATION AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION..
   83    0604031N               LARGE UNMANNED UNDERSEA              92,613           -21,200             71,413
                                 VEHICLES.
         .....................      Early to need........                            [-21,200]
   84    0604112N               GERALD R. FORD CLASS                 58,121                               58,121
                                 NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER
                                 (CVN 78--80).
   86    0604126N               LITTORAL AIRBORNE MCM....            17,622           -10,100              7,522
         .....................      Transfer to PE 63596N                            [-10,100]
   87    0604127N               SURFACE MINE                         18,154            -7,600             10,554
                                 COUNTERMEASURES.
         .....................      Transfer to PE 63596N                             [-7,600]
   88    0604272N               TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL             47,278                               47,278
                                 INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES
                                 (TADIRCM).
   90    0604289M               NEXT GENERATION LOGISTICS            11,081                               11,081
   92    0604320M               RAPID TECHNOLOGY                      7,107                                7,107
                                 CAPABILITY PROTOTYPE.
   93    0604454N               LX (R)...................             5,549                                5,549
   94    0604536N               ADVANCED UNDERSEA                    87,669                               87,669
                                 PROTOTYPING.
   95    0604659N               PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS            132,818                              132,818
                                 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
   96    0604707N               SPACE AND ELECTRONIC                  7,230                                7,230
                                 WARFARE (SEW)
                                 ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING
                                 SUPPORT.
   97    0604786N               OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE              143,062                              143,062
                                 WARFARE WEAPON
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   99    0303354N               ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT--             8,889                                8,889
                                 MIP.
  100    0304240M               ADVANCED TACTICAL                    25,291                               25,291
                                 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
  101    0304240N               ADVANCED TACTICAL                     9,300                                9,300
                                 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.
  102    0304270N               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                      466                                  466
                                 DEVELOPMENT--MIP.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 4,293,713           -19,746          4,273,967
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION
  103    0603208N               TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT.            12,798                               12,798
  104    0604212N               OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT...            32,128                               32,128
  105    0604214M               AV-8B AIRCRAFT--ENG DEV..            46,363           -16,200             30,163
         .....................      Lacks operational                                [-16,200]
                                    justification/need.
  107    0604215N               STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT....             3,771                                3,771
  108    0604216N               MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER             16,611                               16,611
                                 UPGRADE DEVELOPMENT.
  109    0604218N               AIR/OCEAN EQUIPMENT                  17,368                               17,368
                                 ENGINEERING.
  110    0604221N               P-3 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM             2,134                                2,134
  111    0604230N               WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM...             9,729                                9,729
  112    0604231N               TACTICAL COMMAND SYSTEM..            57,688                               57,688
  113    0604234N               ADVANCED HAWKEYE.........           223,565                              223,565
  114    0604245M               H-1 UPGRADES.............            58,097                               58,097
  116    0604261N               ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS..            42,485                               42,485
  117    0604262N               V-22A....................           143,079                              143,079
  118    0604264N               AIR CREW SYSTEMS                     20,980            10,000             30,980
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Increase to advance                               [10,000]
                                    aircrew physiological
                                    monitoring.
  119    0604269N               EA-18....................           147,419            95,300            242,719
         .....................      UPL--EA-18G Advanced                              [95,300]
                                    Modes / Cognitive EW.
  120    0604270N               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                   89,824            31,600            121,424
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      UPL--EA-18G Offensive                             [31,600]
                                    Airborne Electronic
                                    Attack Special
                                    Mission Pod.
  121    0604273M               EXECUTIVE HELO                      245,064                              245,064
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  123    0604274N               NEXT GENERATION JAMMER              459,529                              459,529
                                 (NGJ).
  124    0604280N               JOINT TACTICAL RADIO                  3,272                                3,272
                                 SYSTEM--NAVY (JTRS-NAVY).
  125    0604282N               NEXT GENERATION JAMMER              115,253                              115,253
                                 (NGJ) INCREMENT II.
  126    0604307N               SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT            397,403                              397,403
                                 SYSTEM ENGINEERING.
  127    0604311N               LPD-17 CLASS SYSTEMS                    939            50,000             50,939
                                 INTEGRATION.
         .....................      Mk 41 VLS integration                             [50,000]
  128    0604329N               SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)           104,448                              104,448
  129    0604366N               STANDARD MISSILE                    165,881            19,000            184,881
                                 IMPROVEMENTS.
         .....................      Navy UPL: SM-6 Blk 1B                             [19,000]
                                    21" rocket motor.
  130    0604373N               AIRBORNE MCM.............            10,831                               10,831
  131    0604378N               NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE                33,429                               33,429
                                 CONTROL--COUNTER AIR
                                 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
  132    0604501N               ADVANCED ABOVE WATER                 35,635                               35,635
                                 SENSORS.
  133    0604503N               SSN-688 AND TRIDENT                 126,932                              126,932
                                 MODERNIZATION.
  134    0604504N               AIR CONTROL..............            62,448                               62,448
  135    0604512N               SHIPBOARD AVIATION                    9,710                                9,710
                                 SYSTEMS.
  136    0604518N               COMBAT INFORMATION CENTER            19,303                               19,303
                                 CONVERSION.
  137    0604522N               AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE              27,059                               27,059
                                 RADAR (AMDR) SYSTEM.
  138    0604530N               ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR             184,106                              184,106
                                 (AAG).
  139    0604558N               NEW DESIGN SSN...........           148,233                              148,233
  140    0604562N               SUBMARINE TACTICAL                   60,824                               60,824
                                 WARFARE SYSTEM.
  141    0604567N               SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/                60,062             6,000             66,062
                                 LIVE FIRE T&E.
         .....................      Planning to support                                [6,000]
                                    FY21 award of LHA-9.
  142    0604574N               NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER                4,642                                4,642
                                 RESOURCES.
  144    0604601N               MINE DEVELOPMENT.........            25,756                               25,756
  145    0604610N               LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO                  95,147                               95,147
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  146    0604654N               JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE               7,107                                7,107
                                 ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
  147    0604703N               PERSONNEL, TRAINING,                  6,539                                6,539
                                 SIMULATION, AND HUMAN
                                 FACTORS.
  148    0604727N               JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON                   441                                  441
                                 SYSTEMS.
  149    0604755N               SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT           180,391                              180,391
                                 & CONTROL).
  150    0604756N               SHIP SELF DEFENSE                   178,538                              178,538
                                 (ENGAGE: HARD KILL).
  151    0604757N               SHIP SELF DEFENSE                   120,507                              120,507
                                 (ENGAGE: SOFT KILL/EW).
  152    0604761N               INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING.            29,715                               29,715
  153    0604771N               MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT......             8,095                                8,095
  154    0604777N               NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM.....           121,026                              121,026
  155    0604800M               JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                 66,566                               66,566
                                 (JSF)--EMD.
  156    0604800N               JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                 65,494                               65,494
                                 (JSF)--EMD.
  159    0605013M               INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               14,005                               14,005
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  160    0605013N               INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY              268,567           -90,100            178,467
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Duplication concern                              [-26,300]
                                    in contract writing
                                    systems.
         .....................      Lengthy delivery                                 [-63,800]
                                    timelines for Navy
                                    Personnel and Pay
                                    System.
  161    0605024N               ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY                5,618                                5,618
                                 SUPPORT.
  162    0605212M               CH-53K RDTE..............           326,945                              326,945
  164    0605215N               MISSION PLANNING.........            32,714                               32,714
  165    0605217N               COMMON AVIONICS..........            51,486                               51,486
  166    0605220N               SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR               1,444                                1,444
                                 (SSC).
  167    0605327N               T-AO 205 CLASS...........             1,298                                1,298
  168    0605414N               UNMANNED CARRIER AVIATION           718,942                              718,942
                                 (UCA).
  169    0605450M               JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND                   6,759                                6,759
                                 MISSILE (JAGM).
  171    0605500N               MULTI-MISSION MARITIME               37,296                               37,296
                                 AIRCRAFT (MMA).
  172    0605504N               MULTI-MISSION MARITIME              160,389                              160,389
                                 (MMA) INCREMENT III.
  173    0605611M               MARINE CORPS ASSAULT                 98,223                               98,223
                                 VEHICLES SYSTEM
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
  174    0605813M               JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL                  2,260                                2,260
                                 VEHICLE (JLTV) SYSTEM
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
  175    0204202N               DDG-1000.................           161,264                              161,264
  180    0304785N               TACTICAL CRYPTOLOGIC                 44,098                               44,098
                                 SYSTEMS.
  182    0306250M               CYBER OPERATIONS                      6,808                                6,808
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                   6,042,480           105,600          6,148,080
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  183    0604256N               THREAT SIMULATOR                     94,576                               94,576
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  184    0604258N               TARGET SYSTEMS                       10,981                               10,981
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  185    0604759N               MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.....            77,014                               77,014
  186    0605126N               JOINT THEATER AIR AND                    48                                   48
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE
                                 ORGANIZATION.
  187    0605152N               STUDIES AND ANALYSIS                  3,942                                3,942
                                 SUPPORT--NAVY.
  188    0605154N               CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES            48,797                               48,797
  189    0605285N               NEXT GENERATION FIGHTER..             5,000                                5,000
  191    0605804N               TECHNICAL INFORMATION                 1,029                                1,029
                                 SERVICES.
  192    0605853N               MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL &              87,565            -9,000             78,565
                                 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.
         .....................      Insufficient budget                               [-9,000]
                                    justification.
  193    0605856N               STRATEGIC TECHNICAL                   4,231                                4,231
                                 SUPPORT.
  194    0605861N               RDT&E SCIENCE AND                     1,072                                1,072
                                 TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT.
  195    0605863N               RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT              97,471                               97,471
                                 SUPPORT.
  196    0605864N               TEST AND EVALUATION                 373,834                              373,834
                                 SUPPORT.
  197    0605865N               OPERATIONAL TEST AND                 21,554                               21,554
                                 EVALUATION CAPABILITY.
  198    0605866N               NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC            16,227                               16,227
                                 WARFARE (SEW) SUPPORT.
  200    0605873M               MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE            24,303                               24,303
                                 SUPPORT.
  201    0605898N               MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.......            43,262                               43,262
  202    0606355N               WARFARE INNOVATION                   41,918                               41,918
                                 MANAGEMENT.
  203    0606942M               ASSESSMENTS AND                       7,000                                7,000
                                 EVALUATIONS CYBER
                                 VULNERABILITIES.
  204    0606942N               ASSESSMENTS AND                      48,800                               48,800
                                 EVALUATIONS CYBER
                                 VULNERABILITIES.
  205    0305327N               INSIDER THREAT...........             1,682                                1,682
  206    0902498N               MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS               1,579                                1,579
                                 (DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT
                                 ACTIVITIES).
  208    1206867N               SEW SURVEILLANCE/                     8,684                                8,684
                                 RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT               1,020,569            -9,000          1,011,569
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......         1,549,503                            1,549,503
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  210    0604227N               HARPOON MODIFICATIONS....             5,426                                5,426
  211    0604840M               F-35 C2D2................           259,122                              259,122
  212    0604840N               F-35 C2D2................           252,360                              252,360
  213    0607658N               COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT              130,515                              130,515
                                 CAPABILITY (CEC).
  214    0607700N               DEPLOYABLE JOINT COMMAND              3,127                                3,127
                                 AND CONTROL.
  215    0101221N               STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS             157,679                              157,679
                                 SYSTEM SUPPORT.
  216    0101224N               SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY             43,198                               43,198
                                 PROGRAM.
  217    0101226N               SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC                   11,311                               11,311
                                 WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.
  218    0101402N               NAVY STRATEGIC                       39,313                               39,313
                                 COMMUNICATIONS.
  219    0204136N               F/A-18 SQUADRONS.........           193,086                              193,086
  220    0204163N               FLEET TELECOMMUNICATIONS             25,014                               25,014
                                 (TACTICAL).
  221    0204228N               SURFACE SUPPORT..........            11,661                               11,661
  222    0204229N               TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK               282,395             8,700            291,095
                                 MISSION PLANNING CENTER
                                 (TMPC).
         .....................      Restore MST to                                     [8,700]
                                    maintain 2020 IOC.
  223    0204311N               INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE              36,959            35,000             71,959
                                 SYSTEM.
         .....................      Additional TRAPS                                  [35,000]
                                    units.
  224    0204313N               SHIP-TOWED ARRAY                     15,454                               15,454
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS.
  225    0204413N               AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL                   6,073                                6,073
                                 SUPPORT UNITS
                                 (DISPLACEMENT CRAFT).
  226    0204460M               GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED             45,029                               45,029
                                 RADAR (G/ATOR).
  227    0204571N               CONSOLIDATED TRAINING               104,903                              104,903
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
  228    0204574N               CRYPTOLOGIC DIRECT                    4,544                                4,544
                                 SUPPORT.
  229    0204575N               ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW)              66,889                               66,889
                                 READINESS SUPPORT.
  230    0205601N               HARM IMPROVEMENT.........           120,762           -99,240             21,522
         .....................      Cancel ER program....                            [-99,240]
  231    0205604N               TACTICAL DATA LINKS......           104,696            12,000            116,696
         .....................      UPL--Tactical                                     [12,000]
                                    Targeting Network
                                    Technology
                                    acceleration.
  232    0205620N               SURFACE ASW COMBAT SYSTEM            28,421                               28,421
                                 INTEGRATION.
  233    0205632N               MK-48 ADCAP..............            94,155                               94,155
  234    0205633N               AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS....           121,805            15,000            136,805
         .....................      UPL--F/A-18 E/F Super                             [15,000]
                                    Hornet Engine
                                    Enhancements.
  235    0205675N               OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER           117,028                              117,028
                                 SYSTEMS.
  236    0206313M               MARINE CORPS                        174,779                              174,779
                                 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
  237    0206335M               COMMON AVIATION COMMAND               4,826                                4,826
                                 AND CONTROL SYSTEM
                                 (CAC2S).
  238    0206623M               MARINE CORPS GROUND                  97,152                               97,152
                                 COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS
                                 SYSTEMS.
  239    0206624M               MARINE CORPS COMBAT                  30,156                               30,156
                                 SERVICES SUPPORT.
  240    0206625M               USMC INTELLIGENCE/                   39,976                               39,976
                                 ELECTRONIC WARFARE
                                 SYSTEMS (MIP).
  241    0206629M               AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT                   22,637           -22,637
                                 VEHICLE.
         .....................      Lacks operational                                [-22,637]
                                    justification/need.
  242    0207161N               TACTICAL AIM MISSILES....            40,121                               40,121
  243    0207163N               ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-           32,473                               32,473
                                 TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
  249    0303138N               CONSOLIDATED AFLOAT                  23,697                               23,697
                                 NETWORK ENTERPRISE
                                 SERVICES (CANES).
  250    0303140N               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  44,228                               44,228
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  252    0305192N               MILITARY INTELLIGENCE                 6,081                                6,081
                                 PROGRAM (MIP) ACTIVITIES.
  253    0305204N               TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL              8,529                                8,529
                                 VEHICLES.
  254    0305205N               UAS INTEGRATION AND                  41,212                               41,212
                                 INTEROPERABILITY.
  255    0305208M               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            7,687                                7,687
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  256    0305208N               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           42,846                               42,846
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  257    0305220N               MQ-4C TRITON.............            14,395                               14,395
  258    0305231N               MQ-8 UAV.................             9,843                                9,843
  259    0305232M               RQ-11 UAV................               524                                  524
  260    0305234N               SMALL (LEVEL 0) TACTICAL              5,360                                5,360
                                 UAS (STUASL0).
  261    0305239M               RQ-21A...................            10,914                               10,914
  262    0305241N               MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR            81,231                               81,231
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  263    0305242M               UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS               5,956                                5,956
                                 (UAS) PAYLOADS (MIP).
  264    0305421N               RQ-4 MODERNIZATION.......           219,894                              219,894
  265    0308601N               MODELING AND SIMULATION               7,097                                7,097
                                 SUPPORT.
  266    0702207N               DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-              36,560                               36,560
                                 IF).
  267    0708730N               MARITIME TECHNOLOGY                   7,284                                7,284
                                 (MARITECH).
  268    1203109N               SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS             39,174                               39,174
                                 (SPACE).
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              4,885,060           -51,177          4,833,883
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  18,481,666            55,177         18,536,843
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, NAVY.
         .....................
         .....................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                 TEST & EVAL, AF
         .....................  BASIC RESEARCH
    1    0601102F               DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES           348,322            10,000            358,322
         .....................      Basic research                                     [5,000]
                                    program increase.
         .....................      Quantum information                                [5,000]
                                    sciences.
    2    0601103F               UNIVERSITY RESEARCH                 154,991                              154,991
                                 INITIATIVES.
    3    0601108F               HIGH ENERGY LASER                    14,506             2,500             17,006
                                 RESEARCH INITIATIVES.
         .....................      Directed energy                                    [2,500]
                                    research.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH..           517,819            12,500            530,319
         .....................
         .....................  APPLIED RESEARCH
    4    0602102F               MATERIALS................           125,373             4,000            129,373
         .....................      Advanced materials                                 [4,000]
                                    analysis.
    5    0602201F               AEROSPACE VEHICLE                   130,547             5,000            135,547
                                 TECHNOLOGIES.
         .....................      High speed systems                                 [5,000]
                                    technology
                                    (hypersonic vehicle
                                    structures).
    6    0602202F               HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS                 112,518                              112,518
                                 APPLIED RESEARCH.
    7    0602203F               AEROSPACE PROPULSION.....           190,919            22,500            213,419
         .....................      Affordable Responsive                             [15,000]
                                    Modular Rocket.
         .....................      Multi-mode propulsion                              [3,000]
         .....................      Solid rocket motor                                 [2,000]
                                    produce on-demand.
         .....................      Turbine engine                                     [2,500]
                                    technology.
    8    0602204F               AEROSPACE SENSORS........           166,534            -7,500            159,034
         .....................      General program                                   [-7,500]
                                    reduction.
    9    0602298F               SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY                8,288                                8,288
                                 MANAGEMENT-- MAJOR
                                 HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES.
   11    0602602F               CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS...           112,841                              112,841
   12    0602605F               DIRECTED ENERGY                     141,898             4,000            145,898
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Skywave technologies                               [4,000]
                                    laboratory.
   13    0602788F               DOMINANT INFORMATION                162,420                              162,420
                                 SCIENCES AND METHODS.
   14    0602890F               HIGH ENERGY LASER                    43,359            12,500             55,859
                                 RESEARCH.
         .....................      Directed energy                                    [2,500]
                                    research.
         .....................      High powered                                      [10,000]
                                    microwave.
   15    1206601F               SPACE TECHNOLOGY.........           117,645             6,000            123,645
         .....................      Wargaming and                                      [6,000]
                                    simulator lab.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH         1,312,342            46,500          1,358,842
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   16    0603112F               ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR               34,426            -2,500             31,926
                                 WEAPON SYSTEMS.
         .....................      General program                                   [-5,000]
                                    reduction.
         .....................      Materials                                          [2,500]
                                    affordability.
   17    0603199F               SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND              15,150             1,000             16,150
                                 TECHNOLOGY (S&T).
         .....................      Prevention/enhanced                                [1,000]
                                    maintainability
                                    technologies.
   18    0603203F               ADVANCED AEROSPACE                   39,968                               39,968
                                 SENSORS.
   19    0603211F               AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/           121,002            10,000            131,002
                                 DEMO.
         .....................      Design/Manufacture                                [10,000]
                                    aircraft aft body
                                    drag reduction
                                    devices.
   20    0603216F               AEROSPACE PROPULSION AND            115,462            24,000            139,462
                                 POWER TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      General program                                    [9,000]
                                    increase.
         .....................      Multi-mode propulsion                              [5,000]
         .....................      Technology for the                                [10,000]
                                    Sustainment of
                                    Strategic Systems.
   21    0603270F               ELECTRONIC COMBAT                    55,319             5,000             60,319
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      RF/EO/IR warning and                               [5,000]
                                    countermeasures.
   22    0603401F               ADVANCED SPACECRAFT                  54,895                               54,895
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   23    0603444F               MAUI SPACE SURVEILLANCE              10,674                               10,674
                                 SYSTEM (MSSS).
   24    0603456F               HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS                  36,463                               36,463
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   25    0603601F               CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS                194,981                              194,981
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   26    0603605F               ADVANCED WEAPONS                     43,368            10,000             53,368
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Demonstrator laser                                [10,000]
                                    weapon system.
   27    0603680F               MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             42,025                               42,025
                                 PROGRAM.
   28    0603788F               BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE                51,064                               51,064
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   814,797            47,500            862,297
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   30    0603260F               INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED                 5,568                                5,568
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   32    0603742F               COMBAT IDENTIFICATION                18,194                               18,194
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   33    0603790F               NATO RESEARCH AND                     2,305                                2,305
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   35    0603851F               INTERCONTINENTAL                     41,856                               41,856
                                 BALLISTIC MISSILE--DEM/
                                 VAL.
   37    0604015F               LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER         2,314,196                            2,314,196
   38    0604201F               INTEGRATED AVIONICS                  14,894                               14,894
                                 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
   39    0604257F               ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND              34,585                               34,585
                                 SENSORS.
   40    0604288F               NATIONAL AIRBORNE OPS                 9,740                                9,740
                                 CENTER (NAOC) RECAP.
   41    0604317F               TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER......            12,960                               12,960
   42    0604327F               HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED               71,501                               71,501
                                 TARGET DEFEAT SYSTEM
                                 (HDBTDS) PROGRAM.
   43    0604414F               CYBER RESILIENCY OF                  62,618                               62,618
                                 WEAPON SYSTEMS-ACS.
   46    0604776F               DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION            28,350            10,000             38,350
                                 ENTERPRISE R&D.
         .....................      Tanker prototype.....                             [10,000]
   48    0604858F               TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM..         1,186,075           222,800          1,408,875
         .....................      Acceleration of                                  [100,000]
                                    Hypersonic
                                    Conventional Strike
                                    Weapon.
         .....................      Low cost attritable                               [80,000]
                                    aircraft prototype.
         .....................      Rapid Sustainment                                 [42,800]
                                    Initiative.
   49    0605230F               GROUND BASED STRATEGIC              345,041            69,400            414,441
                                 DETERRENT.
         .....................      UPL program                                       [69,400]
                                    acceleration.
   50    0207110F               NEXT GENERATION AIR                 503,997                              503,997
                                 DOMINANCE.
   51    0207455F               THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG-              40,326                               40,326
                                 RANGE RADAR (3DELRR).
   52    0208099F               UNIFIED PLATFORM (UP)....            29,800                               29,800
   54    0305236F               COMMON DATA LINK                     41,880                               41,880
                                 EXECUTIVE AGENT (CDL EA).
   55    0305601F               MISSION PARTNER                      10,074                               10,074
                                 ENVIRONMENTS.
   56    0306250F               CYBER OPERATIONS                    253,825                              253,825
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   57    0306415F               ENABLED CYBER ACTIVITIES.            16,325                               16,325
   59    0901410F               CONTRACTING INFORMATION              17,577           -17,577
                                 TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM.
         .....................      Duplication concern..                            [-17,577]
   60    1203164F               NAVSTAR GLOBAL                      286,629                              286,629
                                 POSITIONING SYSTEM (USER
                                 EQUIPMENT) (SPACE).
   61    1203710F               EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS....             7,940                                7,940
   62    1206422F               WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON.           138,052                              138,052
   63    1206425F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            39,338                               39,338
                                 SYSTEMS.
   64    1206434F               MIDTERM POLAR MILSATCOM             383,113                              383,113
                                 SYSTEM.
   65    1206438F               SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.            91,018                               91,018
   66    1206730F               SPACE SECURITY AND                   45,542                               45,542
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
   67    1206760F               PROTECTED TACTICAL                   51,419                               51,419
                                 ENTERPRISE SERVICE
                                 (PTES).
   68    1206761F               PROTECTED TACTICAL                   29,776                               29,776
                                 SERVICE (PTS).
   69    1206855F               PROTECTED SATCOM SERVICES            29,379                               29,379
                                 (PSCS)--AGGREGATED.
   70    1206857F               OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE            366,050           -50,000            316,050
                                 SPACE.
         .....................      Space RCO Solar Power                            [-50,000]
                                    Project--Early to
                                    need.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 6,529,943           234,623          6,764,566
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                 PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION
   71    0604200F               FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON               39,602                               39,602
                                 ANALYSIS & PROGRAMS.
   72    0604201F               INTEGRATED AVIONICS                  58,531                               58,531
                                 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
   73    0604222F               NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT..             4,468                                4,468
   74    0604270F               ELECTRONIC WARFARE                    1,909                                1,909
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   75    0604281F               TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS              207,746            50,000            257,746
                                 ENTERPRISE.
         .....................      Increase to                                       [50,000]
                                    accelerate 21st
                                    Century Battle
                                    Management Command
                                    and Control.
   76    0604287F               PHYSICAL SECURITY                    14,421                               14,421
                                 EQUIPMENT.
   77    0604329F               SMALL DIAMETER BOMB                  73,158                               73,158
                                 (SDB)--EMD.
   81    0604429F               AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC                   7,153                                7,153
                                 ATTACK.
   83    0604602F               ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE                    58,590                               58,590
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   84    0604604F               SUBMUNITIONS.............             2,990                                2,990
   85    0604617F               AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT.....            20,028                               20,028
   86    0604618F               JOINT DIRECT ATTACK                  15,787                               15,787
                                 MUNITION.
   87    0604706F               LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS.....             8,919                                8,919
   88    0604735F               COMBAT TRAINING RANGES...            35,895                               35,895
   89    0604800F               F-35--EMD................            69,001                               69,001
   90    0307581F               JSTARS RECAP.............                 0            50,000             50,000
         .....................      Continue JSTARS recap                             [50,000]
                                    GMTI radar
                                    development.
   91    0604932F               LONG RANGE STANDOFF                 614,920            85,000            699,920
                                 WEAPON.
