H. R. 5122—31
SEC. 134. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR F–22A RAPTOR 
FIGHTER AIRCRAFT. 
(a) PROHIBITION ON USE OF INCREMENTAL FUNDING.—The Sec-
retary of the Air Force may not use incremental funding for the 
procurement of F–22A aircraft. 
(b) MULTIYEAR AUTHORITY.—The Secretary of the Air Force 
may enter into a multiyear contract for the procurement of up 
to 60 F–22A Raptor fighter aircraft beginning with the 2007 pro-
gram year. 
(c) COMPLIANCE WITH LAW APPLICABLE TO MULTIYEAR CON-
TRACTS.—A contract under subsection (b) for the procurement of 
F–22A aircraft shall be entered into in accordance with section 
2306b of title 10, United States Code, except that, notwithstanding 
subsection (k) of that section, such a contract may not be for 
a period in excess of three program years. 
(d) SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE CERTIFICATION.—In the case of 
a contract under subsection (b) for the procurement of F–22A air-
craft, a certification under subsection (i)(1)(A) of section 2306b 
of title 10, United States Code, with respect to that contract may 
only be submitted if the certification includes an additional certifi-
cation by the Secretary that each of the conditions specified in 
subsection (a) of that section has been satisfied with respect to 
that contract, as follows: 
(1) That the use of such contract will result in substantial 
savings of the total anticipated costs of carrying out the pro-
gram through annual contracts. 
(2) That the minimum need for the property to be pur-
chased is expected to remain substantially unchanged during 
the contemplated contract period in terms of production rate, 
procurement rate, and total quantities. 
(3) That there is a reasonable expectation that throughout 
the contemplated contract period the Secretary of the Air Force 
will request funding for the contract at the level required 
to avoid contract cancellation. 
(4) That there is a stable design for the property to be 
acquired and that the technical risks associated with such 
property are not excessive. 
(5) That the estimates of both the cost of the contract 
and the anticipated cost avoidance through the use of a 
multiyear contract are realistic. 
(6) That the use of such contract will promote the national 
security of the United States. 
In certifying that the cost savings are substantial, the Secretary 
shall duly consider the historical cost savings that led to a decision 
to proceed with a multiyear procurement contract under section 
2306b of title 10, United States Code, in the case of previous 
aviation-related multiyear contracts authorized by law dating back 
to fiscal year 1982. 
(e) FFRDC COST REPORT.—The Secretary of Defense shall pro-
vide for a federally funded research and development center (other 
than the Institute for Defense Analyses) to report on the cost 
estimates for a three year, 60-aircraft, F–22A multiyear procure-
ment program, beginning in fiscal year 2007, compared to a cor-
responding annual procurement program. 
(f) NOTICE-AND-WAIT REQUIREMENT.—Upon submission to Con-
gress of a certification referred to in subsection (d) with respect 
to a proposed contract under subsection (b) for the procurement
H. R. 5122—32
of F–22A aircraft and the Secretary’s submission to the congres-
sional defense committees of the report referred to in subsection 
(e), the contract may then be entered into only after the end 
of the 30-day period beginning on the later of the date of the 
submission of the certification or the date of the submission of 
the report. 
SEC. 135. LIMITATION ON RETIREMENT OF KC–135E AIRCRAFT DURING 
FISCAL YEAR 2007. 
(a) LIMITATION.—The number of KC–135E aircraft retired by 
the Secretary of the Air Force during fiscal year 2007 may not 
exceed 29. 
(b) TREATMENT OF RETIRED AIRCRAFT.—The Secretary of the 
Air Force shall maintain each KC–135E aircraft that is retired 
by the Secretary after September 30, 2006, in a condition that 
would allow recall of that aircraft to future service in the Air 
Force Reserve, Air National Guard, or active forces aerial refueling 
force structure. 
SEC. 136. LIMITATION ON RETIREMENT OF F–117A AIRCRAFT DURING 
FISCAL YEAR 2007. 
