H. R. 2810—486 
(2) it is critical for the United States to understand the 
impacts of nuclear proliferation and ensure the necessary poli-
cies and resources are in place to prevent the proliferation 
of nuclear materials and weapons; 
(3) effectively addressing the danger of states and non- 
state actors acquiring nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons- 
usable material should be a clear priority for United States 
national security; and 
(4) Secretary of Defense James Mattis testified before Con-
gress on June 12, 2017, that ‘‘nuclear nonproliferation has 
not received enough attention over quite a few years’’. 
(b) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the congressional defense committees a report containing— 
(1) a description of the impacts of nuclear proliferation 
on the security of the United States; 
(2) a description of how the Department of Defense is 
contributing to the current strategy to respond to the threat 
of nuclear proliferation, and what resources are being applied 
to this effort, including whether there are any funding gaps; 
and 
(3) if and how nuclear proliferation is being addressed 
in the Nuclear Posture Review and other pertinent strategy 
reviews. 
SEC. 1668. CERTIFICATION THAT THE NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW 
ADDRESSES DETERRENT EFFECT AND OPERATION OF 
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR FORCES IN CURRENT AND 
FUTURE SECURITY ENVIRONMENTS. 
(a) CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.—Not later than 30 days after 
completing the first Nuclear Posture Review after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the congressional defense committees a certification that the 
Nuclear Posture Review accounts for— 
(1) with respect to the nuclear capabilities of the United 
States as of such date of enactment— 
(A) the ability of such capabilities to deter adversaries 
of the United States that possess nuclear weapons or may 
possess such weapons in the future; 
(B) the ability of the United States to operate in a 
major regional conflict that involves nuclear weapons; 
(C) the ability and preparedness of forward-deployed 
members of the Armed Forces to operate in a nuclear 
environment; and 
(D) weapons, equipment, and training or conduct that 
would improve the abilities described in subparagraphs 
(A), (B), and (C); 
(2) with respect to the nuclear capabilities of the United 
States projected over the 10-year period beginning on such 
date of enactment— 
(A) the projected ability of such capabilities to deter 
adversaries of the United States that possess nuclear 
weapons or may possess such weapons in the future; 
(B) the projected ability of the United States to operate 
in a major regional conflict that involves nuclear weapons;
H. R. 2810—487 
(C) the projected ability and preparedness of forward- 
deployed members of the Armed Forces to operate in a 
nuclear environment; and 
(D) weapons, equipment, and training or conduct that 
would improve the abilities described in subparagraphs 
(A), (B), and (C); and 
(3) any actions that could be taken by the Secretary of 
Defense or the Administrator for Nuclear Security in the near 
and medium terms to decrease the risk posed by possible addi-
tional changes to the security environment related to nuclear 
weapons in the future. 
(b) FORM.—The certification under subsection (a) may be sub-
mitted in classified form. 
SEC. 1669. PLAN TO MANAGE INTEGRATED TACTICAL WARNING AND 
ATTACK ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND MULTI-DOMAIN SEN-
SORS. 
(a) PLAN REQUIRED.—Not later than one year after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall 
develop a plan to manage the Air Force missile warning elements 
of the Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment System 
as a weapon system consistent with Air Force Policy Directive 
10–9, entitled ‘‘Lead Command Designation and Responsibilities 
for Weapon Systems’’ and dated March 8, 2007. 
(b) MULTI-DOMAIN SENSOR MANAGEMENT AND EXPLOITATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The plan required by subsection (a) shall 
include a long-term plan to manage all available sensors for 
multi-domain exploitation against modern and emergent 
threats in order to provide comprehensive support for integrated 
tactical warning and attack assessment, missile defense, and 
space situational awareness. 
(2) COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES.—In developing 
the plan required by paragraph (1), the Secretary shall— 
(A) coordinate with the Secretary of the Army, the 
Secretary of the Navy, the Director of the Missile Defense 
Agency, and the Director of the National Reconnaissance 
Office; and 
(B) solicit comments on the plan, if any, from the 
Commander of the United States Strategic Command and 
the Commander of the United States Northern Command. 
(c) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 14 months after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
to the congressional defense committees— 
(1) the plan required by subsection (a); and 
(2) the comments from the Commander of the United States 
Strategic Command and the Commander of the United States 
Northern Command, if any, on the plan required by subsection 
(b)(1). 
SEC. 1670. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT WITH RESPECT TO STRA-
TEGIC RADIATION HARDENED TRUSTED MICROELEC-
TRONICS. 