         .....................      UPL Program                                       [85,000]
                                    acceleration.
   92    0604933F               ICBM FUZE MODERNIZATION..           172,902                              172,902
   97    0605221F               KC-46....................            88,170                               88,170
   98    0605223F               ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING..           265,465                              265,465
   99    0605229F               COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER.           457,652                              457,652
  105    0605830F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL                 3,617                                3,617
                                 BATTLE MGMT.
  106    0605931F               B-2 DEFENSIVE MANAGEMENT            261,758                              261,758
                                 SYSTEM.
  107    0101125F               NUCLEAR WEAPONS                      91,907                               91,907
                                 MODERNIZATION.
  108    0207171F               F-15 EPAWSS..............           137,095                              137,095
  109    0207328F               STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON...            43,175                               43,175
  110    0207423F               ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS              14,888                               14,888
                                 SYSTEMS.
  111    0207701F               FULL COMBAT MISSION                   1,015                                1,015
                                 TRAINING.
  116    0401310F               C-32 EXECUTIVE TRANSPORT              7,943                                7,943
                                 RECAPITALIZATION.
  117    0401319F               PRESIDENTIAL AIRCRAFT               673,032                              673,032
                                 RECAPITALIZATION (PAR).
  118    0701212F               AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS...            13,653                               13,653
  119    1203176F               COMBAT SURVIVOR EVADER                  939                                  939
                                 LOCATOR.
  120    1203269F               GPS IIIC.................           451,889                              451,889
  121    1203940F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            46,668                               46,668
                                 OPERATIONS.
  122    1206421F               COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS.....            20,676                               20,676
  123    1206425F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS           134,463                              134,463
                                 SYSTEMS.
  124    1206426F               SPACE FENCE..............            20,215                               20,215
  125    1206431F               ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM              151,506                              151,506
                                 (SPACE).
  126    1206432F               POLAR MILSATCOM (SPACE)..            27,337                               27,337
  127    1206433F               WIDEBAND GLOBAL SATCOM                3,970                                3,970
                                 (SPACE).
  128    1206441F               SPACE BASED INFRARED                 60,565                               60,565
                                 SYSTEM (SBIRS) HIGH EMD.
  129    1206442F               EVOLVED SBIRS............           643,126           100,000            743,126
         .....................      Accelerate sensor                                [100,000]
                                    development.
  130    1206853F               EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH           245,447                              245,447
                                 VEHICLE PROGRAM (SPACE)--
                                 EMD.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                   5,272,191           285,000          5,557,191
                                 DEVELOPMENT &
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  131    0604256F               THREAT SIMULATOR                     34,256                               34,256
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  132    0604759F               MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.....            91,844            15,000            106,844
         .....................      Test infrastructure                               [15,000]
                                    improvements.
  133    0605101F               RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE...            34,614                               34,614
  135    0605712F               INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST             18,043                               18,043
                                 & EVALUATION.
  136    0605807F               TEST AND EVALUATION                 692,784                              692,784
                                 SUPPORT.
  137    0605826F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL               233,924                              233,924
                                 POWER.
  138    0605827F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL VIG           263,488                              263,488
                                 & COMBAT SYS.
  139    0605828F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL               153,591                              153,591
                                 REACH.
  140    0605829F               ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER,               232,315                              232,315
                                 NETWORK, & BUS SYS.
  141    0605830F               ACQ WORKFORCE- GLOBAL               169,868                              169,868
                                 BATTLE MGMT.
  142    0605831F               ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY           226,219                              226,219
                                 INTEGRATION.
  143    0605832F               ACQ WORKFORCE- ADVANCED              38,400                               38,400
                                 PRGM TECHNOLOGY.
  144    0605833F               ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR              125,761                              125,761
                                 SYSTEMS.
  147    0605898F               MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.......            10,642                               10,642
  148    0605976F               FACILITIES RESTORATION              162,216                              162,216
                                 AND MODERNIZATION--TEST
                                 AND EVALUATION SUPPORT.
  149    0605978F               FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT--             28,888                               28,888
                                 TEST AND EVALUATION
                                 SUPPORT.
  150    0606017F               REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND            35,285                               35,285
                                 MATURATION.
  153    0308602F               ENTEPRISE INFORMATION                20,545                               20,545
                                 SERVICES (EIS).
  154    0702806F               ACQUISITION AND                      12,367                               12,367
                                 MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
  155    0804731F               GENERAL SKILL TRAINING...             1,448                                1,448
  157    1001004F               INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES.             3,998                                3,998
  158    1206116F               SPACE TEST AND TRAINING              23,254                               23,254
                                 RANGE DEVELOPMENT.
  159    1206392F               SPACE AND MISSILE CENTER            169,912                              169,912
                                 (SMC) CIVILIAN WORKFORCE.
  160    1206398F               SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS              10,508                               10,508
                                 CENTER--MHA.
  161    1206860F               ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH                19,721                               19,721
                                 PROGRAM (SPACE).
  162    1206864F               SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP).            25,620                               25,620
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT               2,839,511            15,000          2,854,511
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......        16,534,124                           16,534,124
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  165    0604233F               SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE            11,344                               11,344
                                 FLIGHT TRAINING.
  167    0605018F               AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL              47,287           -34,146             13,141
                                 AND PAY SYSTEM (AF-IPPS).
         .....................      Poor agile                                       [-34,146]
                                    development
                                    implementation and
                                    lenghty delivery
                                    timeline.
  168    0605024F               ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY               32,770                               32,770
                                 EXECUTIVE AGENCY.
  169    0605117F               FOREIGN MATERIEL                     68,368                               68,368
                                 ACQUISITION AND
                                 EXPLOITATION.
  170    0605278F               HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E....            32,574                               32,574
  171    0606018F               NC3 INTEGRATION..........            26,112                               26,112
  172    0606942F               ASSESSMENTS AND                      99,100                               99,100
                                 EVALUATIONS CYBER
                                 VULNERABILITIES.
  173    0101113F               B-52 SQUADRONS...........           280,414            14,800            295,214
         .....................      Air Force requested                               [14,800]
                                    realignment.
  174    0101122F               AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE                   5,955                                5,955
                                 MISSILE (ALCM).
  175    0101126F               B-1B SQUADRONS...........            76,030                               76,030
  176    0101127F               B-2 SQUADRONS............           105,561                              105,561
  177    0101213F               MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS......           156,047                              156,047
  179    0101316F               WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC            10,442                               10,442
                                 COMMUNICATIONS.
  180    0101324F               INTEGRATED STRATEGIC                 22,833                               22,833
                                 PLANNING & ANALYSIS
                                 NETWORK.
  181    0101328F               ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES....            18,412                               18,412
  183    0102110F               UH-1N REPLACEMENT PROGRAM           288,022                              288,022
  184    0102326F               REGION/SECTOR OPERATION               9,252                                9,252
                                 CONTROL CENTER
                                 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM.
  186    0205219F               MQ-9 UAV.................           115,345                              115,345
  188    0207131F               A-10 SQUADRONS...........            26,738                               26,738
  189    0207133F               F-16 SQUADRONS...........           191,564                              191,564
  190    0207134F               F-15E SQUADRONS..........           192,883                              192,883
  191    0207136F               MANNED DESTRUCTIVE                   15,238                               15,238
                                 SUPPRESSION.
  192    0207138F               F-22A SQUADRONS..........           603,553                              603,553
  193    0207142F               F-35 SQUADRONS...........           549,501                              549,501
  194    0207161F               TACTICAL AIM MISSILES....            37,230                               37,230
  195    0207163F               ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-           61,393                               61,393
                                 TO-AIR MISSILE (AMRAAM).
  196    0207227F               COMBAT RESCUE--PARARESCUE               647                                  647
  198    0207249F               PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS             14,891                               14,891
                                 PROCUREMENT.
  199    0207253F               COMPASS CALL.............            13,901                               13,901
  200    0207268F               AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT           121,203                              121,203
                                 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
  202    0207325F               JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE                 60,062                               60,062
                                 STANDOFF MISSILE (JASSM).
  203    0207410F               AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS              106,102                              106,102
                                 CENTER (AOC).
  204    0207412F               CONTROL AND REPORTING                 6,413                                6,413
                                 CENTER (CRC).
  205    0207417F               AIRBORNE WARNING AND                120,664            10,000            130,664
                                 CONTROL SYSTEM (AWACS).
         .....................      Increase to                                       [10,000]
                                    accelerate 21st
                                    Century Battle
                                    Management Command
                                    and Control.
  206    0207418F               TACTICAL AIRBORNE CONTROL             2,659                                2,659
                                 SYSTEMS.
  208    0207431F               COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE              10,316                               10,316
                                 SYSTEM ACTIVITIES.
  209    0207444F               TACTICAL AIR CONTROL                  6,149                                6,149
                                 PARTY-MOD.
  210    0207448F               C2ISR TACTICAL DATA LINK.             1,738                                1,738
  211    0207452F               DCAPES...................            13,297                               13,297
  212    0207573F               NATIONAL TECHNICAL                    1,788                                1,788
                                 NUCLEAR FORENSICS.
  213    0207581F               JOINT SURVEILLANCE/TARGET            14,888                               14,888
                                 ATTACK RADAR SYSTEM
                                 (JSTARS).
  214    0207590F               SEEK EAGLE...............            24,699                               24,699
  215    0207601F               USAF MODELING AND                    17,078                               17,078
                                 SIMULATION.
  216    0207605F               WARGAMING AND SIMULATION              6,141                                6,141
                                 CENTERS.
  218    0207697F               DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND              4,225                                4,225
                                 EXERCISES.
  219    0208006F               MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS.            63,653                               63,653
  220    0208007F               TACTICAL DECEPTION.......             6,949                                6,949
  221    0208087F               AF OFFENSIVE CYBERSPACE              40,526                               40,526
                                 OPERATIONS.
  222    0208088F               AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE              24,166                               24,166
                                 OPERATIONS.
  223    0208097F               JOINT CYBER COMMAND AND              13,000                               13,000
                                 CONTROL (JCC2).
  224    0208099F               UNIFIED PLATFORM (UP)....            28,759                               28,759
  229    0301017F               GLOBAL SENSOR INTEGRATED              3,579                                3,579
                                 ON NETWORK (GSIN).
  230    0301112F               NUCLEAR PLANNING AND                 29,620                               29,620
                                 EXECUTION SYSTEM (NPES).
  237    0301401F               AIR FORCE SPACE AND CYBER             6,633                                6,633
                                 NON-TRADITIONAL ISR FOR
                                 BATTLESPACE AWARENESS.
  238    0302015F               E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE               57,758                               57,758
                                 OPERATIONS CENTER (NAOC).
  240    0303131F               MINIMUM ESSENTIAL                    99,088                               99,088
                                 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
                                 NETWORK (MEECN).
  241    0303133F               HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO                 51,612                               51,612
                                 SYSTEMS.
  242    0303140F               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  34,612                               34,612
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  244    0303142F               GLOBAL FORCE MANAGEMENT--             2,170                                2,170
                                 DATA INITIATIVE.
  246    0304260F               AIRBORNE SIGINT                     106,873                              106,873
                                 ENTERPRISE.
  247    0304310F               COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC                   3,472                                3,472
                                 ANALYSIS.
  250    0305015F               C2 AIR OPERATIONS SUITE--             8,608                                8,608
                                 C2 INFO SERVICES.
  251    0305020F               CCMD INTELLIGENCE                     1,586                                1,586
                                 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
  252    0305099F               GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC                    4,492                                4,492
                                 MANAGEMENT (GATM).
  254    0305111F               WEATHER SERVICE..........            26,942                               26,942
  255    0305114F               AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL,                  6,271                                6,271
                                 APPROACH, AND LANDING
                                 SYSTEM (ATCALS).
  256    0305116F               AERIAL TARGETS...........             8,383                                8,383
  259    0305128F               SECURITY AND                            418                                  418
                                 INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.
  261    0305146F               DEFENSE JOINT                         3,845                                3,845
                                 COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  268    0305202F               DRAGON U-2...............            48,518                               48,518
  270    0305206F               AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE             175,334                              175,334
                                 SYSTEMS.
  271    0305207F               MANNED RECONNAISSANCE                14,223                               14,223
                                 SYSTEMS.
  272    0305208F               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           24,554                               24,554
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  273    0305220F               RQ-4 UAV.................           221,690                              221,690
  274    0305221F               NETWORK-CENTRIC                      14,288                               14,288
                                 COLLABORATIVE TARGETING.
  275    0305238F               NATO AGS.................            51,527                               51,527
  276    0305240F               SUPPORT TO DCGS                      26,579                               26,579
                                 ENTERPRISE.
  278    0305600F               INTERNATIONAL                         8,464                                8,464
                                 INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY
                                 AND ARCHITECTURES.
  280    0305881F               RAPID CYBER ACQUISITION..             4,303                                4,303
  284    0305984F               PERSONNEL RECOVERY                    2,466                                2,466
                                 COMMAND & CTRL (PRC2).
  285    0307577F               INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA             4,117                                4,117
                                 (IMD).
  287    0401115F               C-130 AIRLIFT SQUADRON...           105,988                              105,988
  288    0401119F               C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS                25,071                               25,071
                                 (IF).
  289    0401130F               C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF).......            48,299                               48,299
  290    0401132F               C-130J PROGRAM...........            15,409                               15,409
  291    0401134F               LARGE AIRCRAFT IR                     4,334                                4,334
                                 COUNTERMEASURES (LAIRCM).
  292    0401218F               KC-135S..................             3,493                                3,493
  293    0401219F               KC-10S...................             6,569                                6,569
  294    0401314F               OPERATIONAL SUPPORT                   3,172                                3,172
                                 AIRLIFT.
  295    0401318F               CV-22....................            18,502                               18,502
  296    0401840F               AMC COMMAND AND CONTROL               1,688                                1,688
                                 SYSTEM.
  297    0408011F               SPECIAL TACTICS / COMBAT              2,541                                2,541
                                 CONTROL.
  298    0702207F               DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-               1,897                                1,897
                                 IF).
  299    0708055F               MAINTENANCE, REPAIR &                50,933           -35,060             15,873
                                 OVERHAUL SYSTEM.
         .....................      Poor agile                                       [-35,060]
                                    development
                                    implementation.
  300    0708610F               LOGISTICS INFORMATION                13,787                               13,787
                                 TECHNOLOGY (LOGIT).
  301    0708611F               SUPPORT SYSTEMS                       4,497                                4,497
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  302    0804743F               OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING....             2,022                                2,022
  303    0808716F               OTHER PERSONNEL                         108                                  108
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  304    0901202F               JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY              2,023                                2,023
                                 AGENCY.
  305    0901218F               CIVILIAN COMPENSATION                 3,772                                3,772
                                 PROGRAM.
  306    0901220F               PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION.             6,358                                6,358
  307    0901226F               AIR FORCE STUDIES AND                 1,418                                1,418
                                 ANALYSIS AGENCY.
  308    0901538F               FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT                 99,734           -11,816             87,918
                                 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Poor agile                                       [-11,816]
                                    development
                                    implementation.
  309    1201921F               SERVICE SUPPORT TO                   14,161                               14,161
                                 STRATCOM--SPACE
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  310    1202247F               AF TENCAP................            26,986                               26,986
  311    1203001F               FAMILY OF ADVANCED BLOS              80,168                               80,168
                                 TERMINALS (FAB-T).
  312    1203110F               SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK            17,808                               17,808
                                 (SPACE).
  314    1203165F               NAVSTAR GLOBAL                        8,937                                8,937
                                 POSITIONING SYSTEM
                                 (SPACE AND CONTROL
                                 SEGMENTS).
  315    1203173F               SPACE AND MISSILE TEST               59,935                               59,935
                                 AND EVALUATION CENTER.
  316    1203174F               SPACE INNOVATION,                    21,019                               21,019
                                 INTEGRATION AND RAPID
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
  317    1203179F               INTEGRATED BROADCAST                  8,568                                8,568
                                 SERVICE (IBS).
  318    1203182F               SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM               10,641                               10,641
                                 (SPACE).
  319    1203265F               GPS III SPACE SEGMENT....           144,543                              144,543
  320    1203400F               SPACE SUPERIORITY                    16,278                               16,278
                                 INTELLIGENCE.
  321    1203614F               JSPOC MISSION SYSTEM.....            72,256           -10,000             62,256
         .....................      Assumed cost savings.                            [-10,000]
  322    1203620F               NATIONAL SPACE DEFENSE               42,209                               42,209
                                 CENTER.
  325    1203913F               NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM               19,778                               19,778
                                 (SPACE).
  326    1203940F               SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS            19,572                               19,572
                                 OPERATIONS.
  327    1206423F               GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM           513,235                              513,235
                                 III--OPERATIONAL CONTROL
                                 SEGMENT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL             22,891,740           -66,222         22,825,518
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  40,178,343           574,901         40,753,244
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, AF.
         .....................
         .....................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                 TEST & EVAL, DW
         .....................  BASIC RESEARCH
    1    0601000BR              DTRA BASIC RESEARCH......            37,023                               37,023
    2    0601101E               DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES           422,130             7,500            429,630
         .....................      Basic research                                     [5,000]
                                    program increase.
         .....................      Critical materials...                              [2,500]
    3    0601110D8Z             BASIC RESEARCH                       42,702            10,000             52,702
                                 INITIATIVES.
         .....................      Quantum information                                [5,000]
                                    sciences.
         .....................      University-lab                                     [5,000]
                                    research partnership.
    4    0601117E               BASIC OPERATIONAL MEDICAL            47,825            10,000             57,825
                                 RESEARCH SCIENCE.
         .....................      TBI Treatment for                                 [10,000]
                                    blast injuries.
    5    0601120D8Z             NATIONAL DEFENSE                     85,919                               85,919
                                 EDUCATION PROGRAM.
    6    0601228D8Z             HISTORICALLY BLACK                   30,412                               30,412
                                 COLLEGES AND
                                 UNIVERSITIES/MINORITY
                                 INSTITUTIONS.
    7    0601384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL              42,103                               42,103
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL BASIC RESEARCH..           708,114            27,500            735,614
         .....................
         .....................  APPLIED RESEARCH
    8    0602000D8Z             JOINT MUNITIONS                      19,170             2,500             21,670
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Insensitive munitions                              [2,500]
    9    0602115E               BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY....           101,300                              101,300
   11    0602234D8Z             LINCOLN LABORATORY                   51,596                               51,596
                                 RESEARCH PROGRAM.
   12    0602251D8Z             APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE             60,688            -7,500             53,188
                                 ADVANCEMENT OF S&T
                                 PRIORITIES.
         .....................      General program                                   [-7,500]
                                    reduction.
   13    0602303E               INFORMATION &                       395,317                              395,317
                                 COMMUNICATIONS
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   14    0602383E               BIOLOGICAL WARFARE                   38,640                               38,640
                                 DEFENSE.
   15    0602384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             192,674                              192,674
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
   16    0602668D8Z             CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH..            14,969                               14,969
   17    0602702E               TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY......           335,466            -2,500            332,966
         .....................      General program                                    [2,500]
                                    increase.
         .....................      MAD-FIRES reduction..                             [-5,000]
   18    0602715E               MATERIALS AND BIOLOGICAL            226,898           -15,000            211,898
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      General program                                  [-15,000]
                                    reduction.
   19    0602716E               ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY...           333,847                              333,847
   20    0602718BR              COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS             161,151                              161,151
                                 DESTRUCTION APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
   21    0602751D8Z             SOFTWARE ENGINEERING                  9,300                                9,300
                                 INSTITUTE (SEI) APPLIED
                                 RESEARCH.
   22    1160401BB              SOF TECHNOLOGY                       35,921                               35,921
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL APPLIED RESEARCH         1,976,937           -22,500          1,954,437
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT
   23    0603000D8Z             JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED             25,598                               25,598
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   24    0603122D8Z             COMBATING TERRORISM                 125,271           -14,000            111,271
                                 TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
         .....................      General program                                  [-14,000]
                                    reduction.
   25    0603133D8Z             FOREIGN COMPARATIVE                  24,532                               24,532
                                 TESTING.
   27    0603160BR              COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS             299,858                              299,858
                                 DESTRUCTION ADVANCED
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   28    0603176C               ADVANCED CONCEPTS AND                13,017                               13,017
                                 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
   29    0603178C               WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY.......                 0            13,400             13,400
         .....................      MDA UPL: Accelerate                               [13,400]
                                    hypersonic missile
                                    defense.
   31    0603180C               ADVANCED RESEARCH........            20,365            22,200             42,565
         .....................      Accelerate hypersonic                             [22,200]
                                    missile defense.
   32    0603225D8Z             JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS              18,644                               18,644
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   34    0603286E               ADVANCED AEROSPACE                  277,603             5,000            282,603
                                 SYSTEMS.
         .....................      Hypersonics weapons                                [5,000]
                                    programs development
                                    and transition.
   35    0603287E               SPACE PROGRAMS AND                  254,671           110,000            364,671
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Blackjack increase...                            [110,000]
   36    0603288D8Z             ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS.....            19,472                               19,472
   37    0603289D8Z             ADVANCED INNOVATIVE                  37,263                               37,263
                                 ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS.
   38    0603291D8Z             ADVANCED INNOVATIVE                  13,621                               13,621
                                 ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS--
                                 MHA.
   39    0603294C               COMMON KILL VEHICLE                 189,753                              189,753
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   40    0603342D8W             DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT              29,364               500             29,864
                                 EXPERIMENTAL (DIUX).
         .....................      Defense technology                                   [500]
                                    innovation.
   41    0603375D8Z             TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION....            83,143            20,000            103,143
         .....................      Commercial SAR                                    [20,000]
                                    satellites.
   42    0603384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             142,826                              142,826
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM--
                                 ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.
   43    0603527D8Z             RETRACT LARCH............           161,128                              161,128
   44    0603618D8Z             JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED            12,918                               12,918
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   45    0603648D8Z             JOINT CAPABILITY                    106,049                              106,049
                                 TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
   46    0603662D8Z             NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS             12,696            -7,500              5,196
                                 CAPABILITIES.
         .....................      General program                                   [-7,500]
                                    reduction.
   47    0603680D8Z             DEFENSE-WIDE                        114,637             7,000            121,637
                                 MANUFACTURING SCIENCE
                                 AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
         .....................      Enhancing                                          [5,000]
                                    cybersecurity for
                                    small vendors.
         .....................      Eye protection system                              [2,000]
   48    0603680S               MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY             49,667             2,500             52,167
                                 PROGRAM.
         .....................      General program                                    [2,500]
                                    increase.
   49    0603699D8Z             EMERGING CAPABILITIES                48,338                               48,338
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
   50    0603712S               GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D                11,778             1,000             12,778
                                 TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEMONSTRATIONS.
         .....................      General program                                    [1,000]
                                    increase.
   52    0603716D8Z             STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL              76,514            10,000             86,514
                                 RESEARCH PROGRAM.
         .....................      Readiness Increase...                             [10,000]
   53    0603720S               MICROELECTRONICS                    168,931             5,000            173,931
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
                                 AND SUPPORT.
         .....................      Tunable filter,                                    [5,000]
                                    support for
                                    microelectronics
                                    development.
   54    0603727D8Z             JOINT WARFIGHTING PROGRAM             5,992                                5,992
   55    0603739E               ADVANCED ELECTRONICS                111,099             7,500            118,599
                                 TECHNOLOGIES.
         .....................      Support for the                                    [7,500]
                                    Electronics
                                    Resurgence Initiative.
   56    0603760E               COMMAND, CONTROL AND                185,984                              185,984
                                 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
   57    0603766E               NETWORK-CENTRIC WARFARE             438,569           -10,000            428,569
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      General program                                  [-10,000]
                                    reduction.
   58    0603767E               SENSOR TECHNOLOGY........           190,128             1,500            191,628
         .....................      Sensors and                                        [1,500]
                                    processing systems
                                    technology.
   59    0603769D8Z             DISTRIBUTED LEARNING                 13,564                               13,564
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
   60    0603781D8Z             SOFTWARE ENGINEERING                 15,050                               15,050
                                 INSTITUTE.
   61    0603826D8Z             QUICK REACTION SPECIAL               69,626           -10,000             59,626
                                 PROJECTS.
         .....................      General program                                  [-10,000]
                                    reduction.
   62    0603833D8Z             ENGINEERING SCIENCE &                19,415                               19,415
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
   63    0603924D8Z             HIGH ENERGY LASER                    69,533                               69,533
                                 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                 PROGRAM.
   64    0603941D8Z             TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE            96,389            15,000            111,389
                                 & TECHNOLOGY.
         .....................      Hypersonics and                                   [10,000]
                                    directed energy test.
         .....................      Workforce development                              [5,000]
   65    0604055D8Z             OPERATIONAL ENERGY                   40,582            10,000             50,582
                                 CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENT.
         .....................      Readiness Increase...                             [10,000]
   66    0303310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS.............            26,644                               26,644
   67    1160402BB              SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY              79,380                               79,380
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  300    8888                   NATIONAL SECURITY                         0           150,000            150,000
                                 INNOVATION ACTIVITIES.
         .....................      Establish office for                             [150,000]
                                    capital investment.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 3,699,612           339,100          4,038,712
                                 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 PROTOTYPES
   68    0603161D8Z             NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL             28,140                               28,140
                                 PHYSICAL SECURITY
                                 EQUIPMENT RDT&E ADC&P.
   69    0603600D8Z             WALKOFF..................            92,222                               92,222
   70    0603821D8Z             ACQUISITION ENTERPRISE                2,506                                2,506
                                 DATA & INFORMATION
                                 SERVICES.
   71    0603851D8Z             ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY               40,016            10,000             50,016
                                 TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION
                                 PROGRAM.
         .....................      Readiness Increase...                             [10,000]
   72    0603881C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           214,173           184,100            398,273
                                 TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT.
         .....................      MDA UPL: USFK JEON...                            [184,100]
   73    0603882C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           926,359          -208,000            718,359
                                 MIDCOURSE DEFENSE
                                 SEGMENT.
         .....................      Reduce FY19 Numbers..                           [-208,000]
   74    0603884BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             129,886                              129,886
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL.
   75    0603884C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           220,876            24,000            244,876
                                 SENSORS.
         .....................      MDA UPL: USFK JEON...                             [24,000]
   76    0603890C               BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS....           540,926                              540,926
   77    0603891C               SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA....           422,348                              422,348
   78    0603892C               AEGIS BMD................           767,539                              767,539
   81    0603896C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           475,168           -50,000            425,168
                                 COMMAND AND CONTROL,