(a) LIMITATION.—The number of F–117A aircraft retired by 
the Secretary of the Air Force during fiscal year 2007 may not 
exceed 10. 
(b) TREATMENT OF RETIRED AIRCRAFT.—The Secretary of the 
Air Force shall maintain each F–117A aircraft that is retired by 
the Secretary after September 30, 2006, in a condition that would 
allow recall of that aircraft to future service. 
SEC. 137. LIMITATION ON RETIREMENT OF C–130E TACTICAL AIRLIFT 
AIRCRAFT. 
(a) LIMITATION.—The number of C–130E tactical airlift aircraft 
retired by the Secretary of the Air Force during fiscal year 2007 
may not exceed 51. 
(b) TREATMENT OF RETIRED AIRCRAFT.—The Secretary of the 
Air Force shall maintain each C–130E tactical airlift aircraft that 
is retired by the Secretary after September 30, 2006, in a condition 
that would allow recall of that aircraft to future service. 
SEC. 138. PROCUREMENT OF JOINT PRIMARY AIRCRAFT TRAINING 
SYSTEM AIRCRAFT AFTER FISCAL YEAR 2006. 
Any Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS) aircraft 
procured after fiscal year 2006 shall be procured through a contract 
under part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), relating 
to acquisition of items by negotiated contract (48 C.F.R. 15.000 
et seq.), rather than through a contract under part 12 of the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation, relating to acquisition of commer-
cial items (48 C.F.R. 12.000 et seq.). 
SEC. 139. MINUTEMAN III INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC MISSILE 
MODERNIZATION. 
(a) MODERNIZATION OF INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC MISSILES 
REQUIRED.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall modernize Minute-
man III intercontinental ballistic missiles in the United States 
inventory as required to maintain a sufficient supply of launch 
test assets and spares to sustain the deployed force of such missiles 
through 2030.
H. R. 5122—33
(b) LIMITATION ON TERMINATION OF MODERNIZATION PROGRAMS 
PENDING REPORT.—
(1) LIMITATION.—No funds authorized to be appropriated 
for the Department of Defense may be obligated or expended 
for the termination of any ICBM modernization program with 
respect to the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile 
system, or for the withdrawal of any Minuteman III interconti-
nental ballistic missile from the active force, until 30 days 
after the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to 
the congressional defense committees a report described in 
subsection (c). 
(2) ICBM MODERNIZATION PROGRAM DEFINED.—In this sub-
section, the term ‘‘ICBM Modernization program’’ means each 
of the following: 
(A) The Guidance Replacement Program (GRP). 
(B) The Propulsion Replacement Program (PRP). 
(C) The Propulsion System Rocket Engine (PSRE) pro-
gram. 
(D) The Safety Enhanced Reentry Vehicle (SERV) pro-
gram. 
(c) REPORT ELEMENTS.—A report under subsection (b)(1) is 
a report setting forth the following: 
(1) A detailed strategic justification for the proposal to 
reduce the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile force 
from 500 to 450 missiles, including an analysis of the effects 
of the reduction on the ability of the United States to assure 
allies and dissuade potential competitors. 
(2) A detailed analysis of the strategic ramifications of 
continuing to equip a portion of the Minuteman III missile 
force with multiple independent warheads rather than single 
warheads. 
(3) An assessment of the test assets and spares required 
to maintain a force of 500 deployed Minuteman III missiles 
through 2030. 
(4) An assessment of the test assets and spares required 
to maintain a force of 450 deployed Minuteman III missiles 
through 2030. 
(5) An inventory of currently available Minuteman III mis-
sile test assets and spares. 
(6) A plan to sustain and complete the modernization of 
all deployed and spare Minuteman III missiles, a test plan, 
and an analysis of the funding required to carry out moderniza-
tion of all deployed and spare Minuteman III missiles. 