Not later than December 31, 2020, the Secretary of Defense 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a certification 
that an assured capability to produce or acquire strategic radiation 
hardened trusted microelectronics, consistent with Department of 
Defense Instruction 5200.44, is operational and available to supply 
necessary microelectronic components for necessary radiation
H. R. 2810—488 
environments involved with the acquisition of delivery systems 
for nuclear weapons. 
SEC. 1671. NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW. 
(a) SENSE
OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that 
the Nuclear Posture Review should— 
(1) take into account the obligations of the United States 
under treaties ratified by and with the advice and consent 
of the Senate; 
(2) examine the tools required to sustain the stockpile 
stewardship program under section 4201 of the Atomic Energy 
Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2521) in the future to ensure the safety, 
security, and effectiveness of the nuclear arsenal of the United 
States; and 
(3) consider input and views from all relevant stakeholders 
in the United States Government, including the Secretary of 
Energy, the Secretary of State, and the Administrator for 
Nuclear Security, on issues pertaining to nuclear deterrence, 
nuclear nonproliferation, and nuclear arms control. 
(b) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that— 
(1) the Nuclear Posture Review is submitted, in its entirety, 
to the President and the congressional defense committees; 
and 
(2) an unclassified version of the Nuclear Posture Review 
is made available to the public. 
SEC. 1672. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON IMPORTANCE OF INDEPENDENT 
NUCLEAR DETERRENT OF UNITED KINGDOM. 
It is the sense of Congress that— 
(1) nuclear deterrence is foundational to the defense and 
security of the United States and the security of the United 
States is enhanced by a nuclear-armed ally with common values 
and security priorities; 
(2) the United States sees the nuclear deterrent of the 
United Kingdom as central to transatlantic security and wel-
comes the commitment of the United Kingdom to the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to continue to spend two 
percent of gross domestic product on defense; 
(3) in the face of increasing threats, the presence of credible 
nuclear deterrent forces of the United Kingdom is essential 
to international stability and for NATO; 
(4) the commitment of the United Kingdom to sustaining 
an independent nuclear deterrent, deployed continuously at 
sea, provides a vital second decision-making point within the 
deterrent capability of NATO, creating essential uncertainty 
in the mind of any potential adversary; 
(5) the United States Navy must continue to execute the 
Columbia-class submarine program on time and within budget 
to ensure that the sea-based leg of the nuclear triad of the 
United States is sustained and the program delivers a Common 
Missile Compartment, the Trident II (D5) Strategic Weapon 
System, and associated equipment and production capabilities, 
to support the successful development and deployment of the 
Dreadnought submarines of the United Kingdom; 
(6) the support that the United Kingdom provides to deploy-
ments of strategic ships and aircraft of the United States at 
specialized facilities enables a vital part of the deterrence pos-
ture of the United States as well as mutual deterrence of
H. R. 2810—489 
adversaries and assurance to the allies and partners of the 
United States; and 
(7) the collaboration of the United Kingdom with the United 
States on the military use of atomic energy ensures a peer 
in the technology and science of nuclear weapons and provides 
independent expert peer review of the nuclear programs of 
the United States, ensuring resilience and cost effectiveness 
to the nuclear defense programs of both nations. 
Subtitle E—Missile Defense Programs 
SEC. 1676. ADMINISTRATION OF MISSILE DEFENSE AND DEFEAT PRO-
GRAMS. 
(a) MAJOR FORCE PROGRAM.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 9 of title 10, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section: 
‘‘§ 239a. Missile defense and defeat programs: major force 
program and budget assessment 
‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT
OF MAJOR FORCE PROGRAM.—The Sec-
retary of Defense shall establish a unified major force program 
for missile defense and defeat programs pursuant to section 222(b) 
of this title to prioritize missile defense and defeat programs in 
accordance with the requirements of the Department of Defense 
and national security. 
‘‘(b) BUDGET ASSESSMENT.—(1) The Secretary shall include with 
the defense budget materials for each of fiscal years 2019 through 
2023 a report on the budget for missile defense and defeat programs 
of the Department of Defense. 