                                 BATTLE MANAGEMENT AND
                                 COMMUNICATI.
         .....................      Inconsistent                                     [-50,000]
                                    capability delivery.
   82    0603898C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            48,767                               48,767
                                 JOINT WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
   83    0603904C               MISSILE DEFENSE                      54,925                               54,925
                                 INTEGRATION & OPERATIONS
                                 CENTER (MDIOC).
   84    0603906C               REGARDING TRENCH.........            16,916                               16,916
   85    0603907C               SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR              149,715           -33,000            116,715
                                 (SBX).
         .....................      Reduce FY19 Numbers..                            [-33,000]
   86    0603913C               ISRAELI COOPERATIVE                 300,000                              300,000
                                 PROGRAMS.
   87    0603914C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           365,681            71,900            437,581
                                 TEST.
         .....................      MDA UPL: USFK JEON...                             [71,900]
   88    0603915C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE           517,852           -31,500            486,352
                                 TARGETS.
         .....................      MDA UPL: USFK JEON...                              [4,500]
         .....................      Reduce FY19 Numbers..                            [-36,000]
   89    0603920D8Z             HUMANITARIAN DEMINING....            11,347                               11,347
   90    0603923D8Z             COALITION WARFARE........             8,528                                8,528
   91    0604016D8Z             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                 3,477             5,000              8,477
                                 CORROSION PROGRAM.
         .....................      Corrosion prevention.                              [5,000]
   92    0604115C               TECHNOLOGY MATURATION               148,822            80,000            228,822
                                 INITIATIVES.
         .....................      Laser scaling for                                 [80,000]
                                    boost phase intercept.
   93    0604132D8Z             MISSILE DEFEAT PROJECT...            58,607                               58,607
   94    0604134BR              COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT            12,993                               12,993
                                 DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE
                                 DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING.
   95    0604181C               HYPERSONIC DEFENSE.......           120,444            10,500            130,944
         .....................      Accelerate hypersonic                             [10,500]
                                    missile defense.
   96    0604250D8Z             ADVANCED INNOVATIVE               1,431,702            50,000          1,481,702
                                 TECHNOLOGIES.
         .....................      Quartermaster                                     [50,000]
                                    Pathfinder.
   97    0604294D8Z             TRUSTED & ASSURED                   233,142             5,500            238,642
                                 MICROELECTRONICS.
         .....................      New trust approach                                 [5,500]
                                    development.
   98    0604331D8Z             RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM            99,333                               99,333
   99    0604400D8Z             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                 3,781                                3,781
                                 (DOD) UNMANNED SYSTEM
                                 COMMON DEVELOPMENT.
  100    0604673C               PACIFIC DISCRIMINATING               95,765                               95,765
                                 RADAR.
  101    0604682D8Z             WARGAMING AND SUPPORT FOR             3,768                                3,768
                                 STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (SSA).
  103    0604826J               JOINT C5 CAPABILITY                  22,435                               22,435
                                 DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATION
                                 AND INTEROPERABILITY
                                 ASSESSMENTS.
  104    0604873C               LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION           164,562                              164,562
                                 RADAR (LRDR).
  105    0604874C               IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE           561,220          -139,400            421,820
                                 INTERCEPTORS.
         .....................      Reduce FY19 Numbers..                           [-139,400]
  106    0604876C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            61,017                               61,017
                                 TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT
                                 TEST.
  107    0604878C               AEGIS BMD TEST...........            95,756                               95,756
  108    0604879C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            81,001                               81,001
                                 SENSOR TEST.
  109    0604880C               LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3)..            27,692                               27,692
  111    0604887C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            81,934            -9,300             72,634
                                 MIDCOURSE SEGMENT TEST.
         .....................      Reduce FY19 Numbers..                             [-9,300]
  112    0604894C               MULTI-OBJECT KILL VEHICLE             8,256                                8,256
  113    0300206R               ENTERPRISE INFORMATION                2,600                                2,600
                                 TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS.
  114    0303191D8Z             JOINT ELECTROMAGNETIC                 3,104                                3,104
                                 TECHNOLOGY (JET) PROGRAM.
  115    0305103C               CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE               985                                  985
  116    1206893C               SPACE TRACKING &                     36,955                               36,955
                                 SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.
  117    1206895C               BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE            16,484            73,000             89,484
                                 SYSTEM SPACE PROGRAMS.
         .....................      MDA UPL: Initiate                                 [73,000]
                                    missile defense
                                    tracking system.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                 8,709,725            42,800          8,752,525
                                 COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
                                 AND PROTOTYPES.
         .....................
         .....................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION
  118    0604161D8Z             NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL              8,333                                8,333
                                 PHYSICAL SECURITY
                                 EQUIPMENT RDT&E SDD.
  119    0604165D8Z             PROMPT GLOBAL STRIKE                263,414                              263,414
                                 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT.
  120    0604384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             388,701                              388,701
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD.
  121    0604771D8Z             JOINT TACTICAL                       19,503                               19,503
                                 INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION
                                 SYSTEM (JTIDS).
  122    0605000BR              COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS               6,163                                6,163
                                 DESTRUCTION SYSTEMS
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  123    0605013BL              INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY               11,988           -11,988
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................      Lengthy delivery                                 [-11,988]
                                    timelines.
  124    0605021SE              HOMELAND PERSONNEL                      296                                  296
                                 SECURITY INITIATIVE.
  125    0605022D8Z             DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY                 1,489                                1,489
                                 PROGRAM.
  126    0605027D8Z             OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT                9,590                                9,590
                                 INITIATIVES.
  127    0605070S               DOD ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS                3,173                                3,173
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
  128    0605075D8Z             DCMO POLICY AND                       2,105             1,000              3,105
                                 INTEGRATION.
         .....................      Data and advanced                                  [1,000]
                                    analytics.
  129    0605080S               DEFENSE AGENCY                       21,156                               21,156
                                 INITIATIVES (DAI)--
                                 FINANCIAL SYSTEM.
  130    0605090S               DEFENSE RETIRED AND                  10,731                               10,731
                                 ANNUITANT PAY SYSTEM
                                 (DRAS).
  132    0605210D8Z             DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC               6,374            -6,374
                                 PROCUREMENT CAPABILITIES.
         .....................      Duplication concern..                             [-6,374]
  133    0605294D8Z             TRUSTED & ASSURED                    56,178             2,500             58,678
                                 MICROELECTRONICS.
         .....................      New trust approach                                 [2,500]
                                    development.
  134    0303141K               GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT                 2,512                                2,512
                                 SYSTEM.
  135    0305304D8Z             DOD ENTERPRISE ENERGY                 2,435                                2,435
                                 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
                                 (EEIM).
  136    0305310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS: SYSTEM                 17,048                               17,048
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                     831,189           -14,862            816,327
                                 DEVELOPMENT AND
                                 DEMONSTRATION.
         .....................
         9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......            45,604                               45,604
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
  137    0604774D8Z             DEFENSE READINESS                     6,661                                6,661
                                 REPORTING SYSTEM (DRRS).
  138    0604875D8Z             JOINT SYSTEMS                         4,088                                4,088
                                 ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT.
  139    0604940D8Z             CENTRAL TEST AND                    258,796            10,000            268,796
                                 EVALUATION INVESTMENT
                                 DEVELOPMENT (CTEIP).
         .....................      Advanced hypersonic                               [10,000]
                                    wind tunnel
                                    experimentation.
  140    0604942D8Z             ASSESSMENTS AND                      31,356                               31,356
                                 EVALUATIONS.
  141    0605001E               MISSION SUPPORT..........            65,646                               65,646
  142    0605100D8Z             JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT            84,184             5,000             89,184
                                 TEST CAPABILITY (JMETC).
         .....................      Cyber range capacity                               [5,000]
                                    and development.
  143    0605104D8Z             TECHNICAL STUDIES,                   22,576            -5,000             17,576
                                 SUPPORT AND ANALYSIS.
         .....................      General program                                   [-5,000]
                                    reduction.
  144    0605126J               JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND             52,565                               52,565
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE
                                 ORGANIZATION (JIAMDO).
  146    0605142D8Z             SYSTEMS ENGINEERING......            38,872                               38,872
  147    0605151D8Z             STUDIES AND ANALYSIS                  3,534                                3,534
                                 SUPPORT--OSD.
  148    0605161D8Z             NUCLEAR MATTERS-PHYSICAL              5,050                                5,050
                                 SECURITY.
  149    0605170D8Z             SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND              11,450                               11,450
                                 INFORMATION INTEGRATION.
  150    0605200D8Z             GENERAL SUPPORT TO USD                1,693                                1,693
                                 (INTELLIGENCE).
  151    0605384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL             102,883                              102,883
                                 DEFENSE PROGRAM.
  159    0605790D8Z             SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION             2,545                                2,545
                                 RESEARCH (SBIR)/ SMALL
                                 BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
                                 TRANSFER.
  160    0605798D8Z             DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY                   24,487                               24,487
                                 ANALYSIS.
  161    0605801KA              DEFENSE TECHNICAL                    56,853                               56,853
                                 INFORMATION CENTER
                                 (DTIC).
  162    0605803SE              R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD                24,914                               24,914
                                 ENLISTMENT, TESTING AND
                                 EVALUATION.
  163    0605804D8Z             DEVELOPMENT TEST AND                 20,179             5,000             25,179
                                 EVALUATION.
         .....................      Improve software                                   [5,000]
                                    testing capabilities.
  164    0605898E               MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D.......            13,643                               13,643
  165    0605998KA              MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE                4,124                                4,124
                                 TECHNICAL INFORMATION
                                 CENTER (DTIC).
  166    0606100D8Z             BUDGET AND PROGRAM                    5,768                                5,768
                                 ASSESSMENTS.
  167    0606225D8Z             ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND                   1,030                                1,030
                                 RESOURCE ANALYSIS.
  168    0606589D8W             DEFENSE DIGITAL SERVICE               1,000                                1,000
                                 (DDS) DEVELOPMENT
                                 SUPPORT.
  169    0606942C               ASSESSMENTS AND                       3,400                                3,400
                                 EVALUATIONS CYBER
                                 VULNERABILITIES.
  170    0606942S               ASSESSMENTS AND                       4,000                                4,000
                                 EVALUATIONS CYBER
                                 VULNERABILITIES.
  171    0203345D8Z             DEFENSE OPERATIONS                    3,008                                3,008
                                 SECURITY INITIATIVE
                                 (DOSI).
  172    0204571J               JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL                6,658                                6,658
                                 SUPPORT.
  175    0303166J               SUPPORT TO INFORMATION                  652                                  652
                                 OPERATIONS (IO)
                                 CAPABILITIES.
  176    0303260D8Z             DEFENSE MILITARY                      1,005                                1,005
                                 DECEPTION PROGRAM OFFICE
                                 (DMDPO).
  177    0305172K               COMBINED ADVANCED                    21,363                               21,363
                                 APPLICATIONS.
  180    0305245D8Z             INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES           109,529                              109,529
                                 AND INNOVATION
                                 INVESTMENTS.
  181    0306310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS: RDT&E                   1,244                                1,244
                                 MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
  184    0804768J               COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT            42,940                               42,940
                                 AND TRAINING
                                 TRANSFORMATION (CE2T2)--
                                 NON-MHA.
  185    0901598C               MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA.......            28,626                               28,626
  187    0903235K               JOINT SERVICE PROVIDER                5,104                                5,104
                                 (JSP).
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT               1,117,030            15,000          1,132,030
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         9999999999             CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......         3,877,898            10,000          3,887,898
         .....................      Classified increase..                             [10,000]
         .....................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
                                 DEVELOPMENT
  189    0604130V               ENTERPRISE SECURITY                   9,750                                9,750
                                 SYSTEM (ESS).
  190    0605127T               REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL                1,855                                1,855
                                 OUTREACH (RIO) AND
                                 PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE
                                 INFORMATION MANA.
  191    0605147T               OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN                   304                                  304
                                 ASSISTANCE SHARED
                                 INFORMATION SYSTEM
                                 (OHASIS).
  192    0607210D8Z             INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS             10,376                               10,376
                                 AND SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT.
  193    0607310D8Z             CWMD SYSTEMS: OPERATIONAL             5,915                                5,915
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
  194    0607327T               GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY               5,869                                5,869
                                 COOPERATION MANAGEMENT
                                 INFORMATION SYSTEMS (G-
                                 TSCMIS).
  195    0607384BP              CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL              48,741                               48,741
                                 DEFENSE (OPERATIONAL
                                 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT).
  196    0208043J               PLANNING AND DECISION AID             3,037                                3,037
                                 SYSTEM (PDAS).
  197    0208045K               C4I INTEROPERABILITY.....            62,814                               62,814
  203    0302019K               DEFENSE INFO                         16,561                               16,561
                                 INFRASTRUCTURE
                                 ENGINEERING AND
                                 INTEGRATION.
  204    0303126K               LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS--           14,769                               14,769
                                 DCS.
  205    0303131K               MINIMUM ESSENTIAL                    17,579                               17,579
                                 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
                                 NETWORK (MEECN).
  207    0303136G               KEY MANAGEMENT                       31,737                               31,737
                                 INFRASTRUCTURE (KMI).
  208    0303140D8Z             INFORMATION SYSTEMS                   7,940                                7,940
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  209    0303140G               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                 229,252                              229,252
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  210    0303140K               INFORMATION SYSTEMS                  19,611                               19,611
                                 SECURITY PROGRAM.
  211    0303150K               GLOBAL COMMAND AND                   46,900                               46,900
                                 CONTROL SYSTEM.
  212    0303153K               DEFENSE SPECTRUM                      7,570                                7,570
                                 ORGANIZATION.
  213    0303228K               JOINT INFORMATION                     7,947                                7,947
                                 ENVIRONMENT (JIE).
  215    0303430K               FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE                39,400                               39,400
                                 SERVICES INFORMATION
                                 TECHNOLOGY.
  224    0305186D8Z             POLICY R&D PROGRAMS......             6,262            -3,000              3,262
         .....................      General program                                   [-3,000]
                                    reduction.
  225    0305199D8Z             NET CENTRICITY...........            16,780                               16,780
  227    0305208BB              DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            6,286                                6,286
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  230    0305208K               DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/            2,970                                2,970
                                 SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  233    0305327V               INSIDER THREAT...........             5,954             5,000             10,954
         .....................      Personnel security                                 [5,000]
                                    and continuous
                                    evaluation.
  234    0305387D8Z             HOMELAND DEFENSE                      2,198                                2,198
                                 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
                                 PROGRAM.
  240    0307577D8Z             INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA             6,889                                6,889
                                 (IMD).
  242    0708012K               LOGISTICS SUPPORT                     1,317                                1,317
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  243    0708012S               PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS.             1,770                                1,770
  244    0708047S               DEFENSE PROPERTY                      1,805                                1,805
                                 ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
  246    1105219BB              MQ-9 UAV.................            18,403                               18,403
  248    1160403BB              AVIATION SYSTEMS.........           184,993                              184,993
  249    1160405BB              INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS                 10,625                               10,625
                                 DEVELOPMENT.
  250    1160408BB              OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS.           102,307                              102,307
  251    1160431BB              WARRIOR SYSTEMS..........            46,942                               46,942
  252    1160432BB              SPECIAL PROGRAMS.........             2,479                                2,479
  253    1160434BB              UNMANNED ISR.............            27,270                               27,270
  254    1160480BB              SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES....             1,121                                1,121
  255    1160483BB              MARITIME SYSTEMS.........            42,471                               42,471
  256    1160489BB              GLOBAL VIDEO SURVEILLANCE             4,780                                4,780
                                 ACTIVITIES.
  257    1160490BB              OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS             12,176                               12,176
                                 INTELLIGENCE.
  258    1203610K               TELEPORT PROGRAM.........             2,323                                2,323
         .....................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL              4,973,946            12,000          4,985,946
                                 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                  22,016,553           399,038         22,415,591
                                 DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                 EVAL, DW.
         .....................
         .....................  OPERATIONAL TEST & EVAL,
                                 DEFENSE
         .....................  MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
    1    0605118OTE             OPERATIONAL TEST AND                 85,685                               85,685
                                 EVALUATION.
    2    0605131OTE             LIVE FIRE TEST AND                   64,332                               64,332
                                 EVALUATION.
    3    0605814OTE             OPERATIONAL TEST                     70,992            10,900             81,892
                                 ACTIVITIES AND ANALYSES.
         .....................      Increase for test and                             [10,900]
                                    evaluation
                                    technologies.
         .....................  SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT                 221,009            10,900            231,909
                                 SUPPORT.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL OPERATIONAL TEST &            221,009            10,900            231,909
                                 EVAL, DEFENSE.
         .....................
         .....................  TOTAL RDT&E..............        91,056,950         1,159,588         92,216,538
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 2019  Request   Senate  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, ARMY
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   56    0603327A                AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE               1,000                               1,000
                                  SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.
   58    0603627A                SMOKE, OBSCURANT AND                  1,500                               1,500
                                  TARGET DEFEATING SYS-ADV
                                  DEV.
   61    0603747A                SOLDIER SUPPORT AND                   3,000                               3,000
                                  SURVIVABILITY.
   76    0604117A                MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR            23,000                              23,000
                                  DEFENSE (M-SHORAD).
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    28,500                 0            28,500
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                  PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         ......................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                  DEMONSTRATION
   88    0604328A                TRACTOR CAGE.............            12,000                              12,000
  100    0604741A                AIR DEFENSE COMMAND,                119,300                             119,300
                                  CONTROL AND
                                  INTELLIGENCE--ENG DEV.
  125    0605032A                TRACTOR TIRE.............            66,760                              66,760
  128    0605035A                COMMON INFRARED                       2,670                               2,670
                                  COUNTERMEASURES (CIRCM).
  136    0605051A                AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY               34,933                              34,933
                                  DEVELOPMENT.
  147    0303032A                TROJAN--RH12.............             1,200                               1,200
         ......................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                     236,863                 0           236,863
                                  DEVELOPMENT &
                                  DEMONSTRATION.
         ......................
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  184    0607131A                WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS                 2,548                               2,548
                                  PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                  PROGRAMS.
  185    0607133A                TRACTOR SMOKE............             7,780                               7,780
  206    0203801A                MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE                   2,000                               2,000
                                  PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT
                                  PROGRAM.
  209    0205402A                INTEGRATED BASE DEFENSE--             8,000                               8,000
                                  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEV.
  216    0303028A                SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE            23,199                              23,199
                                  ACTIVITIES.
  226    0305206A                AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE              14,000                              14,000
                                  SYSTEMS.
  231    0307665A                BIOMETRICS ENABLED                    2,214                               2,214
                                  INTELLIGENCE.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                 59,741                 0            59,741
                                  SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     325,104                 0           325,104
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, ARMY.
         ......................
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, NAVY
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   41    0603527N                RETRACT LARCH............            18,000                              18,000
   61    0603654N                JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE              13,900                              13,900
                                  ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT.
   74    0603795N                LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY...             1,400                               1,400
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    33,300                 0            33,300
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                  PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         ......................  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT &
                                  DEMONSTRATION
  149    0604755N                SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT             1,100                               1,100
                                  & CONTROL).
         ......................  SUBTOTAL SYSTEM                       1,100                 0             1,100
                                  DEVELOPMENT &
                                  DEMONSTRATION.
         ......................
         9999999999              CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......           117,282                             117,282
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  236    0206313M                MARINE CORPS                         16,130                              16,130
                                  COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                133,412                 0           133,412
                                  SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     167,812                 0           167,812
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, NAVY.
         ......................
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, AF
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT & PROTOTYPES
   65    1206438F                SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.             1,100                               1,100
   70    1206857F                OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE             12,395                              12,395
                                  SPACE.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    13,495                 0            13,495
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT &
                                  PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         9999999999              CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......           188,127                             188,127
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  186    0205219F                MQ-9 UAV.................             4,500                               4,500
  187    0205671F                JOINT COUNTER RCIED                   4,000                               4,000
                                  ELECTRONIC WARFARE.
  188    0207131F                A-10 SQUADRONS...........             1,000                               1,000
  217    0207610F                BATTLEFIELD ABN COMM NODE            42,349                              42,349
                                  (BACN).
  228    0208288F                INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS..             1,200                               1,200
  254    0305111F                WEATHER SERVICE..........             3,000                               3,000
  268    0305202F                DRAGON U-2...............            22,100                              22,100
  272    0305208F                DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/           29,500                              29,500
                                  SURFACE SYSTEMS.
  310    1202247F                AF TENCAP................             5,000                               5,000
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                300,776                 0           300,776
                                  SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     314,271                 0           314,271
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, AF.
         ......................
         ......................  RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
                                  TEST & EVAL, DW
         ......................  ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
                                  DEVELOPMENT
   24    0603122D8Z              COMBATING TERRORISM                  25,000                              25,000
                                  TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.
   26    0603134BR               COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT            13,648                              13,648
                                  SIMULATION.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                    38,648                 0            38,648
                                  TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  ADVANCED COMPONENT
                                  DEVELOPMENT AND
                                  PROTOTYPES
   94    0604134BR               COUNTER IMPROVISED-THREAT           242,668                             242,668
                                  DEMONSTRATION, PROTOTYPE
                                  DEVELOPMENT, AND TESTING.
         ......................  SUBTOTAL ADVANCED                   242,668                 0           242,668
                                  COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT
                                  AND PROTOTYPES.
         ......................
         9999999999              CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS......           192,131                             192,131
         ......................  OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
                                  DEVELOPMENT
  250    1160408BB               OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS.             3,632                               3,632
  251    1160431BB               WARRIOR SYSTEMS..........            11,040                              11,040
  253    1160434BB               UNMANNED ISR.............            11,700                              11,700
  254    1160480BB               SOF TACTICAL VEHICLES....               725                                 725
         ......................  SUBTOTAL OPERATIONAL                219,228                 0           219,228
                                  SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RESEARCH,                     500,544                 0           500,544
                                  DEVELOPMENT, TEST &
                                  EVAL, DW.
         ......................
         ......................  TOTAL RDT&E..............         1,307,731                 0         1,307,731
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 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 2019                           Senate
  Line                           Item                              Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................       2,076,360                          2,076,360
  020    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................         107,946                            107,946
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................         732,485                            732,485
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................       1,169,508                          1,169,508
  050    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................       1,180,460                          1,180,460
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................       1,467,500                          1,467,500
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................       4,285,211                          4,285,211
  080    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................         482,201                            482,201
  090    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................       1,536,851                          1,536,851
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................       8,274,299                          8,274,299
  110    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.       3,516,859                          3,516,859
  120    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............         438,733                            438,733
  180    US AFRICA COMMAND...................................         231,518                            231,518
  190    US EUROPEAN COMMAND.................................         150,268                            150,268
  200    US SOUTHERN COMMAND.................................         195,964          14,300            210,264
             SOUTHCOM ABN GFE Sensor (GEOINT/SIGINT).........                          [4,200]
             SOUTHCOM Cyber HUMINT (CME/OPS).................                          [1,000]
             SOUTHCOM OSINT/PAI (CME/LIC/TOOLS)..............                          [1,600]
             SOUTHCOM Overland Airborne ISR Flight Hours.....                          [7,200]
             SOUTHCOM SIGINT Suite COMSAT RF.................                            [300]
  210    US FORCES KOREA.....................................          59,625                             59,625
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      25,905,788          14,300         25,920,088
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  220    STRATEGIC MOBILITY..................................         370,941                            370,941
  230    ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS...........................         573,560                            573,560
  240    INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS.............................           7,678                              7,678
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................         952,179               0            952,179
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  250    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................         135,832                            135,832
  260    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................          54,819                             54,819
  270    ONE STATION UNIT TRAINING...........................          69,599                             69,599
  280    SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS..............         518,998                            518,998
  290    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................       1,020,073                          1,020,073
  300    FLIGHT TRAINING.....................................       1,082,190                          1,082,190
  310    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................         220,399                            220,399
  320    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................         611,482                            611,482
  330    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         698,962        -200,000            498,962
             Marketing Cuts..................................                       [-200,000]
  340    EXAMINING...........................................         162,049                            162,049
  350    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................         215,622                            215,622
  360    CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.....................         176,914                            176,914
  370    JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING CORPS...............         174,430                            174,430
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................       5,141,369        -200,000          4,941,369
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,259,622                          1,259,622
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  390    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................         588,047                            588,047
  400    CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES...........................         931,462                            931,462
  410    LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.........................         696,114                            696,114
  420    AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT...............................         461,637                            461,637
  430    ADMINISTRATION......................................         447,564                            447,564
  440    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................       2,069,127                          2,069,127
  450    MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.................................         261,021                            261,021
  460    OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.............................         379,541                            379,541
  470    OTHER SERVICE SUPPORT...............................       1,699,767                          1,699,767
  480    ARMY CLAIMS ACTIVITIES..............................         192,686                            192,686
  490    REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..............................         240,917                            240,917
  500    FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT READINESS............         291,569                            291,569
  510    INTERNATIONAL MILITARY HEADQUARTERS.................         442,656                            442,656
  520    MISC. SUPPORT OF OTHER NATIONS......................          48,251                             48,251
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................      10,009,981               0         10,009,981
 