(7) An assessment of whether halting upgrades to the 
Minuteman III missiles withdrawn from the deployed force 
would compromise the ability of those missiles to serve as 
test assets. 
(8) A description of the plan of the Department of Defense 
for extending the life of the Minuteman III missile force beyond 
fiscal year 2030.
H. R. 5122—34
Subtitle E—Joint and Multiservice Matters 
SEC. 141. CLARIFICATION OF LIMITATION ON INITIATION OF NEW 
UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE SYSTEMS. 
(a) APPLICABILITY
OF
LIMITATION
ONLY
TO
PROCUREMENT 
FUNDS.—Subsection (a) of section 142 of National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 119 
Stat. 3164) is amended—
(1) by inserting ‘‘for procurement’’ after ‘‘the Department 
of Defense’’; and 
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the following: 
‘‘(or by an official within the Office of the Under Secretary 
designated by the Under Secretary for that purpose)’’. 
(b) APPLICABILITY ONLY TO NEW SYSTEMS.—Subsection (b) of 
that section is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(b) EXCEPTION FOR EXISTING SYSTEMS.—The limitation in sub-
section (a) does not apply with respect to an unmanned aerial 
vehicle (UAV) system (or any component or other item of associated 
equipment of any such system described in subsection (a)) if as 
of January 6, 2006—
‘‘(1) the system (or component or item of associated equip-
ment) to be procured is otherwise under contract or has pre-
viously been procured by the Department; or 
‘‘(2) funds have been appropriated but not yet obligated 
for the system (or component or item of associated equipment).’’. 
TITLE II—RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, 
TEST, AND EVALUATION
Subtitle A—Authorization of Appropriations 
Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations. 
Sec. 202. Amount for defense science and technology. 
Subtitle B—Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations 
Sec. 211. Acquisition of, and independent cost analyses for, the Joint Strike Fighter 
propulsion system. 
Sec. 212. Expansion and extension of authority to award prizes for advanced tech-
nology achievements. 
Sec. 213. Defense Acquisition Challenge Program extension, enhancement, and 
modification to address critical cost growth threshold breaches in major 
defense acquisition programs. 
Sec. 214. Future Combat Systems milestone review. 
Sec. 215. Dedicated amounts for implementing or evaluating Navy shipbuilding 
technology proposals under Defense Acquisition Challenge Program. 
Sec. 216. Independent estimate of costs of the Future Combat Systems. 
Sec. 217. Funding of defense science and technology programs. 
Sec. 218. Hypersonics development. 
Sec. 219. Report on program for replacement of nuclear warheads on certain Tri-
dent sea-launched ballistic missiles with conventional warheads. 
Subtitle C—Missile Defense Programs 
Sec. 221. Fielding of ballistic missile defense capabilities. 
Sec. 222. Limitation on use of funds for space-based interceptor. 
Sec. 223. Policy of the United States on priorities in the development, testing, and 
fielding of missile defense capabilities. 
Sec. 224. One-year extension of Comptroller General assessments of ballistic mis-
sile defense programs. 
Sec. 225. Submittal of plans for test and evaluation of the operational capability of 
the Ballistic Missile Defense System. 
Sec. 226. Annual reports on transition of ballistic missile defense programs to the 
military departments.
H. R. 5122—35
Subtitle D—Other Matters 
Sec. 231. Policies and practices on test and evaluation to address emerging acquisi-
tion approaches. 
Sec. 232. Extension of requirement for Global Research Watch Program. 
Sec. 233. Sense of Congress on technology sharing of Joint Strike Fighter tech-
nology. 
Sec. 234. Report on vehicle-based active protection systems for certain battlefield 
threats.
Subtitle A—Authorization of 
Appropriations 
SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
2007 for the use of the Department of Defense for research, develop-
ment, test, and evaluation as follows: 
(1) For the Army, $10,876,609,000. 
(2) For the Navy, $17,383,857,000. 