‘‘(2) Each report on the budget for missile defense and defeat 
programs of the Department under paragraph (1) shall include 
the following: 
‘‘(A) An overview of the budget, including— 
‘‘(i) a comparison between that budget, the previous 
budget, the most recent and prior future-years defense 
program submitted to Congress under section 221 of this 
title (such comparison shall exclude the responsibility for 
research and development of the continuing improvement 
of such missile defense and defeat program), and the 
amounts appropriated for such missile defense and defeat 
programs during the previous fiscal year; and 
‘‘(ii) the specific identification, as a budgetary line item, 
for the funding under such programs. 
‘‘(B) An assessment of the budget, including significant 
changes, priorities, challenges, and risks. 
‘‘(C) Any additional matters the Secretary determines 
appropriate. 
‘‘(3) Each report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in 
unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. 
‘‘(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
‘‘(1) The term ‘budget’, with respect to a fiscal year, means 
the budget for that fiscal year that is submitted to Congress 
by the President under section 1105(a) of title 31. 
‘‘(2) The term ‘defense budget materials’, with respect to 
a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by
H. R. 2810—490 
the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget for that 
fiscal year. 
‘‘(3) The term ‘missile defense and defeat programs’ means 
active and passive ballistic missile defense programs, cruise 
missile defense programs for the homeland, and missile defeat 
programs.’’. 
(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the 
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
item relating to section 239 the following new item: 
‘‘239a. Missile defense and defeat programs: major force program and budget assess-
ment.’’. 
(b) TRANSITION OF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAMS TO 
MILITARY DEPARTMENTS.— 
(1) REQUIREMENT.—Not later than the date on which the 
budget of the President for fiscal year 2021 is submitted under 
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary 
of Defense shall transfer the acquisition authority and the 
total obligational authority for each missile defense program 
described in paragraph (2) from the Missile Defense Agency 
to a military department. 
(2) MISSILE
DEFENSE
PROGRAM
DESCRIBED.—A missile 
defense program described in this paragraph is a missile 
defense program of the Missile Defense Agency that, as of 
the date specified in paragraph (1), has received Milestone 
C approval (as defined in section 2366 of title 10, United 
States Code). 
(3) REPORT.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a 
report on the plans of the Department of Defense for the 
transition of missile defense programs from the Missile 
Defense Agency to the military departments pursuant to 
paragraph (1). 
(B) SCOPE.—The report under subparagraph (A) shall 
cover the period covered by the future-years defense pro-
gram that is submitted under section 221 of title 10, United 
States Code, in the year in which such report is submitted. 
(C) MATTERS INCLUDED.—The report under subpara-
graph (A) shall include the following: 
(i) An identification of— 
(I) the missile defense programs planned to 
be transitioned from the Missile Defense Agency 
to the military departments; and 
(II) the missile defense programs, if any, not 
planned for transition to the military departments. 
(ii) The schedule for transition of each missile 
defense program planned to be transitioned to a mili-
tary department, and an explanation of such schedule. 
(iii) A description of— 
(I) the status of the plans of the Missile 
Defense Agency and the military departments for 
the transition of missile defense programs from 
that agency to the military departments; and 
(II) the status of any agreement between the 
Missile Defense Agency and one or more of the
H. R. 2810—492 
be deemed to be a reference to the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Research and Engineering, including with 
respect to the Under Secretary serving as the chairman 
of the Missile Defense Executive Board. 
SEC. 1677. CONDITION FOR PROCEEDING BEYOND LOW-RATE INITIAL 
PRODUCTION. 
(a) INCLUSION OF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM.—Section 
2399(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended— 
(1) by striking ‘‘or a covered designated major subprogram’’ 
and inserting ‘‘, a covered designated major subprogram, or 
an element of the ballistic missile defense system’’; and 
(2) by striking ‘‘program or subprogram’’ and inserting 
‘‘program, subprogram, or element’’. 
(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Section 1662(e) of the Carl Levin 
and Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 10 U.S.C. 2431 
note) is amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
following: ‘‘, or to diminish the authority of the Secretary of Defense 
to deploy a missile defense system at the date on which the Sec-
retary determines appropriate’’. 
SEC. 1678. PRESERVATION OF THE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 
CAPACITY OF THE ARMY. 
(a) LIMITATION.—None of the funds authorized to be appro-
priated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 
2018 or any fiscal year thereafter for the Army may be obligated 
or expended to demilitarize any GEM–T interceptor or remove 
any such interceptor from the operational inventory of the Army 
until the date on which the Secretary of the Army submits to 
the congressional defense committees the plan under subsection 
(b). 