 
         UNDISTRIBUTED
    1    UNDISTRIBUTED.......................................               0        -200,000           -200,000
             Army misrepresentation of civilian pay budget                          [-200,000]
             request.........................................
         SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED..............................               0        -200,000           -200,000
 
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY.................      42,009,317        -385,700         41,623,617
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................          13,867                             13,867
  020    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................         536,438                            536,438
  030    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................         113,225                            113,225
  040    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................         551,141                            551,141
  050    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................          89,073                             89,073
  060    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................         409,531                            409,531
  070    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................         101,411                            101,411
  080    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................          60,114                             60,114
  090    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................         595,728                            595,728
  100    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         304,658                            304,658
  110    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............          22,175                             22,175
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       2,797,361               0          2,797,361
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  120    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          11,832                             11,832
  130    ADMINISTRATION......................................          18,218                             18,218
  140    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................          25,069                             25,069
  150    MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.................................           6,248                              6,248
  160    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................          58,181                             58,181
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         119,548               0            119,548
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES.............       2,916,909               0          2,916,909
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................         810,269                            810,269
  020    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................         193,402                            193,402
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................         753,815                            753,815
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................          84,124                             84,124
  050    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................          31,881                             31,881
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................         973,874                            973,874
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................         784,086                            784,086
  080    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................          51,353                             51,353
  090    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................         221,633                            221,633
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................       1,129,942                          1,129,942
  110    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         919,947                            919,947
  120    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............       1,010,524                          1,010,524
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       6,964,850               0          6,964,850
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  130    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          10,017                             10,017
  140    ADMINISTRATION......................................          72,746                             72,746
  150    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................          83,105                             83,105
  160    MANPOWER MANAGEMENT.................................          10,678                             10,678
  170    OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.............................         254,753                            254,753
  180    REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..............................           3,146                              3,146
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         434,445               0            434,445
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG.................       7,399,295               0          7,399,295
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.................       5,372,399                          5,372,399
  020    FLEET AIR TRAINING..................................       2,023,351                          2,023,351
  030    AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES......          56,225                             56,225
  040    AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT...................         156,081                            156,081
  050    AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT.................................         682,379                            682,379
  060    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................       1,253,756                          1,253,756
  070    AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................          66,649                             66,649
  080    AVIATION LOGISTICS..................................         939,368                            939,368
  090    MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS...................       4,439,566                          4,439,566
  100    SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..................         997,663                            997,663
  110    SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE..............................       8,751,526                          8,751,526
  120    SHIP DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT.......................       2,168,876                          2,168,876
  130    COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........       1,349,593           1,700          1,351,293
             SOUTHCOM CCO Sensor Integration.................                          [1,700]
  150    SPACE SYSTEMS AND SURVEILLANCE......................         215,255                            215,255
  160    WARFARE TACTICS.....................................         632,446                            632,446
  170    OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............         373,046                            373,046
  180    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................       1,452,075                          1,452,075
  190    EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT..         153,719                            153,719
  210    COMBATANT COMMANDERS CORE OPERATIONS................          63,039                             63,039
  220    COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.........          89,339                             89,339
  230    MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATIONS.............           8,475                              8,475
  240    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................         424,088                            424,088
  260    FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE.............................       1,361,947                          1,361,947
  280    WEAPONS MAINTENANCE.................................         823,952                            823,952
  290    OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................         494,101                            494,101
  300    ENTERPRISE INFORMATION..............................         921,936         -45,000            876,936
             General reduction...............................                        [-45,000]
  310    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........       2,040,389         406,000          2,446,389
             FSRM to 100% max executable.....................                        [406,000]
  320    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................       4,414,753                          4,414,753
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      41,725,992         362,700         42,088,692
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  330    SHIP PREPOSITIONING AND SURGE.......................         549,142                            549,142
  340    READY RESERVE FORCE.................................         310,805                            310,805
  360    SHIP ACTIVATIONS/INACTIVATIONS......................         161,150                            161,150
  370    EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS...............         120,338                            120,338
  390    COAST GUARD SUPPORT.................................          24,097                             24,097
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................       1,165,532               0          1,165,532
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  400    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................         145,481                            145,481
  410    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................           9,637                              9,637
  420    RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS.....................         149,687                            149,687
  430    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................         879,557                            879,557
  450    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................         184,436                            184,436
  460    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................         223,159                            223,159
  470    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         181,086                            181,086
  480    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................          96,006                             96,006
  490    CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.....................          72,083                             72,083
  500    JUNIOR ROTC.........................................          54,156                             54,156
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................       1,995,288               0          1,995,288
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................         574,994                            574,994
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  510    ADMINISTRATION......................................       1,089,964                          1,089,964
  530    CIVILIAN MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........         164,074                            164,074
  540    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........         418,350                            418,350
  580    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................         167,106                            167,106
  600    PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND PROGRAM SUPPORT..........         333,556                            333,556
  610    ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT...............         663,690                            663,690
  650    INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES.................         705,087                            705,087
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................       4,116,821               0          4,116,821
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY.................      49,003,633         362,700         49,366,333
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATIONAL FORCES..................................         873,320                            873,320
  020    FIELD LOGISTICS.....................................       1,094,187                          1,094,187
  030    DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................................         314,182                            314,182
  040    MARITIME PREPOSITIONING.............................          98,136                             98,136
  050    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................         183,546                            183,546
  060    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION............         832,636                            832,636
  070    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................       2,151,390                          2,151,390
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       5,547,397               0          5,547,397
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  080    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................          16,453                             16,453
  090    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................           1,144                              1,144
  100    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................         106,360                            106,360
  110    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................          46,096                             46,096
  120    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................         389,751                            389,751
  130    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         201,662                            201,662
  140    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................          32,461                             32,461
  150    JUNIOR ROTC.........................................          24,217                             24,217
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................         818,144               0            818,144
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          50,859                             50,859
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  160    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          29,735                             29,735
  170    ADMINISTRATION......................................         386,375                            386,375
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         466,969               0            466,969
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS.........       6,832,510               0          6,832,510
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.................         569,584                            569,584
  020    INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE............................           6,902                              6,902
  030    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................         109,776                            109,776
  040    AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................             538                                538
  050    AVIATION LOGISTICS..................................          18,888                             18,888
  060    SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..................             574                                574
  070    COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS...............................          17,561                             17,561
  080    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................         121,070                            121,070
  090    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................             337                                337
  100    ENTERPRISE INFORMATION..............................          23,964                             23,964
  110    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........          36,356                             36,356
  120    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................         103,562                            103,562
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       1,009,112               0          1,009,112
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  130    ADMINISTRATION......................................           1,868                              1,868
  140    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........          12,849                             12,849
  160    ACQUISITION AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..................           3,177                              3,177
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................          17,894               0             17,894
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES.............       1,027,006               0          1,027,006
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATING FORCES....................................          99,173                             99,173
  020    DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................................          19,430                             19,430
  030    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........          39,962                             39,962
  040    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................         101,829                            101,829
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................         260,394               0            260,394
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  050    ADMINISTRATION......................................          11,176                             11,176
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................          11,176               0             11,176
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE...........         271,570               0            271,570
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,164,810                          1,164,810
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...............................         758,178          25,000            783,178
             Increase for F-35 sustainment to accelerate                              [25,000]
             depot component repair capability...............
  020    COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES...........................       1,509,027                          1,509,027
  030    AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)......       1,323,330                          1,323,330
  040    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................       3,511,830                          3,511,830
  050    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.       2,892,705          25,000          2,917,705
             Additional demo.................................                         [25,000]
  060    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....       7,613,084         645,900          8,258,984
             Increase for JSTARS buy-back....................                         [95,900]
             WSS to 100% executable..........................                        [550,000]
  070    FLYING HOUR PROGRAM.................................       4,345,208          50,000          4,395,208
             Increase for JSTARS buy-back....................                         [50,000]
  080    BASE SUPPORT........................................       5,989,215                          5,989,215
  090    GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................         928,023                            928,023
  100    OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS.......................       1,080,956                          1,080,956
  110    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................         879,032                            879,032
  130    LAUNCH FACILITIES...................................         183,777                            183,777
  140    SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS...............................         404,072                            404,072
  170    US NORTHCOM/NORAD...................................         187,375                            187,375
  180    US STRATCOM.........................................         529,902                            529,902
  190    US CYBERCOM.........................................         329,474                            329,474
  200    US CENTCOM..........................................         166,024                            166,024
  210    US SOCOM............................................             723                                723
  220    US TRANSCOM.........................................             535                                535
  918    UNDISTRIBUTED.......................................               0         156,800            156,800
             Procurement of 7 DABs for PACOM.................                        [156,800]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      33,797,280         902,700         34,699,980
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  230    AIRLIFT OPERATIONS..................................       1,307,695                          1,307,695
  240    MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS...........................         144,417                            144,417
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................       1,452,112               0          1,452,112
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  280    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................         133,187                            133,187
  290    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................          25,041                             25,041
  300    RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING CORPS (ROTC)..............         117,338                            117,338
  330    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................         401,996                            401,996
  340    FLIGHT TRAINING.....................................         477,064                            477,064
  350    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................         276,423                            276,423
  360    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................          95,948                             95,948
  380    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................         154,530                            154,530
  390    EXAMINING...........................................           4,132                              4,132
  400    OFF-DUTY AND VOLUNTARY EDUCATION....................         223,150                            223,150
  410    CIVILIAN EDUCATION AND TRAINING.....................         209,497                            209,497
  420    JUNIOR ROTC.........................................          59,908                             59,908
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................       2,178,214               0          2,178,214
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,222,456                          1,222,456
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  430    LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................         681,788                            681,788
  440    TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................         117,812                            117,812
  480    ADMINISTRATION......................................         953,102                            953,102
  490    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................         358,389                            358,389
  500    OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................       1,194,862                          1,194,862
  510    CIVIL AIR PATROL....................................          29,594                             29,594
  540    INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT...............................          74,959                             74,959
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................       4,632,962               0          4,632,962
 