(3) For the Air Force, $24,235,951,000. 
(4) For Defense-wide activities, $21,111,559,000, of which 
$181,520,000 is authorized for the Director of Operational Test 
and Evaluation. 
SEC. 202. AMOUNT FOR DEFENSE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. 
(a) FISCAL YEAR 2007.—Of the amounts authorized to be appro-
priated by section 201, $11,662,554,000 shall be available for the 
Defense Science and Technology Program, including basic research, 
applied research, and advanced technology development projects. 
(b) BASIC RESEARCH, APPLIED RESEARCH, AND ADVANCED TECH-
NOLOGY DEVELOPMENT DEFINED.—For purposes of this section, the 
term ‘‘basic research, applied research, and advanced technology 
development’’ means work funded in program elements for defense 
research and development under Department of Defense budget 
activity 1, 2, or 3. 
Subtitle B—Program Requirements, 
Restrictions, and Limitations 
SEC. 211. ACQUISITION OF, AND INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSES FOR, 
THE JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER PROPULSION SYSTEM. 
(a) ACQUISITION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide 
for the development and procurement of the propulsion system 
for the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft through the continued 
development and sustainment of two interchangeable propul-
sion systems for that aircraft by two separate contractors 
throughout the life cycle of the aircraft. 
(2) MODIFICATIONS
PROHIBITED.—Except as provided by 
paragraph (3), the Secretary may not carry out any modification 
to the acquisition program for the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft 
that would result in the development or procurement of the 
propulsion system for that aircraft in a manner other than 
that required by paragraph (1). 
(3) MODIFICATIONS ALLOWED.—Notwithstanding paragraph 
(1), a modification described in paragraph (2) may be carried
H. R. 5122—36
out to the extent that each of the following requirements is 
met: 
(A) The Secretary of Defense has notified the congres-
sional defense committees of the modification. 
(B) Each of the reports required by subsection (b) has 
been submitted. 
(C) Funds are appropriated for that purpose pursuant 
to an authorization of appropriations. 
(b) INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—A comprehensive and detailed cost anal-
ysis of the Joint Strike Fighter engine program shall be 
independently performed by each of the following: 
(A) The Comptroller General. 
(B) A federally funded research and development center 
selected by the Secretary of Defense. 
(C) The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Cost 
Analysis Improvement Group of the Office of the Secretary 
of Defense. 
(2) MATTERS
COVERED.—Each such cost analysis shall 
cover—
(A) an alternative under which the Joint Strike Fighter 
aircraft is capable of using the F135 engine only; 
(B) an alternative under which the program executes 
a one-time firm-fixed price contract for a selected propul-
sion system for the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft for the 
life cycle of the aircraft following the Initial Service Release 
of the propulsion system in fiscal year 2008; 
(C) an alternative under which the Joint Strike Fighter 
aircraft is capable of using either the F135 engine or the 
F136 engine, and the engine selection is carried out on 
a competitive basis; and 
(D) any other alternative, whether competitive or sole 
source, that would reduce total life-cycle cost, improve pro-
gram schedule, or both. 
(3) REPORTS.—Not later than March 15, 2007, the Secretary 
of Defense, the Comptroller General, and the chief executive 
officer of the federally funded research and development center 
selected under paragraph (1)(B) shall independently submit 
to the congressional defense committees a report on the cost 
analysis carried out under paragraph (1). Each such report 
shall include each of the following matters: 
(A) The key assumptions used in carrying out the 
cost analysis. 
(B) The methodology and techniques used in carrying 
out the cost analysis. 
(C) For each alternative required by paragraph (2)—
(i) a comparison of the life-cycle costs, including 
costs in current and constant dollars and a net-present-
value analysis; 
(ii) estimates of—
(I) supply, maintenance, and other operations 
manpower required to support the alternative; 
(II) the number of flight hours required to 
achieve engine maturity and the year in which 
that is expected to be achieved; and
H. R. 5122—37
(III) the total number of engines expected to 
be procured over the lifetime of the Joint Strike 
Fighter program; and 
(iii) an evaluation of benefits, other than cost, pro-
vided by competition, to include an assessment of 
improved performance, operational readiness and 
warfighting capability, risk reduction, technology 
innovation, and contractor responsiveness. 