(b) PLAN.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act, the Secretary and the Chief of Staff of the 
Army shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees 
a plan to maintain an inventory of interceptors necessary to retain 
the capability provided by GEM–T interceptors, including the costs, 
milestones, and timelines to carry out such plan. 
(c) EXCEPTION.—The limitation in subsection (a) shall not apply 
to activities that the Secretary determines are critical to the safety 
of GEM–T interceptors. 
(d) GEM–T INTERCEPTOR DEFINED.—In this section, the term 
‘‘GEM–T interceptor’’ means the Patriot guidance enhanced missile 
TBM. 
SEC. 1679. MODERNIZATION OF ARMY LOWER TIER AIR AND MISSILE 
DEFENSE SENSOR. 
(a) APPROVAL OF ACQUISITION STRATEGY.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than September 15, 2018, the 
Secretary of the Army shall issue an acquisition strategy for 
a 360-degree lower tier air and missile defense sensor that 
achieves initial operating capability by not later than December 
31, 2023. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The acquisition strategy under para-
graph (1) shall— 
(A) ensure the use of competitive procedures; 
(B) clearly describe the open-architecture design to 
be used;
H. R. 2810—493 
(C) provide a comprehensive fielding plan that provides 
360-degree lower tier air and missile defense sensor capa-
bility to all units of the Army; 
(D) define the operation and sustainment cost savings 
of the acquisition strategy and other acquisition options 
of the Army; 
(E) identify any programmatic cost avoidance that 
could be achieved through co-production, co-development, 
or foreign military sales; 
(F) ensure the fielding of an interim gap-filler capa-
bility to the highest priority forces (consisting of not less 
than three battalions) for imminent threats; and 
(G) identify the estimated cost to field both the 360- 
degree lower tier air and missile defense sensor capability 
and the interim capability pursuant to subparagraph (E). 
(3) LIMITATION.—If the Secretary of the Army does not 
issue the acquisition strategy under subsection (a) by Sep-
tember 15, 2018, none of the funds authorized to be appro-
priated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 
2018 for the lower tier air and missile defense sensor of the 
Army that are unobligated as of such date may be obligated 
or expended. 
(b) CONDITIONAL TRANSFER.— 
(1) MDA.—If the Secretary of the Army does not issue 
the acquisition strategy under subsection (a) by September 
15, 2018, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer from the 
Secretary of the Army to the Director of the Missile Defense 
Agency— 
(A) the responsibility to issue the acquisition strategy 
described in subsection (a) by not later than August 15, 
2019; and 
(B) the responsibility to implement such acquisition 
strategy to procure a 360-degree lower tier air and missile 
defense sensor. 
(2) ARMY.—If the Secretary of Defense carries out the 
transfer under paragraph (1), after the 360-degree lower tier 
air and missile defense sensor achieves Milestone B approval 
(or equivalent), but before such sensor achieves Milestone C 
approval (or equivalent), the Secretary of Defense shall transfer 
from the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to the Secretary 
of the Army the responsibility to procure such sensor. 
(c) DEFINITIONS.—The terms ‘‘Milestone B approval’’ and ‘‘Mile-
stone C approval’’ have the meanings given those terms in section 
2366 of title 10, United States Code. 
SEC. 1680. DEFENSE OF HAWAII FROM NORTH KOREAN BALLISTIC MIS-
SILE ATTACK. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that— 
(1) expanding persistent midcourse and terminal ballistic 
missile defense system discrimination capability is critically 
important to the defense of the United States; and 
(2) the Department of Defense should take all appropriate 
steps to ensure Hawaii has missile defense coverage against 
the evolving ballistic missile threat, including from North 
Korea. 
(b) SEQUENCED APPROACH.—The Secretary of Defense shall—
H. R. 2810—494 
(1) protect the test and training operations of the Pacific 
Missile Range Facility; and 
(2) assess the siting and functionality of a discrimination 
radar for homeland defense throughout the Hawaiian Islands 
before assessing the feasibility of improving the missile defense 
of Hawaii by using existing missile defense assets that could 
materially improve the defense of Hawaii. 
(c) TEST.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall— 
(1) not later than December 31, 2020, conduct a test to 
evaluate and demonstrate, if technologically feasible, the capa-
bility to defeat a simple intercontinental ballistic missile threat 
using the standard missile 3 block IIA missile interceptor; 
and 
(2) as part of the integrated master test plan for the bal-
listic missile defense system, develop a plan to demonstrate 
a capability to defeat a complex intercontinental ballistic missile 
threat, including a complex threat posed by the intercontinental 
ballistic missiles of North Korea. 