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............      42,060,568         902,700         42,963,268
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...............................       1,853,437                          1,853,437
  020    MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS..........................         205,369                            205,369
  030    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................         345,576                            345,576
  040    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         120,736           2,800            123,536
             Additional demo.................................                          [2,800]
  050    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....         241,239          52,000            293,239
             WSS to 91%......................................                         [52,000]
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................         385,922                            385,922
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       3,152,279          54,800          3,207,079
 
 
         ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES
  070    ADMINISTRATION......................................          71,188                             71,188
  080    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................          19,429                             19,429
  090    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERS MGMT (ARPC)..............           9,386                              9,386
  100    OTHER PERS SUPPORT (DISABILITY COMP)................           7,512                              7,512
  110    AUDIOVISUAL.........................................             440                                440
         SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES..         107,955               0            107,955
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE...........       3,260,234          54,800          3,315,034
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS.................................       2,619,940           1,600          2,621,540
             Restoring O&M associated with buyback of 3 PMAI                           [1,600]
             JSTARS aircraft.................................
  020    MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS..........................         623,265                            623,265
  030    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................         748,287                            748,287
  040    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.         303,792                            303,792
  050    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....       1,061,759                          1,061,759
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................         988,333          11,000            999,333
             PFAS Transfer...................................                         [11,000]
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       6,345,376          12,600          6,357,976
 
 
         ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES
  070    ADMINISTRATION......................................          45,711                             45,711
  080    RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING..........................          36,535                             36,535
         SUBTOTAL ADMINISTRATION AND SERVICE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.          82,246               0             82,246
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG..................       6,427,622          12,600          6,440,222
 
 
         OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...............................         430,215           2,500            432,715
             Operational logistics exercise elements.........                          [2,500]
  020    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF--CE2T2........................         602,186                            602,186
  040    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/OPERATING FORCES.........       5,389,250                          5,389,250
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       6,421,651           2,500          6,424,151
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  050    DEFENSE ACQUISITION UNIVERSITY......................         181,601                            181,601
  060    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...............................          96,565                             96,565
  070    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/TRAINING AND RECRUITING..         370,583                            370,583
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................         648,749               0            648,749
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................      15,645,192                         15,645,192
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  080    CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.............................         166,131                            166,131
  100    DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY.......................         625,633                            625,633
  110    DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY..................       1,465,354                          1,465,354
  120    DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY....................         859,923                            859,923
  130    DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY..................       2,106,930                          2,106,930
  150    DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY.......................          27,403                             27,403
  160    DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY............................         379,275                            379,275
  170    DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY..............................         207,537                            207,537
  180    DEFENSE PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING AGENCY.................         130,696                            130,696
  190    DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY.................         754,711                            754,711
  200    DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE............................         789,175          63,600            852,775
             Additional civilian FTE.........................                         [18,600]
             New mission needs...............................                         [45,000]
  220    DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ADMINISTRATION..........          34,951                             34,951
  230    DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY.....................         553,329                            553,329
  250    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............       2,892,284          50,000          2,942,284
             Impact aid for children with severe disabilities                         [10,000]
             Impact aid for schools with military dependent                           [40,000]
             students........................................
  260    MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY..............................         499,817                            499,817
  280    OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT.......................          70,035                             70,035
  290    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..................       1,519,655          46,000          1,565,655
             CDC Health Study (sec. 312).....................                         [10,000]
             Clearinghouse...................................                          [1,000]
             Defense Environmental International Cooperations                          [1,000]
             (DEIC)..........................................
             Defense Fellows Program.........................                         [10,000]
             DOD emerging contaminants.......................                          [1,000]
             DOD environmental resilience....................                          [1,000]
             DOD Rewards Program Cut.........................                         [-3,000]
             Readiness and Environmental Protection                                   [25,000]
             Initiative Increase.............................
  300    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/ADMIN & SVC-WIDE                   97,787                             97,787
          ACTIVITIES.........................................
  310    WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES....................         456,407                            456,407
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................      29,282,225         159,600         29,441,825
 
         TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.......      36,352,625         162,100         36,514,725
 
 
         MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS
         US COURT OF APPEALS FOR ARMED FORCES, DEF
  010    US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES, DEFENSE...          14,662                             14,662
         SUBTOTAL US COURT OF APPEALS FOR ARMED FORCES, DEF..          14,662               0             14,662
 
 
         OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID
  010    OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER AND CIVIC AID.......         107,663                            107,663
         SUBTOTAL OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC          107,663               0            107,663
          AID................................................
 
 
         COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT
  010    FORMER SOVIET UNION (FSU) THREAT REDUCTION..........         335,240                            335,240
         SUBTOTAL COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT.......         335,240               0            335,240
 
 
         DOD ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FUND
  010    ACQ WORKFORCE DEV FD................................         400,000                            400,000
         SUBTOTAL DOD ACQUISITION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FUND.         400,000               0            400,000
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
  060    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY.....................         203,449                            203,449
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY............         203,449               0            203,449
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY
  080    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY.....................         329,253                            329,253
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY............         329,253               0            329,253
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE
  100    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE................         296,808         -11,000            285,808
             PFAS Transfer...................................                        [-11,000]
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE.......         296,808         -11,000            285,808
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE
  120    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE..................           8,926                              8,926
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE.........           8,926               0              8,926
 
 
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES
  140    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED SITES.......         212,346                            212,346
         SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION FORMERLY USED             212,346               0            212,346
          SITES..............................................
 
         TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS..................       1,908,347         -11,000          1,897,347
 
 
         UNDISTRIBUTED
         UNDISTRIBUTED
  999    UNDISTRIBUTED.......................................               0        -216,520           -216,520
             Foreign Currency Fluctuation....................                       [-267,000]
             JROTC...........................................                          [5,480]
             Operation and Maintenance, Air Force DSMOA......                         [10,000]
             Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard                            [15,000]
             DSMOA...........................................
             Operation and Maintenance, Army DSMOA...........                         [10,000]
             Operation and Maintenance, Navy DSMOA...........                         [10,000]
         SUBTOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED..............................               0        -216,520           -216,520
 
         TOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED.................................               0        -216,520           -216,520
 
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE.......................     199,469,636         881,680        200,351,316
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       SEC. 4302. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2019                           Senate
  Line                           Item                              Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................       1,179,339                          1,179,339
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................          25,983                             25,983
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................       2,189,916                          2,189,916
  050    LAND FORCES OPERATIONS SUPPORT......................         188,609                            188,609
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................         120,787                            120,787
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................       3,867,286                          3,867,286
  080    LAND FORCES SYSTEMS READINESS.......................         550,068                            550,068
  090    LAND FORCES DEPOT MAINTENANCE.......................         195,873                            195,873
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................         109,560                            109,560
  110    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.          60,807                             60,807
  140    ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES...............................       5,992,222                          5,992,222
  150    COMMANDERS EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM...............          10,000                             10,000
  160    RESET...............................................       1,036,454                          1,036,454
  180    US AFRICA COMMAND...................................         248,796                            248,796
  190    US EUROPEAN COMMAND.................................          98,127                             98,127
  200    US SOUTHERN COMMAND.................................           2,550                              2,550
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................      15,876,377               0         15,876,377
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  230    ARMY PREPOSITIONED STOCKS...........................         158,753                            158,753
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................         158,753               0            158,753
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,074,270                          1,074,270
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  390    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................         712,230                            712,230
  400    CENTRAL SUPPLY ACTIVITIES...........................          44,168                             44,168
  410    LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.........................           5,300                              5,300
  420    AMMUNITION MANAGEMENT...............................          38,597                             38,597
  460    OTHER PERSONNEL SUPPORT.............................         109,019                            109,019
  490    REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT..............................         191,786                            191,786
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................       2,175,370               0          2,175,370
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY.................      18,210,500               0         18,210,500
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  020    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................          20,700                             20,700
  060    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................             700                                700
  090    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................          20,487                             20,487
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          41,887               0             41,887
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARMY RES.............          41,887               0             41,887
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MANEUVER UNITS......................................          42,519                             42,519
  020    MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES............................             778                                778
  030    ECHELONS ABOVE BRIGADE..............................          12,093                             12,093
  040    THEATER LEVEL ASSETS................................             708                                708
  060    AVIATION ASSETS.....................................          28,135                             28,135
  070    FORCE READINESS OPERATIONS SUPPORT..................           5,908                              5,908
  100    BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................          18,877                             18,877
  120    MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL HEADQUARTERS.............             956                                956
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................         109,974               0            109,974
 
 
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  150    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................             755                                755
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................             755               0                755
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ARNG.................         110,729               0            110,729
 
 
         AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND
         AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY
  090    SUSTAINMENT.........................................       1,522,777                          1,522,777
  100    INFRASTRUCTURE......................................         137,732                            137,732
  110    EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................          71,922                             71,922
  120    TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.............................         175,846                            175,846
         SUBTOTAL AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY.......................       1,908,277               0          1,908,277
 
 
         AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE
  130    SUSTAINMENT.........................................         527,554                            527,554
  140    INFRASTRUCTURE......................................          42,984                             42,984
  150    EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................          14,554                             14,554
  160    TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.............................         181,922                            181,922
         SUBTOTAL AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE.....................         767,014               0            767,014
 
 
         AFGHAN AIR FORCE
  170    SUSTAINMENT.........................................         942,279                            942,279
  180    INFRASTRUCTURE......................................          30,350                             30,350
  190    EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................         572,310                            572,310
  200    TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.............................         277,191                            277,191
         SUBTOTAL AFGHAN AIR FORCE...........................       1,822,130               0          1,822,130
 
 
         AFGHAN SPECIAL SECURITY FORCES
  210    SUSTAINMENT.........................................         353,734                            353,734
  220    INFRASTRUCTURE......................................          43,132                             43,132
  230    EQUIPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION........................         151,790                            151,790
  240    TRAINING AND OPERATIONS.............................         153,373                            153,373
         SUBTOTAL AFGHAN SPECIAL SECURITY FORCES.............         702,029               0            702,029
 
         TOTAL AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND..............       5,199,450               0          5,199,450
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    MISSION AND OTHER FLIGHT OPERATIONS.................         435,507                            435,507
  030    AVIATION TECHNICAL DATA & ENGINEERING SERVICES......             800                                800
  040    AIR OPERATIONS AND SAFETY SUPPORT...................           9,394                              9,394
  050    AIR SYSTEMS SUPPORT.................................         193,384                            193,384
  060    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................         173,053                            173,053
  070    AIRCRAFT DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT...................           3,524                              3,524
  080    AVIATION LOGISTICS..................................          60,219                             60,219
  090    MISSION AND OTHER SHIP OPERATIONS...................         942,960                            942,960
  100    SHIP OPERATIONS SUPPORT & TRAINING..................          20,236                             20,236
  110    SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE..............................       1,022,647                          1,022,647
  130    COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE........          59,553                             59,553
  160    WARFARE TACTICS.....................................          16,651                             16,651
  170    OPERATIONAL METEOROLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY............          31,118                             31,118
  180    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................         635,560                            635,560
  190    EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND DEPOT OPERATIONS SUPPORT..           4,334                              4,334
  220    COMBATANT COMMANDERS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT.........          24,800                             24,800
  240    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................             355                                355
  280    WEAPONS MAINTENANCE.................................         493,033                            493,033
  290    OTHER WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT........................          12,780                             12,780
  310    SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION..........          67,321                             67,321
  320    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................         211,394                            211,394
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       4,418,623               0          4,418,623
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  370    EXPEDITIONARY HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEMS...............          12,902                             12,902
  390    COAST GUARD SUPPORT.................................         165,000                            165,000
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................         177,902               0            177,902
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  430    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................          51,138                             51,138
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................          51,138               0             51,138
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          16,076                             16,076
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  510    ADMINISTRATION......................................           4,145                              4,145
  540    MILITARY MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT..........           7,503                              7,503
  580    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          69,297                             69,297
  610    ACQUISITION, LOGISTICS, AND OVERSIGHT...............          10,912                             10,912
  650    INVESTIGATIVE AND SECURITY SERVICES.................           1,559                              1,559
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         109,492               0            109,492
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY.................       4,757,155               0          4,757,155
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATIONAL FORCES..................................         734,505                            734,505
  020    FIELD LOGISTICS.....................................         212,691                            212,691
  030    DEPOT MAINTENANCE...................................          53,040                             53,040
  070    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................          23,047                             23,047
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       1,023,283               0          1,023,283
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  120    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................          30,459                             30,459
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................          30,459               0             30,459
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................           4,650                              4,650
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  160    SERVICEWIDE TRANSPORTATION..........................          61,400                             61,400
  170    ADMINISTRATION......................................           2,108                              2,108
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................          68,158               0             68,158
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS.........       1,121,900               0          1,121,900
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES
         OPERATING FORCES
  020    INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE............................             500                                500
  030    AIRCRAFT DEPOT MAINTENANCE..........................          11,400                             11,400
  080    COMBAT SUPPORT FORCES...............................          13,737                             13,737
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          25,637               0             25,637
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, NAVY RES.............          25,637               0             25,637
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    OPERATING FORCES....................................           2,550                              2,550
  040    BASE OPERATING SUPPORT..............................             795                                795
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................           3,345               0              3,345
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, MC RESERVE...........           3,345               0              3,345
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    PRIMARY COMBAT FORCES...............................         166,274                            166,274
  020    COMBAT ENHANCEMENT FORCES...........................       1,492,580                          1,492,580
  030    AIR OPERATIONS TRAINING (OJT, MAINTAIN SKILLS)......         110,237                            110,237
  040    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................         209,996                            209,996
  050    FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION & MODERNIZATION.          92,412                             92,412
  060    CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT AND SYSTEM SUPPORT.....       1,289,693                          1,289,693
  070    FLYING HOUR PROGRAM.................................       2,355,264                          2,355,264
  080    BASE SUPPORT........................................       1,141,718                          1,141,718
  090    GLOBAL C3I AND EARLY WARNING........................          13,537                             13,537
  100    OTHER COMBAT OPS SPT PROGRAMS.......................         224,713                            224,713
  110    CYBERSPACE ACTIVITIES...............................          17,353                             17,353
  120    TACTICAL INTEL AND OTHER SPECIAL ACTIVITIES.........          36,098                             36,098
  130    LAUNCH FACILITIES...................................             385                                385
  140    SPACE CONTROL SYSTEMS...............................          38,966                             38,966
  170    US NORTHCOM/NORAD...................................             725                                725
  180    US STRATCOM.........................................           2,056                              2,056
  190    US CYBERCOM.........................................          35,189                             35,189
  200    US CENTCOM..........................................         162,691                            162,691
  210    US SOCOM............................................          19,000                             19,000
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       7,408,887               0          7,408,887
 
 
         MOBILIZATION
  230    AIRLIFT OPERATIONS..................................       1,287,659                          1,287,659
  240    MOBILIZATION PREPAREDNESS...........................         107,064                            107,064
         SUBTOTAL MOBILIZATION...............................       1,394,723               0          1,394,723
 
 
         TRAINING AND RECRUITING
  280    OFFICER ACQUISITION.................................             300                                300
  290    RECRUIT TRAINING....................................             340                                340
  330    SPECIALIZED SKILL TRAINING..........................          25,327                             25,327
  340    FLIGHT TRAINING.....................................             844                                844
  350    PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION..................           1,199                              1,199
  360    TRAINING SUPPORT....................................           1,320                              1,320
         SUBTOTAL TRAINING AND RECRUITING....................          29,330               0             29,330
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................          51,108                             51,108
         ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES
  430    LOGISTICS OPERATIONS................................         154,485                            154,485
  440    TECHNICAL SUPPORT ACTIVITIES........................          13,608                             13,608
  480    ADMINISTRATION......................................           4,814                              4,814
  490    SERVICEWIDE COMMUNICATIONS..........................         131,123                            131,123
  500    OTHER SERVICEWIDE ACTIVITIES........................          97,471                             97,471
  540    INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT...............................             240                                240
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWD ACTIVITIES...................         452,849               0            452,849
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE............       9,285,789               0          9,285,789
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE
         OPERATING FORCES
  030    DEPOT PURCHASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE................          51,000                             51,000
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................           9,500                              9,500
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          60,500               0             60,500
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, AF RESERVE...........          60,500               0             60,500
 
 
         OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG
         OPERATING FORCES
  020    MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS..........................           3,560                              3,560
  060    BASE SUPPORT........................................          12,310                             12,310
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................          15,870               0             15,870
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE, ANG..................          15,870               0             15,870
 
 
         OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
         OPERATING FORCES
  010    JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF...............................          28,671                             28,671
  040    SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND/OPERATING FORCES.........       3,733,161                          3,733,161
         SUBTOTAL OPERATING FORCES...........................       3,761,832               0          3,761,832
 
 
         CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.................................       1,944,813                          1,944,813
         ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES
  100    DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY.......................           1,781                              1,781
  110    DEFENSE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT AGENCY..................          21,723                             21,723
  130    DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY..................         111,702                            111,702
  150    DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY.......................         127,023                            127,023
  170    DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY..............................          14,377                             14,377
  190    DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY.................       2,208,442        -550,000          1,658,442
             Coalition Support Funds.........................                       [-550,000]
  230    DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY.....................         302,250                            302,250
  250    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY............          31,620                             31,620
  290    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE..................          16,579                             16,579
  310    WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES....................           7,766                              7,766
         SUBTOTAL ADMIN & SRVWIDE ACTIVITIES.................       4,788,076        -550,000          4,238,076
 
         TOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE.......       8,549,908        -550,000          7,999,908
 
 
         TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE.......................      47,382,670        -550,000         46,832,670
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL

TITLE XLIV--MILITARY PERSONNEL
 

SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             SEC. 4401. MILITARY PERSONNEL (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2019  Request     Senate  Change    Senate  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS...................        140,689,301          -3,062,080         137,627,221
     End strength cut...............................                              [-993,200]
     Foreign Currency Fluctuation...................                              [-133,000]
     JROTC..........................................                                  1,220
     Military Personnel Underexecution..............                            [-1,937,100]
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS..........        140,689,301          -3,062,080         137,627,221
 
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS
MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND CONTRIBUTIONS.          7,533,090                               7,533,090
SUBTOTAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH FUND                7,533,090                               7,533,090
 CONTRIBUTIONS......................................
 