(D) 
A 
description 
of 
the 
acquisition 
strategies 
(including development and production) that were used 
for, and experience with respect to cost, schedule, and 
performance under, past acquisition programs for engines 
for tactical fighter aircraft, including the F–15, F–16, F–
18, and F–22 aircraft. 
(E) A comparison of the experiences under past acquisi-
tion programs carried out on a sole-source basis with 
respect to performance, savings, maintainability, reliability, 
and technical innovation. 
(F) The impact that canceling the F136 competitive 
engine would have on the high-performance military engine 
industrial base, and on the Department of Defense’s ability 
to make competitive engine choices for future combat air-
craft systems beyond the Joint Strike Fighter. 
(G) Conclusions and recommendations. 
(4) CERTIFICATIONS.—In submitting the report required by 
paragraph (3), the Comptroller General and the chief executive 
officer of the federally funded research and development center 
shall also submit a certification as to whether the Secretary 
of Defense provided access to sufficient information to enable 
the Comptroller General or the chief executive officer, as the 
case may be, to make informed judgments on the matters 
required to be included in the report. 
(c) LIFE-CYCLE COSTS DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘life-
cycle costs’’ includes—
(1) those elements of cost that would be considered for 
a life-cycle cost analysis for a major defense acquisition pro-
gram, including procurement of engines, procurement of spare 
engines, and procurement of engine components and parts; 
and 
(2) good-faith estimates of routine engine costs (such as 
performance upgrades and component improvement) that 
historically have occurred in tactical fighter engine programs. 
SEC. 212. EXPANSION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO AWARD 
PRIZES FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY ACHIEVEMENTS. 
(a) EXPANSION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) of section 2374a of title 
10, United States Code, is amended—
(A) by striking ‘‘Director of the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency’’ and inserting ‘‘Director of 
Defense Research and Engineering and the service acquisi-
tion executive for each military department’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘a program’’ and inserting ‘‘programs’’. 
(2) CONFORMING
AMENDMENTS.—Such section is further 
amended—
(A) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘The program’’ and 
inserting ‘‘Each program’’; and
H. R. 5122—38
(B) in subsection (d)—
(i) by striking ‘‘The program’’ and inserting ‘‘A 
program’’; and 
(ii) by striking ‘‘the Director’’ and inserting ‘‘an 
official referred to in that subsection’’. 
(b) EXTENSION.—Subsection (f) of such section is amended by 
striking ‘‘September 30, 2007’’ and inserting ‘‘September 30, 2010’’. 
(c) MODIFICATION OF REPORTING REQUIREMENT.—Subsection (e) 
of such section is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(e) ANNUAL REPORT.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than March 1 of each year, 
the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
House of Representatives a report on the activities carried 
out during the preceding fiscal year under the authority in 
subsection (a). 
‘‘(2) INFORMATION INCLUDED.—The report for a fiscal year 
under this subsection shall include, for each program under 
subsection (a), the following: 
‘‘(A) A description of the proposed goals of the competi-
tions established under the program, including the areas 
of research, technology development, or prototype develop-
ment to be promoted by such competitions and the relation-
ship of such areas to the military missions of the Depart-
ment of Defense. 
‘‘(B) An analysis of why the utilization of the authority 
in subsection (a) was the preferable method of achieving 
the goals described in subparagraph (A) as opposed to 
other authorities available to the Department, such as 
contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. 
‘‘(C) The total amount of cash prizes awarded under 
the program, including a description of the manner in 
which the amounts of cash prizes awarded and claimed 
were allocated among the accounts of the Department for 
recording as obligations and expenditures. 