(d) REPORT.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the congressional defense committees a report— 
(1) that indicates whether demonstrating an interconti-
nental ballistic missile defense capability against North Korean 
ballistic missiles by the standard missile 3 block IIA missile 
interceptor poses any risks to strategic stability; and 
(2) if the Secretary determines under paragraph (1) that 
such demonstration poses such risks to strategic stability, a 
description of the plan developed and implemented by the Sec-
retary to address and mitigate such risks, as determined appro-
priate by the Secretary. 
SEC. 1681. DESIGNATION OF LOCATION OF CONTINENTAL UNITED 
STATES INTERCEPTOR SITE. 
If consistent with the direction or recommendations of the 
Ballistic Missile Defense Review that commenced in 2017, not later 
than 60 days after the date on which the Ballistic Missile Defense 
Review is published, the Secretary of Defense shall— 
(1) designate the preferred location of a potential additional 
continental United States interceptor site; 
(2) in making such designation, consider— 
(A) strategic and operational effectiveness, including 
with respect to the location that is the most advantageous 
site to the continental United States, including by having 
the capability to provide shoot-assess-shoot coverage to the 
entire continental United States; 
(B) existing infrastructure at the location; and 
(C) costs to construct, equip, and operate; and 
(3) submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
on the designation made under paragraph (1) with respect 
to each factor specified in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) 
of such paragraph. 
SEC. 1682. AEGIS ASHORE ANTI-AIR WARFARE CAPABILITY. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—Subject to the availability of funds author-
ized to be appropriated by sections 101 and 201 of this Act or 
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2018 for procurement and 
research, development, test, and evaluation, as specified in the 
funding tables in division D, the Secretary of Defense shall continue
H. R. 2810—495 
the development, procurement, and deployment of anti-air warfare 
capabilities at each Aegis Ashore site in Romania and Poland. 
The Secretary shall ensure the deployment of such capabilities— 
(1) at such sites in Romania by not later than one year 
after the date of the enactment of this Act; and 
(2) at such sites in Poland by not later than one year 
after the declaration of operational status for such sites. 
(b) REPROGRAMMING AND TRANSFERS.—Any reprogramming or 
transfer made to carry out subsection (a) shall be carried out 
in accordance with established procedures for reprogramming or 
transfers. 
SEC. 1683. DEVELOPMENT OF PERSISTENT SPACE-BASED SENSOR 
ARCHITECTURE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—If consistent with the direction or rec-
ommendations of the Ballistic Missile Defense Review that com-
menced in 2017, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall 
develop, using sound acquisition practices, a highly reliable and 
cost-effective persistent space-based sensor architecture capable of 
supporting the ballistic missile defense system. 
(b) TESTING AND DEPLOYMENT.—The Director shall ensure that 
the sensor architecture developed under subsection (a) is rigorously 
tested before final production decisions or operational deployment. 
(c) FUNCTIONS.—The sensor architecture developed under sub-
section (a) shall include one or more of the following functions: 
(1) Control of increased raid sizes. 
(2) Precision tracking of threat missiles. 
(3) Fire-control-quality tracks of evolving threat missiles. 
(4) Enabling of launch-on-remote and engage-on-remote 
capabilities. 
(5) Discrimination of warheads. 
(6) Effective kill assessment. 
(7) Enhanced shot doctrine. 
(8) Integration with the command, control, battle manage-
ment, and communication program of the ballistic missile 
defense system. 
(9) Integration with all other elements of the current bal-
listic missile defense system, including the Terminal High Alti-
tude Area Defense, Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, Aegis 
Ashore, and Patriot Air and Missile Defense systems. 
(10) Such additional functions as determined by the Bal-
listic Missile Defense Review. 
(d) COST ESTIMATES.—Whenever the Director develops a cost 
estimate for the sensor architecture required by subsection (a), 
the Director shall use— 
(1) the cost-estimating and assessment guide of the Comp-
troller General of the United States titled ‘‘GAO Cost Esti-
mating and Assessment Guide’’ (GAO–09–3SP), or a successor 
guide; or 
(2) the most current operating and support cost-estimating 
guide of the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation. 
(e) PLAN.—Not later than one year after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act, the Director shall submit to the appropriate 
congressional committees a plan that includes— 
(1) how the Director will develop the sensor architecture 
under subsection (a), including with respect to the estimated 
costs (in accordance with subsection (d)) to develop, acquire,