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................        148,222,391          -3,062,080         145,160,311
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           SEC. 4402. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Item                           FY 2019  Request     Senate  Change    Senate  Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY PERSONNEL
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS...................          4,660,661                               4,660,661
SUBTOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS..........          4,660,661                   0           4,660,661
 
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL............................          4,660,661                   0           4,660,661
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE XLV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
 

SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           SEC. 4501. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2019                           Senate
    Line                           Item                            Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
       010   Industrial Operations...........................          59,002                             59,002
       020   Supply Management--Army.........................          99,763                             99,763
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY.............          59,002               0             59,002
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY.............          99,763               0             99,763
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
       020   Supplies and Materials..........................          69,054                             69,054
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........          69,054               0             69,054
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE
       020   Supply Chain Management--Def....................          48,096                             48,096
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE-WIDE.....          48,096               0             48,096
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA
       010   Working Capital Fund, DECA......................       1,266,200                          1,266,200
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DECA.............       1,266,200               0          1,266,200
 
             TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND......................       1,542,115               0          1,542,115
 
             CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION
             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
         1   Chem Demilitarization--O&M......................         105,997                            105,997
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............         105,997               0            105,997
 
             RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
         2   Chem Demilitarization--RDT&E....................         886,728                            886,728
             SUBTOTAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND                886,728               0            886,728
              EVALUATION.....................................
 
             PROCUREMENT
         3   Chem Demilitarization--Proc.....................           1,091                              1,091
             SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................           1,091               0              1,091
 
             TOTAL CHEM AGENTS & MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION.......         993,816               0            993,816
 
             DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
             DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG ACTIVITIES
       010   Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,           547,171                            547,171
              Defense........................................
             SUBTOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG              547,171               0            547,171
              ACTIVITIES.....................................
 
             DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM
       020   Drug Demand Reduction Program...................         117,900                            117,900
             SUBTOTAL DRUG DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM..........         117,900               0            117,900
 
             READINESS COUNTERDRUG ACTIVITIES
       040   Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,             5,276                              5,276
              Defense........................................
             SUBTOTAL READINESS COUNTERDRUG ACTIVITIES.......           5,276               0              5,276
 
             NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
       030   National Guard Counter-Drug Program.............         117,178                            117,178
             SUBTOTAL NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM....         117,178               0            117,178
 
             TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES,           787,525               0            787,525
              DEF............................................
 
             OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
       010   Office of the Inspector General.................         327,611                            327,611
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............         327,611               0            327,611
 
             RDT&E
       020   Office of the Inspector General.................           1,602                              1,602
             SUBTOTAL RDT&E..................................           1,602               0              1,602
 
             PROCUREMENT
       030   Office of the Inspector General.................              60                                 60
             SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................              60               0                 60
 
             TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL...........         329,273               0            329,273
 
             DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
             OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
       010   In-House Care...................................       9,738,569                          9,738,569
       020   Private Sector Care.............................      15,103,735                         15,103,735
       030   Consolidated Health Support.....................       2,107,961                          2,107,961
       040   Information Management..........................       2,039,878                          2,039,878
       050   Management Activities...........................         307,629                            307,629
       060   Education and Training..........................         756,778           2,500            759,278
                 Specialized medical pilot program...........                          [2,500]
       070   Base Operations/Communications..................       2,090,845                          2,090,845
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................      32,145,395           2,500         32,147,895
 
             RDT&E
       080   R&D Research....................................          11,386                             11,386
       090   R&D Exploratry Development......................          75,010                             75,010
       100   R&D Advanced Development........................         275,258                            275,258
       110   R&D Demonstration/Validation....................         117,529                            117,529
       120   R&D Engineering Development.....................         151,985                            151,985
       130   R&D Management and Support......................          63,755                             63,755
       140   R&D Capabilities Enhancement....................          15,714                             15,714
             SUBTOTAL RDT&E..................................         710,637               0            710,637
 
             PROCUREMENT
       150   PROC Initial Outfitting.........................          33,056                             33,056
       160   PROC Replacement & Modernization................         343,424                            343,424
       180   PROC DoD Healthcare Management System                    496,680                            496,680
              Modernization..................................
             SUBTOTAL PROCUREMENT............................         873,160               0            873,160
 
             TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM....................      33,729,192           2,500         33,731,692
 
             TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS......................      37,381,921           2,500         37,384,421
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         SEC. 4502. OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS  (In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   FY 2019                           Senate
    Line                           Item                            Request      Senate  Change     Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY
       020   Supply Management--Army.........................           6,600                              6,600
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY.............           6,600               0              6,600
 
             WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE
       020   Supplies and Materials..........................           8,590                              8,590
             SUBTOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE........           8,590               0              8,590
 
             TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND......................          15,190               0             15,190
 
             DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEF
             DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG ACTIVITIES
       010   Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,           153,100                            153,100
              Defense........................................
             SUBTOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER DRUG              153,100               0            153,100
              ACTIVITIES.....................................
 
             TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION & CTR-DRUG ACTIVITIES,           153,100               0            153,100
              DEF............................................
 
             OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
       010   Office of the Inspector General.................          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...................................          72,627                             72,627
       020   Private Sector Care.............................         277,066                            277,066
       030   Consolidated Health Support.....................           2,375                              2,375
             SUBTOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE................         352,068               0            352,068
 
             TOTAL DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM....................         352,068               0            352,068
 
             COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND
             COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND (CTEF)
       010   IRAQ............................................         850,000                            850,000
       020   SYRIA...........................................         300,000                            300,000
       030   Other...........................................         250,000                            250,000
             SUBTOTAL COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND             1,400,000               0          1,400,000
              (CTEF).........................................
 
             TOTAL COUNTER-ISIS TRAIN AND EQUIP FUND.........       1,400,000               0          1,400,000
 
             TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS......................       1,945,050               0          1,945,050
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