‘‘(D) The methods used for the solicitation and evalua-
tion of submissions under the program, together with an 
assessment of the effectiveness of such methods. 
‘‘(E) A description of the resources, including personnel 
and funding, used in the execution of the program, together 
with a detailed description of the activities for which such 
resources were used and an accounting of how funding 
for execution was allocated among the accounts of the 
Department for recording as obligations and expenditures. 
‘‘(F) A description of any plans to transition the tech-
nologies or prototypes developed as a result of the program 
into an acquisition program of the Department. 
‘‘(3) SUSPENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR FAILURE TO INCLUDE 
INFORMATION.—For each program under subsection (a), the 
authority to obligate or expend funds under that program is 
suspended as of the date specified in paragraph (1) if the 
Secretary does not, by that date, submit a report that includes, 
for that program, all the information required by paragraph 
(2). As of the date on which the Secretary does submit a 
report that includes, for that program, all the information 
required by paragraph (2), the suspension is lifted.’’.
H. R. 5122—39
SEC. 213. DEFENSE ACQUISITION CHALLENGE PROGRAM EXTENSION, 
ENHANCEMENT, AND MODIFICATION TO ADDRESS CRIT-
ICAL COST GROWTH THRESHOLD BREACHES IN MAJOR 
DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS. 
(a) ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONAL ISSUES REQUIRED IN THE EVENT 
OF CRITICAL COST GROWTH.—Section 2433(e)(2)(A) of title 10, 
United States Code, is amended—
(1) by redesignating clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) as clauses 
(ii), (iii), and (iv) respectively; and 
(2) by inserting before clause (ii) (as so redesignated) the 
following new clause: 
‘‘(i) any design, engineering, manufacturing, or tech-
nology integration issues that contributed significantly to 
the cost growth of the program;’’. 
(b) REQUIREMENT FOR CHALLENGE PROGRAM TO ADDRESS CRIT-
ICAL COST GROWTH THRESHOLD BREACHES
IN MAJOR DEFENSE 
ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.—
(1) SOLICITATION
OF
CHALLENGE
PROPOSALS.—Section 
2359b(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) as 
paragraphs (5), (6), and (7), respectively; and 
(B) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
paragraph (4): 
‘‘(4)(A) The Under Secretary shall establish procedures for 
the prompt issuance of a solicitation for challenge proposals 
addressing—
‘‘(i) any acquisition program for which, since the last 
such announcement, the Secretary concerned has deter-
mined under section 2433(d) of this title that the program’s 
acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost has increased 
by a percentage equal to or greater than the critical cost 
growth threshold for the program (in this section referred 
to as a ‘critical cost growth threshold breach’); and 
‘‘(ii) any design, engineering, manufacturing, or tech-
nology integration issues, in accordance with the assess-
ment required by section 2433(e)(2)(A) of this title, that 
have contributed significantly to the cost growth of such 
program. 
‘‘(B) A solicitation under this paragraph may be included 
in a broad agency announcement issued pursuant to paragraph 
(3) as long as the broad agency announcement is released 
in an expeditious manner following the determination of the 
Secretary concerned that a critical cost growth threshold breach 
has occurred with respect to a major defense acquisition pro-
gram.’’. 
(2) REQUIREMENT
FOR
GUIDELINES
FOR
COVERING
COSTS 
OF CHALLENGE PROPOSALS.—Section 2359b(e) of such title is 
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 
‘‘(3) In the case of a challenge proposal submitted in response 
to a solicitation issued as a result of a critical cost growth threshold 
breach that is determined under full review and evaluation to 
satisfy each of the criteria specified in subsection (c)(5), the Under 
Secretary shall establish guidelines for covering the costs of the 
challenge proposal. If appropriate, such guidelines shall not be 
restricted to funding provided by the Defense Acquisition Challenge 
Program, but shall also consider alternative funding sources, such