TITLE XLVI--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
 

SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               SEC. 4601. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              FY 2019                         Senate
          Account                 State/ Country           Installation              Project Title            Request     Senate  Change    Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
ARMY                         ALABAMA                  Anniston Army Depot     Weapon Maintenance Shop...           5,200                           5,200
ARMY                         CALIFORNIA               Fort Irwin              Multipurpose Range Complex          29,000                          29,000
ARMY                         COLORADO                 Fort Carson             Vehicle Maintenance Shop..          77,000                          77,000
ARMY                         GEORGIA                  Fort Gordon             Cyber Instructional Fac             99,000                          99,000
                                                                               and Network Ctr.
ARMY                         GERMANY                  East Camp Grafenwoehr   Mission Training Complex..          31,000                          31,000
ARMY                         HAWAII                   Fort Shafter            Command and Control                105,000                         105,000
                                                                               Facility, Incr 4.
ARMY                         HAWAII                   Wheeler Army Airfield   Rotary wing parking apron.               0          50,000          50,000
ARMY                         HONDURAS                 Soto Cano AB            Barracks..................          21,000                          21,000
ARMY                         INDIANA                  Crane Army Ammunition   Railcar Holding Area......          16,000                          16,000
                                                       Activity
ARMY                         KENTUCKY                 Fort Campbell           Microgrid and power plant.               0          18,000          18,000
ARMY                         KENTUCKY                 Fort Campbell           Vehicle Maintenance Shop..          32,000                          32,000
ARMY                         KENTUCKY                 Fort Knox               Digital Air/Ground                  26,000                          26,000
                                                                               Integration Range.
ARMY                         KOREA                    Camp Tango              Command and Control                 17,500                          17,500
                                                                               Facility.
ARMY                         KUWAIT                   Camp Arifjan            Vehicle Maintenance Shop..          44,000                          44,000
ARMY                         NEW JERSEY               Picatinny Arsenal       Munitions Disassembly               41,000                          41,000
                                                                               Complex.
ARMY                         NEW MEXICO               White Sands Missile     Information Systems                 40,000                          40,000
                                                       Range                   Facility.
ARMY                         NEW YORK                 West Point Military     Engineering Center........          95,000                          95,000
                                                       Reservation
ARMY                         NEW YORK                 West Point Military     Parking Structure.........          65,000                          65,000
                                                       Reservation
ARMY                         NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              Dining Facility...........          10,000                          10,000
ARMY                         SOUTH CAROLINA           Fort Jackson            Trainee Barracks Complex            52,000                          52,000
                                                                               3, Ph2.
ARMY                         TEXAS                    Fort Bliss              Supply Support Activity...          24,000                          24,000
ARMY                         TEXAS                    Fort Hood               Supply Support Activity...               0           9,600           9,600
ARMY                         VIRGINIA                 Arlington National      Arlington National                       0          30,000          30,000
                                                       Cemetery                Cemetery Southern
                                                                               Expansion.
ARMY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Host Nation Support.......          34,000                          34,000
                                                       Locations
ARMY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          71,068                          71,068
                                                       Locations
ARMY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   72,000                          72,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
ARMY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......           5,000                           5,000
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL ARMY                                                                                            1,011,768         107,600       1,119,368
                             .......................  ......................
NAVY
NAVY                         ARIZONA                  Camp Navajo             Missile Motor Magazines                  0          14,800          14,800
                                                                               and U&SI.
NAVY                         BAHAMAS                  Andros Island           AUTEC Austere Quarters....          31,050                          31,050
NAVY                         BAHRAIN ISLAND           SW Asia                 Fleet Maintenance Facility          26,340                          26,340
                                                                               & TOC.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          62 Area Mess Hall &                      0          71,700          71,700
                                                                               Consolidated Warehouse.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          Supply Warehouse SOI-West.               0          16,600          16,600
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          Potable Water Distribution          47,230                          47,230
                                                                               Improvements.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          AAV-ACV Maintenance &               49,410                          49,410
                                                                               Warehouse Facility.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          Full Motion Trainer                 10,670                          10,670
                                                                               Facility.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          Electrical Upgrades.......           4,020                           4,020
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Coronado                CMV-22B Airfield                    77,780                          77,780
                                                                               Improvements.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Lemoore                 F-35 Maintenance Hangar...         112,690                         112,690
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Miramar                 F-35 Vertical Landing Pads          20,480                          20,480
                                                                               and Taxiway.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Miramar                 Airfield Security                   11,500                          11,500
                                                                               Improvements.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Point Mugu              Directed Energy Systems             22,150                          22,150
                                                                               Intergration Lab.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               San Diego               Harbor Drive Switching              48,440                          48,440
                                                                               Station.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               San Diego               Pier 8 Replacement........         108,100                         108,100
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               San Nicolas Island      Missile Assembly Build &            31,010                          31,010
                                                                               High Explosive Mag.
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Seal Beach              Missile Magazines.........               0          21,800          21,800
NAVY                         CALIFORNIA               Seal Beach              Causeway, Boat Channel &           117,830                         117,830
                                                                               Turning Basin.
NAVY                         DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA     Naval Observatory       Master Time Clocks &               115,600                         115,600
                                                                               Operations Facility.
NAVY                         FLORIDA                  Mayport                 LCS Support Facility......          82,350                          82,350
NAVY                         FLORIDA                  Mayport                 LCS Operational Training            29,110                          29,110
                                                                               Facility Addition.
NAVY                         FLORIDA                  NAS Whiting Field       Air Traffic Control Tower                0          10,000          10,000
                                                                               (North Field).
NAVY                         GEORGIA                  MCLB Albany             Welding and Body Repair                  0          31,900          31,900
                                                                               Shop Facility.
NAVY                         GERMANY                  Panzer Kaserne          MARFOREUR HQ Modernization          43,950                          43,950
                                                                               and Expansion.
NAVY                         GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   ACE Gym & Dining..........          27,910                          27,910
NAVY                         GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Earth Covered Magazines...          52,270                          52,270
NAVY                         GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Ordnance Ops..............          22,020                          22,020
NAVY                         GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Machine Gun Range.........         141,287        -126,287          15,000
NAVY                         GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Unaccompanied Enlisted              36,170                          36,170
                                                                               Housing.
NAVY                         GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA     Guantanamo Bay          Solid Waste Management              85,000                          85,000
                                                                               Facility.
NAVY                         HAWAII                   Joint Base Pearl        Drydock Waterfront                  45,000                          45,000
                                                       Harbor-Hickam           Facility.
NAVY                         HAWAII                   Kaneohe Bay             Corrosion Control Hangar..          66,100                          66,100
NAVY                         HAWAII                   Pearl City              Water Transmission Line...          78,320                          78,320
NAVY                         JAPAN                    Kadena AB               Tactical Operations Center           9,049                           9,049
NAVY                         MAINE                    Kittery                 Extend Portal Crane Rail..          39,725                          39,725
NAVY                         MAINE                    Kittery                 Dry Dock #1 Superflood             109,960                         109,960
                                                                               Basin.
NAVY                         MISSISSIPPI              Naval Construction      Expeditionary Combat                     0          22,300          22,300
                                                       Battalion Center        Skills Student Berthing.
NAVY                         NORTH CAROLINA           Camp Lejeune            2nd Radio BN Complex,                    0          51,300          51,300
                                                                               Phase 2.
NAVY                         NORTH CAROLINA           Cherry Point Marine     Aircraft Maintenance               133,970        -106,970          27,000
                                                       Corps Air Station       Hangar.
NAVY                         NORTH CAROLINA           Cherry Point Marine     Flightline Utility                 106,860                         106,860
                                                       Corps Air Station       Modernization.
NAVY                         PENNSYLVANIA             Philadelphia            Submarine Propulsor                 71,050                          71,050
                                                                               Manufacturing Support Fac.
NAVY                         SOUTH CAROLINA           MCAS Beaufort           Cryogenics Facility.......               0           6,300           6,300
NAVY                         SOUTH CAROLINA           MCAS Beaufort           Recycling/Hazardous Waste            9,517                           9,517
                                                                               Facility.
NAVY                         SOUTH CAROLINA           Parris Island           Range Improvements &                35,190                          35,190
                                                                               Modernization, Phase 2.
NAVY                         UTAH                     Hill AFB                D5 Missile Motor Receipt/          105,520                         105,520
                                                                               Storage Facility.
NAVY                         VIRGINIA                 Portsmouth              Ships Maintenance Facility          26,120                          26,120
NAVY                         VIRGINIA                 Quantico                Ammunition Supply Point                  0          13,100          13,100
                                                                               Upgrade, Phase 2.
NAVY                         VIRGINIA                 Quantico                TBS Fire Station..........          21,980         -21,980               0
NAVY                         WASHINGTON               Bangor                  Pier and Maintenance                88,960                          88,960
                                                                               Facility.
NAVY                         WASHINGTON               Whidbey Island          Fleet Support Facility....          19,450                          19,450
NAVY                         WASHINGTON               Whidbey Island          Next Generation Jammer               7,930                           7,930
                                                                               Facility.
NAVY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                        0          25,000          25,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
NAVY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   28,579                          28,579
                                                       Locations               Construction.
NAVY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......         185,542                         185,542
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL NAVY                                                                                            2,543,189          29,563       2,572,752
                             .......................  ......................
AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE                    ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A School Age Facility.          22,500                          22,500
AIR FORCE                    ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35A CATM Range..........          19,000                          19,000
AIR FORCE                    ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35 Aircraft Maintenance            6,800                           6,800
                                                                               Unit Admin Facility.
AIR FORCE                    ALASKA                   Eielson AFB             F-35 Conventional                   15,500                          15,500
                                                                               Munitions Maintenance Fac.
AIR FORCE                    ARIZONA                  Davis-Monthan AFB       AGE Facility..............               0          15,000          15,000
AIR FORCE                    ARIZONA                  Luke AFB                F-35A Squad Ops #6........          17,000                          17,000
AIR FORCE                    ARIZONA                  Luke AFB                F-35A ADAL AMU B914 Sq 6..          23,000                          23,000
AIR FORCE                    FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               F-35A Student Dormitory II          28,000                          28,000
AIR FORCE                    FLORIDA                  Eglin AFB               F-35A Integrated Trng               34,863                          34,863
                                                                               Center Academics Bldg.
AIR FORCE                    FLORIDA                  MacDill AFB             KC135 Beddown Add Flight             3,100                           3,100
                                                                               Simulator Training.
AIR FORCE                    GUAM                     Joint Region Marianas   Hayman Munitions Storage             9,800                           9,800
                                                                               Igloos MSA 2.
AIR FORCE                    MARIANA ISLANDS          Tinian                  APR--Cargo Pad with                 46,000                          46,000
                                                                               Taxiway Extension.
AIR FORCE                    MARIANA ISLANDS          Tinian                  APR--Maintenance Support             4,700                           4,700
                                                                               Facility.
AIR FORCE                    MARYLAND                 Joint Base Andrews      Child Development Center..               0          13,000          13,000
AIR FORCE                    MARYLAND                 Joint Base Andrews      PAR Relocate Haz Cargo Pad          37,000                          37,000
                                                                               and EOD Range.
AIR FORCE                    MARYLAND                 Joint Base Andrews      Presidential Aircraft              154,000         -32,750         121,250
                                                                               Recap Complex, Inc. 2.
AIR FORCE                    MASSACHUSETTS            Hanscom AFB             MIT-Lincoln Laboratory             225,000         -50,000         175,000
                                                                               (West Lab CSL/MIF).
AIR FORCE                    NEBRASKA                 Offutt AFB              Parking Lot, USSTRATCOM...           9,500                           9,500
AIR FORCE                    NEVADA                   Creech AFB              MQ-9 CPIP Operations &              28,000                          28,000
                                                                               Command Center Fac..
AIR FORCE                    NEVADA                   Creech AFB              MQ-9 CPIP GCS Operations            31,000                          31,000
                                                                               Facility.
AIR FORCE                    NEVADA                   Nellis AFB              CRH Simulator.............           5,900                           5,900
AIR FORCE                    NEW MEXICO               Holloman AFB            MQ-9 FTU Ops Facility.....          85,000                          85,000
AIR FORCE                    NEW MEXICO               Kirtland AFB            Wyoming Gate Upgrade for                 0           7,000           7,000
                                                                               Anti-terrorism Compliance.
AIR FORCE                    NEW YORK                 Rome Lab                Anti-Terrorism Perimeter                 0          14,200          14,200
                                                                               Security / Entry Control
                                                                               Point.
AIR FORCE                    NORTH DAKOTA             Minot AFB               Consolidated Helo/TRF Ops/          66,000                          66,000
                                                                               AMU and Alert Fac.
AIR FORCE                    OHIO                     Wright-Patterson AFB    ADAL Intelligence                  116,100                         116,100
                                                                               Production Complex
                                                                               (NASIC).
AIR FORCE                    OKLAHOMA                 Altus AFB               KC-46A FTU/FTC Simulator            12,000                          12,000
                                                                               Facility Ph 3.
AIR FORCE                    OKLAHOMA                 Tinker AFB              KC-46A Depot Maintenance            81,000                          81,000
                                                                               Hangar.
AIR FORCE                    OKLAHOMA                 Tinker AFB              KC-46A Depot Fuel                   85,000                          85,000
                                                                               Maintenance Hangar.
AIR FORCE                    QATAR                    Al Udeid                Personnel Deployment                40,000                          40,000
                                                                               Processing Facility.
AIR FORCE                    QATAR                    Al Udeid                Flightline Support                  30,400                          30,400
                                                                               Facilities.
AIR FORCE                    SOUTH CAROLINA           Shaw AFB                CPIP MQ-9 MCE GROUP.......          53,000                          53,000
AIR FORCE                    TEXAS                    Joint Base San Antonio- BMT Recruit Dormitory 6...          25,000                          25,000
                                                       Lackland
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Fuel System                   16,880                          16,880
                                                       Lakenheath              Maintenance Dock 2 Bay.
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Parking Apron.......          27,431                          27,431
                                                       Lakenheath
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A AGE Facility........          12,449                          12,449
                                                       Lakenheath
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A ADAL Parts Store....          13,926                          13,926
                                                       Lakenheath
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A 6 Bay Hangar........          39,036                          39,036
                                                       Lakenheath
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A Dorm................          29,541                          29,541
                                                       Lakenheath
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           Royal Air Force         F-35A ADAL Conventional              9,204                           9,204
                                                       Lakenheath              Munitions MX.
AIR FORCE                    UTAH                     Hill AFB                Composite Aircraft Antenna               0          26,000          26,000
                                                                               Calibration Fac.
AIR FORCE                    WASHINGTON               White Bluff             ADAL JPRA C2 Mission                     0          14,000          14,000
                                                                               Support Facility.
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE CLASSIFIED     Classified Location     TACMOR--Utilities and               18,000                          18,000
                                                                               Infrastructure Support.
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Planning and Design.......               0          20,000          20,000
                                                       Locations
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Planning and Design.......         195,577                         195,577
                                                       Locations
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Planning and Design.......          11,000                          11,000
                                                       Locations
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Unspecified Minor Military          38,500                          38,500
                                                       Locations               Construction.
      SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE                                                                                       1,725,707          26,450       1,752,157
                             .......................  ......................
DEFENSE-WIDE
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ALABAMA                  Anniston Army Depot     Install microgrid.........               0          20,000          20,000
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ALASKA                   Clear AFS               Long Range Discrim Radar           174,000         -44,000         130,000
                                                                               Sys Complex Ph2.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ALASKA                   Fort Greely             Missile Field #1 Expansion           8,000                           8,000
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ALASKA                   Joint Base Elmendorf-   Operations Facility                 14,000                          14,000
                                                       Richardson              Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ARKANSAS                 Little Rock AFB         Hydrant Fuel System                 14,000                          14,000
                                                                               Alterations.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 BELGIUM                  U.S. Army Garrison      Europe West District                14,305                          14,305
                                                       Benelux (Chievres)      Superintendent's Office.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          SOF EOD Facility--West....           3,547                           3,547
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Camp Pendleton          SOF Human Performance                9,049                           9,049
                                                                               Training Center-West.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF NSWG-1 Operations               25,172                          25,172
                                                                               Support Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF Close Quarters Combat           12,768                          12,768
                                                                               Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF ATC Applied                     14,819                          14,819
                                                                               Instruction Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Coronado                SOF ATC Training Facility.          18,329                          18,329
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               Defense Distribution    Main Access Control Point           18,800                          18,800
                                                       Depot-Tracy             Upgrades.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CALIFORNIA               NB Ventura County       SNI Energy Storage System.               0           6,530           6,530
DEFENSE-WIDE                 COLORADO                 Fort Carson             SOF Human Performance               15,297                          15,297
                                                                               Training Center.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 COLORADO                 Fort Carson             SOF Mountaineering                   9,000                           9,000
                                                                               Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 CONUS CLASSIFIED         Classified Location     Battalion Complex, PH2....          49,222                          49,222
DEFENSE-WIDE                 DJIBOUTI                 Camp Lemonnier          ECIP-install PV ground                   0           3,750           3,750
                                                                               array.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GERMANY                  Baumholder              SOF Joint Parachute                 11,504                          11,504
                                                                               Rigging Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GERMANY                  Kaiserslautern AB       Kaiserslautern Middle               99,955                          99,955
                                                                               School.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GERMANY                  Rhine Ordnance          Medical Center Replacement         319,589                         319,589
                                                       Barracks                Inc. 8.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GERMANY                  Weisbaden               Clay Kaserne Elementary             56,048                          56,048
                                                                               School.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GREECE                   NSA Souda Bay           Energy management control                0           2,230           2,230
                                                                               systems (EMCS).
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GUAM                     Naval Base Guam         P-691 NBG 74 facilities                  0           4,634           4,634
                                                                               automated controls.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA     Guantanamo Bay          Working Dog Treatment                9,080                           9,080
                                                                               Facility Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 HAWAII                   Bellows AFB             Expand PV and provide                    0           2,944           2,944
                                                                               energy resilience to fire
                                                                               crash rescue.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 JAPAN                    Camp McTureous          Bechtel Elementary School.          94,851                          94,851
DEFENSE-WIDE                 JAPAN                    Iwakuni                 Fuel Pier.................          33,200                          33,200
DEFENSE-WIDE                 JAPAN                    Kadena AB               Truck Unload Facilities...          21,400                          21,400
DEFENSE-WIDE                 JAPAN                    Yokosuka                Kinnick High School.......         170,386        -130,386          40,000
DEFENSE-WIDE                 KANSAS                   Salina Training Center  PV/Water Conservation &                  0           3,500           3,500
                                                                               Energy Resilience.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 KENTUCKY                 Fort Campbell           Ft Campbell Middle School.          62,634                          62,634
DEFENSE-WIDE                 KENTUCKY                 Fort Campbell           SOF Logistics Support                5,435                           5,435
                                                                               Operations Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 KENTUCKY                 Fort Campbell           SOF Air/Ground Integ.                9,091                           9,091
                                                                               Urban Live Fire Range.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 KENTUCKY                 Fort Campbell           SOF Multi-Use Helicopter             5,138                           5,138
                                                                               Training Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 LOUISIANA                JRB NAS New Orleans     Distribution Switchgear...               0           5,340           5,340
DEFENSE-WIDE                 MAINE                    Kittery                 Consolidated Warehouse              11,600                          11,600
                                                                               Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 MARYLAND                 Fort Meade              NSAW Recapitalize Building         218,000         -26,400         191,600
                                                                               #2 Inc 4.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 MARYLAND                 Fort Meade              NSAW Recapitalize Building          99,000                          99,000
                                                                               #3 Inc 1.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 MARYLAND                 Fort Meade              Mission Support Operations          30,000                          30,000
                                                                               Warehouse Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 MISSOURI                 St Louis                Next NGA West (N2W)                213,600        -163,600          50,000
                                                                               Complex Phase 1 Inc. 2.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 MISSOURI                 St Louis                Next NGA West (N2W)                110,000                         110,000
                                                                               Complex Phase 2 Inc. 1.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 NEW JERSEY               Joint Base McGuire-Dix- Hot Cargo Hydrant System            10,200                          10,200
                                                       Lakehurst               Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              SOF Replace Training Maze           12,109                          12,109
                                                                               and Tower.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 NORTH CAROLINA           Fort Bragg              SOF SERE Resistance                 20,257                          20,257
                                                                               Training Lab. Complex.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 NORTH CAROLINA           New River               Amb Care Center/Dental              32,580                          32,580
                                                                               Clinic Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 OKLAHOMA                 McAlester               Bulk Diesel System                   7,000                           7,000
                                                                               Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 SOUTH CAROLINA           MCAS Beaufort           Electrical hardening and                 0          22,402          22,402
                                                                               black start CHP system.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 TEXAS                    Camp Mabry              Install microgrid.........               0           5,500           5,500
DEFENSE-WIDE                 TEXAS                    Joint Base San Antonio- Energy Aerospace                    10,200                          10,200
                                                       Lackland                Operations Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 TEXAS                    Red River Army Depot    General Purpose Warehouse.          71,500                          71,500
DEFENSE-WIDE                 UNITED KINGDOM           Croughton RAF           Ambulatory Care Center              10,000         -10,000               0
                                                                               Addition/Alteration.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Dam Neck                SOF Magazines.............           8,959                           8,959
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Fort A.P. Hill          Training Campus...........          11,734                          11,734
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Fort Belvoir            Human Performance Training           6,127                           6,127
                                                                               Center.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Humphreys Engineer      Maintenance and Supply              20,257                          20,257
                                                       Center                  Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Joint Base Langley-     Fuel Facilities                      6,900                           6,900
                                                       Eustis                  Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Joint Base Langley-     Ground Vehicle Fueling               5,800                           5,800
                                                       Eustis                  Facility Replacement.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 NAS Oceana              Super Flight Line                        0           2,520           2,520
                                                                               Electrical Distribtion
                                                                               System (FLEDS).
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Pentagon                North Village VACP &                12,200                          12,200
                                                                               Fencing.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 VIRGINIA                 Pentagon                Exterior Infrastruc. &              23,650                          23,650
                                                                               Security Improvements.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WASHINGTON               Joint Base Lewis-       Refueling Facility........          26,200                          26,200
                                                       McChord
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design--ERCIP               0           5,000           5,000
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          55,925                          55,925
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......             496                             496
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   10,000                          10,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          14,184                          14,184
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   13,642                          13,642
                                                       Locations               Construction.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    5,000                           5,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Energy Resilience and              150,000                         150,000
                                                       Locations               Conserv. Invest. Prog..
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Contingency Construction..          10,000                          10,000
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,000                           3,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          14,300                          14,300
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   ERCIP Design..............          10,000                          10,000
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Exercise Related Minor              12,479                          12,479
                                                       Locations               Construction.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......           2,036                           2,036
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Planning & Design.........          42,705                          42,705
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Unspecified Minor                   17,366                          17,366
                                                       Locations               Construction.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Planning and Design.......          55,699                          55,699
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL DEFENSE-WIDE                                                                                    2,693,324        -290,036       2,403,288
                             .......................  ......................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          ALASKA                   Joint Base Elmendorf-   United States Property &            27,000                          27,000
                                                       Richardson              Fiscal Office.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          ILLINOIS                 Marseilles              Automated Record Fire                5,000                           5,000
                                                                               Range.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          MONTANA                  Malta                   National Guard Readiness            15,000                          15,000
                                                                               Center.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          NEVADA                   North Las Vegas         National Guard Readiness            32,000                          32,000
                                                                               Center.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          NEW HAMPSHIRE            Pembroke                National Guard Readiness            12,000                          12,000
                                                                               Center.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          NORTH DAKOTA             Fargo                   National Guard Readiness            32,000                          32,000
                                                                               Center.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          OHIO                     Camp Ravenna            Automated Multipurpose               7,400                           7,400
                                                                               Machine Gun Range.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          OKLAHOMA                 Lexington               Aircraft vehicle storage                 0          11,000          11,000
                                                                               building.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          OREGON                   Boardman                Tactical unmanned aerial                 0          11,000          11,000
                                                                               vehicle hangar.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          SOUTH DAKOTA             Rapid City              National Guard Readiness            15,000                          15,000
                                                                               Center.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          TEXAS                    Houston                 Unheated vehicle storage                 0          15,000          15,000
                                                                               (aircraft).
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          VIRGINIA                 Sandston                Army aviation support                    0          89,000          89,000
                                                                               facility.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   18,100                          18,100
                                                       Locations               Construction.
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD          WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......          16,622                          16,622
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL ARMY NATIONAL GUARD                                                                               180,122         126,000         306,122
                             .......................  ......................
AIR NATIONAL GUARD
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           CALIFORNIA               Channel Islands ANGS    Construct C-130J Flight              8,000                           8,000
                                                                               Simulator Facility.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           HAWAII                   Joint Base Pearl        Construct Addition to F-22          17,000                          17,000
                                                       Harbor-Hickam           LO/CRF B3408.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           ILLINOIS                 Gen. Wayne A. Downing   Construct New Fire Crash/            9,000                           9,000
                                                       Peoria International    Rescue Station.
                                                       Airport
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           LOUISIANA                JRB NAS New Orleans     NORTHCOM--Construct Alert           15,000                          15,000
                                                                               Apron.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           NEW YORK                 Francis S. Gabreski     Security Forces/                    20,000                          20,000
                                                       Airport                 Comm.Training Facility.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           PENNSYLVANIA             Fort Indiantown Gap     Replace Operations                   8,000                           8,000
                                                                               Training/Dining Hall.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           PUERTO RICO              Luis Munoz Marin        Hurricane Maria--                        0          15,000          15,000
                                                       International           Communications Facility.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           PUERTO RICO              Luis Munoz Marin        Hurricane Maria--                        0          35,000          35,000
                                                       International Airport   Maintenance Hangar.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           VIRGINIA                 Joint Base Langley-     Construct Cyber Ops                 10,000                          10,000
                                                       Eustis                  Facility.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......               0           4,000           4,000
                                                       Locations
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                   23,626                          23,626
                                                       Locations               Construction.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD           WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       Planning and Design.......          18,500                          18,500
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL AIR NATIONAL GUARD                                                                                129,126          54,000         183,126
                             .......................  ......................
ARMY RESERVE
ARMY RESERVE                 CALIFORNIA               Barstow                 ECS Modified TEMF /                 34,000                          34,000
                                                                               Warehouse.
ARMY RESERVE                 WISCONSIN                Fort McCoy              Transient Training                  23,000                          23,000
                                                                               Barracks.
ARMY RESERVE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    2,064                           2,064
                                                       Locations               Construction.
ARMY RESERVE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......           5,855                           5,855
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL ARMY RESERVE                                                                                       64,919               0          64,919
                             .......................  ......................
NAVY RESERVE
NAVY RESERVE                 CALIFORNIA               Seal Beach              Reserve Training Center...          21,740                          21,740
NAVY RESERVE                 GEORGIA                  Benning                 Reserve Training Center...          13,630                          13,630
NAVY RESERVE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,000                           3,000
                                                       Locations               Construction.
NAVY RESERVE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           4,695                           4,695
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL NAVY RESERVE                                                                                       43,065               0          43,065
                             .......................  ......................
AIR FORCE RESERVE
AIR FORCE RESERVE            INDIANA                  Grissom ARB             Aerial Port Facility......               0           9,400           9,400
AIR FORCE RESERVE            INDIANA                  Grissom ARB             Add/Alter Aircraft                  12,100                          12,100
                                                                               Maintenance Hangar.
AIR FORCE RESERVE            MINNESOTA                Minneapolis-St Paul     Small Arms Range..........           9,000                           9,000
                                                       IAP
AIR FORCE RESERVE            MISSISSIPPI              Keesler AFB             Aeromedical Staging                  4,550                           4,550
                                                                               Squadron Facility.
AIR FORCE RESERVE            NEW YORK                 Niagara Falls IAP       Physical Fitness Center...          14,000                          14,000
AIR FORCE RESERVE            TEXAS                    Fort Worth              Munitions Training/Admin             3,100                           3,100
                                                                               Facility.
AIR FORCE RESERVE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning and Design.......               0           5,000           5,000
                                                       Locations
AIR FORCE RESERVE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           4,055                           4,055
                                                       Locations
AIR FORCE RESERVE            WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Unspecified Minor                    3,358                           3,358
                                                       Locations               Construction.
      SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE RESERVE                                                                                  50,163          14,400          64,563
                             .......................  ......................
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT     WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    NATO Security           NATO Security Investment           171,064                         171,064
 PROGRAM                                               Investment Program      Program.
      SUBTOTAL NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM                                                                  171,064               0         171,064
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION                                                                              8,612,447          67,977       8,680,424
                             .......................  ......................
FAMILY HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           GERMANY                  Baumholder              Family Housing                      32,000                          32,000
                                                                               Improvements.
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           ITALY                    Vicenza                 Family Housing New                  95,134                          95,134
                                                                               Construction.
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           KOREA                    Camp Humphreys          Family Housing New                  85,000                          85,000
                                                                               Construction Incr 3.
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           KOREA                    Camp Walker             Family Housing Replacement          68,000                          68,000
                                                                               Construction.
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           PUERTO RICO              Fort Buchanan           Family Housing Replacement          26,000                          26,000
                                                                               Construction.
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           WISCONSIN                Fort McCoy              Family Housing New                   6,200                           6,200
                                                                               Construction.
CONSTRUCTION, ARMY           WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Family Housing P & D......          18,326                          18,326
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, ARMY                                                                                330,660               0         330,660
                             .......................  ......................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................          36,302                          36,302
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................          10,502                          10,502
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............          15,842                          15,842
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Miscellaneous.............             408                             408
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............          75,530                          75,530
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................          57,872                          57,872
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................         161,252                         161,252
 ARMY                                                  Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Housing Privitization               18,801                          18,801
 ARMY                                                  Locations               Support.
      SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY                                                                   376,509               0         376,509
                             .......................  ......................
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND       MARIANA ISLANDS          Guam                    Replace Andersen Housing            83,441                          83,441
 MARINE CORPS                                                                  PH III.
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND       WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Improvements, Washington            16,638                          16,638
 MARINE CORPS                                          Locations               DC.
CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND       WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   P&D Washington DC.........           4,502                           4,502
 MARINE CORPS                                          Locations
      SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                                               104,581               0         104,581
                             .......................  ......................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................          60,252                          60,252
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............          16,395                          16,395
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................          50,870                          50,870
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Miscellaneous.............             148                             148
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................          16,261                          16,261
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          62,515                          62,515
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............          86,328                          86,328
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Housing Privatization               21,767                          21,767
 NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                 Locations               Support.
      SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS                                                  314,536               0         314,536
                             .......................  ......................
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE      WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Construction Improvements.          75,247                          75,247
                                                       Locations
CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE      WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Planning & Design.........           3,199                           3,199
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE                                                                            78,446               0          78,446
                             .......................  ......................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Housing Privatization.....          22,205                          22,205
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................          48,566                          48,566
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................          54,423                          54,423
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................          13,669                          13,669
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............          30,645                          30,645
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Miscellaneous.............           2,171                           2,171
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          15,832                          15,832
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............         129,763                         129,763
 AIR FORCE                                             Locations
      SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE                                                              317,274               0         317,274
                             .......................  ......................
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................           4,100                           4,100
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............             416                             416
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................             106                             106
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          13,046                          13,046
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............             121                             121
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............             643                             643
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Leasing...................          38,232                          38,232
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Furnishings...............              01                              01
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Services..................              02                              02
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Utilities.................              09                              09
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Maintenance...............           1,542                           1,542
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,   WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Management................             155                             155
 DEFENSE-WIDE                                          Locations
      SUBTOTAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE                                                            58,373               0          58,373
                             .......................  ......................
IMPROVEMENT FUND
IMPROVEMENT FUND             WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Administrative Expenses--            1,653                           1,653
                                                       Locations               FHIF.
      SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT FUND                                                                                    1,653               0           1,653
                             .......................  ......................
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND
UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND       WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unaccompanied Housing   Administrative Expenses--              600                             600
                                                       Improvement Fund        UHIF.
      SUBTOTAL UNACCMP HSG IMPRV FUND                                                                                600               0             600
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING                                                                                     1,582,632                       1,582,632
                             .......................  ......................
DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ARMY
ARMY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Base Realignment &      Base Realignment and                62,796                          62,796
                                                       Closure, Army           Closure.
                             .......................  ......................
NAVY
NAVY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   Base Realignment & Closure         151,839                         151,839
                                                       Locations
                             .......................  ......................
AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   DoD BRAC Activities--Air            52,903                          52,903
                                                       Locations               Force.
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL DEFENSE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE                                                                 267,538                         267,538
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC                                                   10,462,617          67,977      10,530,594
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             SEC. 4602. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS (In Thousands of Dollars)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              FY 2019                         Senate
          Account                 State/ Country           Installation              Project Title            Request     Senate  Change    Authorized
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
ARMY
ARMY                         BULGARIA                 Nevo Selo FOS           EDI: Ammunition Holding              5,200                           5,200
                                                                               Area.
ARMY                         GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA     Guantanamo Bay          OCO: High Value Detention           69,000         -69,000               0
                                                                               Facility.
ARMY                         POLAND                   Drawsko Pomorski        EDI: Staging Areas........          17,000                          17,000
                                                       Training Area
ARMY                         POLAND                   Powidz AB               EDI: Rail Extension &               14,000                          14,000
                                                                               Railhead.
ARMY                         POLAND                   Powidz AB               EDI: Ammunition Storage             52,000                          52,000
                                                                               Facility.
ARMY                         POLAND                   Powidz AB               EDI: Bulk Fuel Storage....          21,000                          21,000
ARMY                         POLAND                   Zagan Training Area     EDI: Rail Extension and              6,400                           6,400
                                                                               Railhead.
ARMY                         POLAND                   Zagan Training Area     EDI: Staging Areas........          34,000                          34,000
ARMY                         ROMANIA                  Mihail Kogalniceanu     EDI: Explosives & Ammo              21,651                          21,651
                                                       FOS                     Load/Unload Apron.
ARMY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   EDI: Planning and Design..          20,999                          20,999
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL ARMY                                                                                              261,250         -69,000         192,250
                             .......................  ......................
NAVY
NAVY                         GREECE                   Souda Bay               EDI: Marathi Logistics               6,200                           6,200
                                                                               Support Center.
NAVY                         GREECE                   Souda Bay               EDI: Joint Mobility                 41,650                          41,650
                                                                               Processing Center.
NAVY                         ITALY                    Sigonella               EDI: P-8A Taxiway.........          66,050                          66,050
NAVY                         SPAIN                    Rota                    EDI: Port Operations                21,590                          21,590
                                                                               Facilities.
NAVY                         UNITED KINGDOM           Lossiemouth             EDI: P-8 Base Improvements          79,130                          79,130
NAVY                         WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   EDI: Planning and Design..          12,700                          12,700
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL NAVY                                                                                              227,320               0         227,320
                             .......................  ......................
AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE                    GERMANY                  Ramstein AB             EDI--KMC DABS-FEV/RH               119,000                         119,000
                                                                               Storage Warehouses.
AIR FORCE                    NORWAY                   Rygge AS                EDI--Construct Taxiway....          13,800                          13,800
AIR FORCE                    SLOVAKIA                 Malacky AB              EDI--Regional Munitions             59,000                          59,000
                                                                               Storage Area.
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           RAF Fairford            EDI--Construct DABS-FEV             87,000                          87,000
                                                                               Storage.
AIR FORCE                    UNITED KINGDOM           RAF Fairford            EDI--Munitions Holding              19,000                          19,000
                                                                               Area.
AIR FORCE                    WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   EDI--Planning & Design              48,000                          48,000
                                                       Locations               Funds.
      SUBTOTAL AIR FORCE                                                                                         345,800               0         345,800
                             .......................  ......................
DEFENSE-WIDE
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ESTONIA                  Unspecified Estonia     EDI: SOF Training Facility           9,600                           9,600
DEFENSE-WIDE                 ESTONIA                  Unspecified Estonia     EDI: SOF Operations                  6,100                           6,100
                                                                               Facility.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 QATAR                    Al Udeid                OCO: Trans-Regional                 60,000                          60,000
                                                                               Logistics Complex.
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Unspecified Worldwide   EDI: Planning and Design..           7,100                           7,100
                                                       Locations
DEFENSE-WIDE                 WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED    Various Worldwide       EDI: Planning and Design..           4,250                           4,250
                                                       Locations
      SUBTOTAL DEFENSE-WIDE                                                                                       87,050               0          87,050
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION                                                                                921,420         -69,000         852,420
                             .......................  ......................
      TOTAL MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, FAMILY HOUSING, AND BRAC                                                      921,420         -69,000         852,420
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      TITLE XLVII--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

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 2019  Request   Senate  Change      Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary Summary By Appropriation
  Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies
  Appropriation Summary:
    Energy Programs
      Nuclear Energy......................................           136,090               0             136,090
 
    Atomic Energy Defense Activities
      National nuclear security administration:
        Weapons activities................................        11,017,078               0          11,017,078
        Defense nuclear nonproliferation..................         1,862,825               0           1,862,825
        Naval reactors....................................         1,788,618               0           1,788,618
        Federal salaries and expenses.....................           422,529               0             422,529
      Total, National nuclear security administration.....        15,091,050               0          15,091,050
 
      Environmental and other defense activities:
        Defense environmental cleanup.....................         5,630,217               0           5,630,217
        Other defense activities..........................           853,300               0             853,300
        Defense nuclear waste disposal....................            30,000         -30,000                   0
      Total, Environmental & other defense activities.....         6,513,517         -30,000           6,483,517
    Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities...............        21,604,567         -30,000          21,574,567
Total, Discretionary Funding..............................        21,740,657         -30,000          21,710,657
 
Nuclear Energy
  Idaho sitewide safeguards and security..................           136,090                             136,090
Total, Nuclear Energy.....................................           136,090               0             136,090
 
Weapons Activities
  Directed stockpile work
    Life extension programs and major alterations
      B61 Life extension program..........................           794,049                             794,049
      W76 Life extension program..........................           113,888        -113,888                   0
         Split into W76-1 and W76-2 lines.................                         [-113,888]
      W76-1 Life extension program........................                 0          48,888              48,888
         Complete W76-1 life extension....................                           [48,888]
      W76-2 Warhead modification program..................                 0          65,000              65,000
         NPR Implementation...............................                           [65,000]
      W88 Alt 370.........................................           304,285                             304,285
      W80-4 Life extension program........................           654,766                             654,766
      IW-1................................................            53,000                              53,000
    Total, Life extension programs and major alterations..         1,919,988               0           1,919,988
 
    Stockpile systems
      B61 Stockpile systems...............................            64,547                              64,547
      W76 Stockpile systems...............................            94,300                              94,300
      W78 Stockpile systems...............................            81,329                              81,329
      W80 Stockpile systems...............................            80,204                              80,204
      B83 Stockpile systems...............................            35,082                              35,082
      W87 Stockpile systems...............................            83,107                              83,107
      W88 Stockpile systems...............................           180,913                             180,913
    Total, Stockpile systems..............................           619,482               0             619,482
 
    Weapons dismantlement and disposition
      Operations and maintenance..........................            56,000                              56,000
 
    Stockpile services
      Production support..................................           512,916                             512,916
      Research and development support....................            38,129                              38,129
      R&D certification and safety........................           216,582                             216,582
      Management, technology, and production..............           300,736                             300,736
    Total, Stockpile services.............................         1,068,363               0           1,068,363
 
    Strategic materials
      Uranium sustainment.................................            87,182                              87,182
      Plutonium sustainment...............................           361,282                             361,282
      Tritium sustainment.................................           205,275                             205,275
      Lithium sustainment.................................            29,135                              29,135
      Domestic uranium enrichment.........................           100,704                             100,704
      Strategic materials sustainment.....................           218,794                             218,794
    Total, Strategic materials............................         1,002,372               0           1,002,372
  Total, Directed stockpile work..........................         4,666,205               0           4,666,205
 
  Research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E)
    Science
      Advanced certification..............................            57,710                              57,710
      Primary assessment technologies.....................            95,057                              95,057
      Dynamic materials properties........................           131,000                             131,000
      Advanced radiography................................            32,544                              32,544
      Secondary assessment technologies...................            77,553                              77,553
      Academic alliances and partnerships.................            53,364                              53,364
      Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical Experiments...           117,632                             117,632
    Total, Science........................................           564,860               0             564,860
 
    Engineering
      Enhanced surety.....................................            43,226                              43,226
      Weapon systems engineering assessment technology....            27,536                              27,536
      Nuclear survivability...............................            48,230                              48,230
      Enhanced surveillance...............................            58,375                              58,375
      Stockpile Responsiveness............................            34,000                              34,000
    Total, Engineering ...................................           211,367               0             211,367
 
    Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield
      Ignition............................................            22,434                              22,434
      Support of other stockpile programs.................            17,397                              17,397
      Diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support....            51,453                              51,453
      Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion............             8,310                               8,310
      Facility operations and target production...........           319,333                             319,333
    Total, Inertial confinement fusion and high yield.....           418,927               0             418,927
 
    Advanced simulation and computing
      Advanced simulation and computing...................           656,401                             656,401
      Construction:
        18-D-670, Exascale Class Computer Cooling                     24,000                              24,000
         Equipment, LANL..................................
        18-D-620, Exascale Computing Facility                         23,000                              23,000
         Modernization Project, LLNL......................
      Total, Construction.................................            47,000               0              47,000
    Total, Advanced simulation and computing..............           703,401               0             703,401
 
    Advanced manufacturing
      Additive manufacturing..............................            17,447                              17,447
      Component manufacturing development.................            48,477                              48,477
      Process technology development......................            30,914                              30,914
    Total, Advanced manufacturing.........................            96,838               0              96,838
  Total, RDT&E............................................         1,995,393               0           1,995,393
 
  Infrastructure and operations
    Operations of facilities..............................           891,000                             891,000
    Safety and environmental operations...................           115,000                             115,000
    Maintenance and repair of facilities..................           365,000                             365,000
    Recapitalization:
      Infrastructure and safety...........................           431,631                             431,631
      Capability based investments........................           109,057                             109,057
    Total, Recapitalization...............................           540,688               0             540,688
 
      Program increase to address high-priority deferred
       maintenance
 
    Construction:
      19-D-670, 138kV Power Transmission System                        6,000                               6,000
       Replacement, NNSS..................................
      19-D-660, Lithium Production Capability, Y-12.......            19,000                              19,000
      18-D-650, Tritium Production Capability, SRS........            27,000                              27,000
      17-D-640, U1a Complex Enhancements Project, NNSS....            53,000                              53,000
      16-D-515, Albuquerque complex project...............            47,953                              47,953
      06-D-141 Uranium processing facility Y-12, Oak                 703,000                             703,000
       Ridge, TN..........................................
      04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy research facility            235,095                             235,095
       replacement project, LANL..........................
    Total, Construction...................................         1,091,048               0           1,091,048
  Total, Infrastructure and operations....................         3,002,736               0           3,002,736
 
  Secure transportation asset
    Operations and equipment..............................           176,617                             176,617
    Program direction.....................................           102,022                             102,022
  Total, Secure transportation asset......................           278,639               0             278,639
 
  Defense nuclear security
    Operations and maintenance............................           690,638                             690,638
  Total, Defense nuclear security.........................           690,638               0             690,638
 
  Information technology and cybersecurity................           221,175                             221,175
 
  Legacy contractor pensions..............................           162,292                             162,292
Total, Weapons Activities.................................        11,017,078               0          11,017,078
 
 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
  Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs
    Global material security
      International nuclear security......................            46,339                              46,339
      Domestic radiological security......................            90,764                              90,764
      International radiological security.................            59,576                              59,576
      Nuclear smuggling detection and deterrence..........           140,429                             140,429
    Total, Global material security.......................           337,108               0             337,108
 
    Material management and minimization
      HEU reactor conversion..............................            98,300                              98,300
      Nuclear material removal............................            32,925                              32,925
      Material disposition................................           200,869                             200,869
    Total, Material management & minimization.............           332,094               0             332,094
 
    Nonproliferation and arms control.....................           129,703                             129,703
      Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D................           456,095                             456,095
 
    Nonproliferation Construction:
      18-D-150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition Project......            59,000                              59,000
      99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication                    220,000                             220,000
       Facility, SRS......................................
    Total, Nonproliferation construction..................           279,000               0             279,000
  Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs........         1,534,000               0           1,534,000
 
  Legacy contractor pensions..............................            28,640                              28,640
  Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response program..           319,185                             319,185
  Use of prior year balances..............................           -19,000                             -19,000
Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................         1,862,825               0           1,862,825
 
 
Naval Reactors
  Naval reactors development..............................           514,951                             514,951
  Columbia-Class reactor systems development..............           138,000                             138,000
  S8G Prototype refueling.................................           250,000                             250,000
  Naval reactors operations and infrastructure............           525,764                             525,764
  Construction:...........................................                                                     0
    19-D-930, KS Overhead Piping..........................            10,994                              10,994
    17-D-911, BL Fire System Upgrade......................            13,200                              13,200
    14-D-901 Spent fuel handling recapitalization project,           287,000                             287,000
     NRF..................................................
  Total, Construction.....................................           311,194               0             311,194
  Program direction.......................................            48,709                              48,709
Total, Naval Reactors.....................................         1,788,618               0           1,788,618
 
 
Federal Salaries And Expenses
  Program direction.......................................           422,529                             422,529
Total, Office Of The Administrator........................           422,529               0             422,529
 
 
Defense Environmental Cleanup
  Closure sites:
    Closure sites administration..........................             4,889                               4,889
 
  Richland:
    River corridor and other cleanup operations...........            89,577                              89,577
    Central plateau remediation...........................           562,473                             562,473
    Richland community and regulatory support.............             5,121                               5,121
    Construction:
      18-D-404 WESF Modifications and Capsule Storage.....             1,000                               1,000
    Total, Construction...................................             1,000               0               1,000
  Total, Hanford site.....................................           658,171               0             658,171
 
  Office of River Protection:
    Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant Commissioning....            15,000                              15,000
    Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition...           677,460                             677,460
    Construction:
      15-D-409 Low activity waste pretreatment system, ORP            56,053                              56,053
         01-D-416 A-D WTP Subprojects A-D.................           675,000                             675,000
         01-D-416 E--Pretreatment Facility................            15,000                              15,000
    Total, Construction...................................           746,053               0             746,053
  Total, Office of River protection.......................         1,438,513               0           1,438,513
 
  Idaho National Laboratory:
    SNF stabilization and disposition--2012...............            17,000                              17,000
    Solid waste stabilization and disposition.............           148,387                             148,387
    Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and                  137,739                             137,739
     disposition..........................................
    Soil and water remediation--2035......................            42,900                              42,900
    Idaho community and regulatory support................             3,200                               3,200
  Total, Idaho National Laboratory........................           349,226               0             349,226
 
  NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................             1,704                               1,704
    Nuclear facility D & D Separations Process Research               15,000                              15,000
     Unit.................................................
    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..................           271,069               0             271,069
 
  Oak Ridge Reservation:
    OR Nuclear facility D & D
      OR-0041--D&D--Y-12..................................            30,214                              30,214
      OR-0042--D&D--ORNL..................................            60,007                              60,007
    Total, OR Nuclear facility D & D......................            90,221               0              90,221
 
    U233 Disposition Program..............................            45,000                              45,000
 
    OR cleanup and waste disposition
      OR cleanup and disposition..........................            67,000                              67,000
      Construction:
        17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility..........             5,000                               5,000
        14-D-403 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility...            11,274                              11,274
      Total, Construction.................................            16,274               0              16,274
    Total, OR cleanup and waste disposition...............            83,274               0              83,274
 
    OR community & regulatory support.....................             4,711                               4,711
    OR technology development and deployment..............             3,000                               3,000
  Total, Oak Ridge Reservation............................           226,206               0             226,206
 
  Savannah River Sites:
    Nuclear Material Management...........................           351,331                             351,331
 
    Environmental Cleanup
      Environmental Cleanup...............................           166,105                             166,105
      Construction:
        18-D-402, Emergency Operations Center.............             1,259                               1,259
    Total, Environmental Cleanup..........................           167,364               0             167,364
 
    SR community and regulatory support...................             4,749                               4,749
      Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and                805,686                             805,686
       disposition........................................
      Construction:
        18-D-401, SDU #8/9................................            37,450                              37,450
        17-D-402--Saltstone Disposal Unit #7..............            41,243                              41,243
        05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, Savannah             65,000                              65,000
         River Site.......................................
      Total, Construction.................................           143,693               0             143,693
  Total, Savannah River site..............................         1,472,823               0           1,472,823
 
  Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
    Operations and maintenance............................           220,000                             220,000
    Central characterization project......................            19,500                              19,500
    Critical Infrastructure Repair/Replacement............            46,695                              46,695
    Transportation........................................            25,500                              25,500
    Construction:
      15-D-411 Safety significant confinement ventilation             84,212                              84,212
       system, WIPP.......................................
      15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP........................             1,000                               1,000
    Total, Construction...................................            85,212               0              85,212
  Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant......................           396,907               0             396,907
 
  Program direction.......................................           300,000                             300,000
  Program support.........................................             6,979                               6,979
  Minority Serving Institution Partnership................             6,000                               6,000
  Safeguards and Security
    Oak Ridge Reservation.................................            14,023                              14,023
    Paducah...............................................            15,577                              15,577
    Portsmouth............................................            15,078                              15,078
    Richland/Hanford Site.................................            86,686                              86,686
    Savannah River Site...................................           183,357                             183,357
    Waste Isolation Pilot Project.........................             6,580                               6,580
    West Valley...........................................             3,133                               3,133
  Total, Safeguards and Security..........................           324,434               0             324,434
 
  Technology development..................................            25,000                              25,000
  HQEF-0040--Excess Facilities............................           150,000                             150,000
Total, Defense Environmental Cleanup......................         5,630,217               0           5,630,217
 
Other Defense Activities
  Environment, health, safety and security
    Environment, health, safety and security..............           135,194                             135,194
    Program direction.....................................            70,653                              70,653
  Total, Environment, Health, safety and security.........           205,847               0             205,847
 
  Independent enterprise assessments
    Independent enterprise assessments....................            24,068                              24,068
    Program direction.....................................            52,702                              52,702
  Total, Independent enterprise assessments...............            76,770               0              76,770
 
  Specialized security activities.........................           254,378                             254,378
  Office of Legacy Management
    Legacy management.....................................           140,575                             140,575
    Program direction.....................................            18,302                              18,302
  Total, Office of Legacy Management......................           158,877               0             158,877
 
  Defense related administrative support
    Chief financial officer...............................            48,484                              48,484
    Chief information officer.............................            96,793                              96,793
    Project management oversight and Assessments..........             8,412                               8,412
  Total, Defense related administrative support...........           153,689               0             153,689
 
  Office of hearings and appeals..........................             5,739                               5,739
Subtotal, Other defense activities........................           855,300               0             855,300
  Rescission of prior year balances (OHA).................            -2,000                              -2,000
Total, Other Defense Activities...........................           853,300               0             853,300
 
 
Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal
  Yucca mountain and interim storage......................            30,000         -30,000                   0
    Program cut...........................................                          [-30,000]
Total, Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal.....................            30,000         -30,000                   0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Legislative Requirements

                      Departmental Recommendations

    Six legislative proposals on the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 were submitted as 
executive communications 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 these executive communications 
appears below. These executive communications are available for 
review at the committee.
    Executive Communication No. EC-4563
    Dated March 14, 2018
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on March 14, 
2018
    Executive Communication No. EC-4621
    Dated March 20, 2018
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on March 20, 
2018
    Executive Communication No. EC-4658
    Dated April 10, 2018
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on April 10, 
2018
    Executive Communication No. EC-4784
    Dated April 11, 2018
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on April 11, 
2018
    Executive Communication No. EC-4926
    Dated April 18, 2018
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on April 18, 
2018
    Executive Communication No. EC-5213
    Dated May 21, 2018
    Received in the Committee on Armed Services on May 21, 2018

                            Committee Action

    The committee vote to report the John S. McCain National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 passed by roll 
call vote, 25-2, as follows: In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, 
Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, 
Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, Scott, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, 
and Peters. Opposed: Senators Gillibrand and Warren.
    The other 17 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 2019 in closed 
session because of classified and proprietary information 
expected to be discussed.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 18-7-2
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Sasse, Scott, Reed, 
Nelson, Donnelly, Hirono, King, and Heinrich
    Opposed: Senators McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, 
Blumenthal, Kaine, Warren, and Peters
    No Instruction: Senators Cruz and Graham
    2. MOTION: To improve reimbursement by the Department of 
Defense of entities carrying out state vaccination programs in 
connection with vaccines provided to TRICARE covered 
beneficiaries.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
    In favor: Senators Sullivan, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, and Scott
    3. MOTION: To include a provision that would prohibit the 
Department of Defense from reducing per diem rates based on the 
duration of a temporary duty assignment or civilian travel.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
    In favor: Senators Rounds, Perdue, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, Scott, and Reed
    4. MOTION: To include a provision that would establish 
White Sands National Park, abolish White Sands National 
Monument, and direct a land exchange of specific lands between 
the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 22-5
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, 
Perdue, Graham, Sasse, Scott, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, and Cruz
    5. MOTION: To include a provision that would prevent the 
obligation or expenditure of funds related to deployment of a 
low-yield nuclear warhead for a submarine-launched ballistic 
missile pending submission of a report from the Secretary of 
Defense related to cost, schedule, and program implications of 
the development of the W76-2 warhead.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 11-16
    In favor: Senators Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, 
Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
Scott, Nelson, and McCaskill
    6. MOTION: To include a provision that would modify the 
requirement in section 3116(c) of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 for specific 
authorization by Congress before commencing certain stages of 
development of a low-yield nuclear weapon.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
and Scott
    Opposed: Senators Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    7. MOTION: To include a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to pursue a strategy with respect to 
national security launch that includes reusable launch 
vehicles.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 17-10
    In favor: Senators McCain, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Reed, 
Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, 
Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, 
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Sasse, and Scott
    8. MOTION: To strike a provision that repealed certain 
energy source-specific requirements.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 19-5-3
    In favor: Senators Fischer, Ernst, Perdue, Graham, Sasse, 
Scott, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, 
Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, 
and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Cotton, and Cruz
    No Instruction: Senators Rounds, Tillis, and Sullivan
    9. MOTION: To repeal the authority to transfer certain 
veterans memorial objects to foreign governments without 
specific authorization in law.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 12-15
    In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, 
Ernst, Tillis, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, and Scott
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Sullivan, Reed, Nelson, 
McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, 
Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    10. MOTION: To include a provision that would authorize the 
temporary transfer of Guantanamo Bay detainees to the United 
States for medical treatment that is not available at 
Guantanamo.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
    In favor: Senators McCain, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, 
Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, 
Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, and Scott
    11. MOTION: To include a provision that would direct the 
Missile Defense Agency to commence a space-based intercept 
program notwithstanding the outcome of the Missile Defense 
Review.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 16-11
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
Scott, Donnelly, and King
    Opposed: Senators Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, Heinrich, Warren, and 
Peters
    12. MOTION: To place conditions on future participation of 
the People's Republic of China in any Rim of the Pacific naval 
exercise.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 14-13
    In favor: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
and Scott
    Opposed: Senators Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    13. MOTION: To include a provision that would provide 
authority to procure up to six polar-class heavy icebreakers.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 17-10
    In favor: Senators Inhofe, Rounds, Ernst, Sullivan, Perdue, 
Cruz, Graham, Sasse, Scott, Nelson, Shaheen, Gillibrand, 
Donnelly, Hirono, King, Heinrich, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Tillis, 
Reed, McCaskill, Blumenthal, Kaine, and Warren
    14. MOTION: To include a provision that would authorize the 
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State and in consultation with the Administrator of the U.S. 
Agency for International Development and the Director of the 
Office of Management and Budget, to provide support for the 
stabilization activities of other Federal agencies.
    VOTE: Passed by roll call vote 21-6
    In favor: Senators Fischer, Rounds, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, 
Graham, Sasse, Scott, Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Cotton, Ernst, 
and Tillis
    15. MOTION: To include report language that directs the 
Department of Defense to implement the recommendations listed 
in the Government Accountability Office Report 18-206.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 13-14
    In favor: Senators Reed, Nelson, McCaskill, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, 
Heinrich, Warren, and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, 
and Scott
    16. MOTION: To include a provision that would prohibit the 
use of funds for the exhibition or parade of military forces 
and hardware for review by the President to demonstrate 
military force outside of authorized military operations or 
activities on or after January 1, 2019.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 12-15
    In favor: Senators Ernst, Reed, Nelson, Shaheen, 
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, 
and Peters
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, 
Rounds, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Cruz, Graham, Sasse, Scott, 
McCaskill, and Donnelly
    17. MOTION: To include a provision that would waive the 
requirement that recreational vessels over 300 gross tons be 
inspected as if they were commercial vessels and require the 
Coast Guard to establish a large recreational vessel code to 
provide safety and construction standards for this category of 
vessels.
    VOTE: Failed by roll call vote 10-17
    In favor: Senators Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, 
Sullivan, Cruz, Graham, Scott, and Nelson
    Opposed: Senators McCain, Ernst, Tillis, Perdue, Sasse, 
Reed, McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Donnelly, 
Hirono, Kaine, King, 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 2019.

                         Changes in Existing Law

    Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law 
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in 
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the 
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such 
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and 
reduce the expenditure of funds.

                                  [all]
```