H. R. 1735—399 
of the United States Strategic Command, shall conduct an assess-
ment of the global environment with respect to nuclear weapons 
and the role of the nuclear forces, policy, and strategy of the 
United States in that environment. 
(b) OBJECTIVES.—The objectives of the assessment required by 
subsection (a) are to inform the long-term planning of the Depart-
ment of Defense and policies relating to regional nuclear crises 
and operations that may involve the escalation of nuclear competi-
tion among countries. 
(c) REQUIREMENTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In conducting the assessment required 
by subsection (a), the Director shall develop and analyze a 
range of contingencies and scenarios, including crises that may 
emerge from nuclear competition during the 10- to 20-year 
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act 
that involve the following: 
(A) The United States and one other country that 
possesses a nuclear weapon. 
(B) The United States and multiple such countries. 
(C) Two other such countries. 
(D) Three or more other such countries. 
(E) Regional and cross-regional geography, including 
contingencies and scenarios in Europe, the Middle East, 
South Asia, and East Asia, and contingencies and scenarios 
that transcend regions. 
(F) The long-term geopolitical and military-technical 
competition as it relates to nuclear weapons and strategic 
warfare. 
(2) ANALYSIS OF COMPETITIVE DISCONTINUITIES.—In ana-
lyzing the long-term geopolitical and military-technical competi-
tion as it relates to nuclear weapons and strategic warfare 
under paragraph (1)(F), the Director shall identify— 
(A) prospective discontinuities in that competition; and 
(B) strategies and capabilities the United States could 
adopt to improve its competitive position following such 
discontinuities. 
(d) STAFFING.—In conducting the assessment required by sub-
section (a), the Director shall engage the best talent available, 
with particular emphasis on engaging individuals and independent 
entities with demonstrated expertise in strategy and net assessment 
methodology. 
(e) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than November 15, 2016, 
the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees 
a report on the assessment required by subsection (a). 
SEC. 1656. ANNUAL BRIEFING ON THE COSTS OF FORWARD-DEPLOYING 
NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN EUROPE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the date on 
which the President submits to Congress the budget for each of 
fiscal years 2017 through 2021 under section 1105 of title 31, 
United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the 
congressional defense committees a briefing on the costs of forward- 
deploying nuclear weapons in Europe (not including costs relating 
to the life extension program for the B61 nuclear bomb). 
(b) ELEMENTS.—Each briefing required under paragraph (1) 
shall include the following:
H. R. 1735—400 
(1) The contributions of the United States, including with 
respect to sustainment (operations and maintenance) and man-
power, to support forward-deployed nuclear weapons in Europe, 
but not costs that are attributed to non-nuclear missions, during 
the fiscal year following the date of the briefing and the period 
covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Con-
gress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code, for 
that fiscal year. 
(2) Contributions made by the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) or member states of NATO relating to 
the extended deterrence mission. 
(3) Recent or planned contributions of the United States 
for security enhancements (site-by-site) relating to support for 
such forward-deployed nuclear weapons and any other contribu-
tions, including burden-share costs by the United States, for 
other security enhancements and upgrades relating to such 
forward-deployed nuclear weapons, including infrastructure 
upgrades at weapons storage sites in Europe. 
SEC. 1657. REPORT ON THE NUMBER OF PLANNED LONG-RANGE 
STANDOFF WEAPONS. 
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 on the justification of the number 
of planned nuclear-armed cruise missiles, known as the long-range 
standoff weapon, of the United States. The report shall include— 
(1) the rationale for procuring such planned number of 
cruise missiles; 
(2) how such planned number of cruise missiles aligns 
with the nuclear employment strategy of the United States; 
(3) an estimate of the annual and total cost for research, 
development, test, and evaluation and procurement for such 
planned number of cruise missiles; and 
(4) an estimate of the proportional annual cost of such 
cruise missiles as compared to the annual cost of the nuclear 
triad and annual defense spending. 
SEC. 1658. REVIEW OF COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED 
STATES ON RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO NUCLEAR 
ENTERPRISE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—During each of fiscal years 2016 through 
2021, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct 
a review of the process of the Department of Defense for addressing 
the recommendations of the Department of Defense Internal 
Nuclear Enterprise Review, the Independent Review of the Depart-
ment of Defense Nuclear Enterprise, and the Nuclear Deterrence 
Enterprise Review Group that are evaluated by the Director of 
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation. 
(b) BRIEFING.—After conducting each review under subsection 
(a), the Comptroller General shall provide to the congressional 
defense committees a briefing on the review. 
SEC. 1659. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON ORGANIZATION OF NAVY FOR 
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE MISSION. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) The safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the 
nuclear deterrent of the United States is a vital national secu-
rity priority.
H. R. 1735—401 
(2) Nuclear weapons require special consideration because 
of the political and military importance of the weapons, the 
destructive power of the weapons, and the potential con-
sequences of an accident or unauthorized act involving the 
weapons. 
(3) The assured safety, security, and control of nuclear 
weapons and related systems are of paramount importance. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that— 
(1) the Navy has repeatedly demonstrated the commitment 
and prioritization of the Navy to the nuclear deterrence mission 
of the Navy; 
(2) the emphasis of the Navy on ensuring a safe, secure, 
reliable, and credible sea-based nuclear deterrent force has 
been matched by an equal emphasis on ensuring the assured 
safety, security, and control of nuclear weapons and related 
systems ashore; and 
(3) the Navy is commended for the actions the Navy has 
taken subsequent to the 2014 Nuclear Enterprise Review to 
ensure continued focus on the nuclear deterrent mission by 
all ranks within the Navy, including the clarification and 
assignment of specific responsibilities and authorities within 
the Navy contained in OPNAV Instruction 8120.1 and SECNAV 
Instruction 8120.1B. 
SEC. 1660. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE NUCLEAR FORCE IMPROVE-
MENT PROGRAM OF THE AIR FORCE. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) On February 6, 2014, Air Force Global Strike Command 
initiated a force improvement program for the intercontinental 
ballistic missile force designed to improve mission effectiveness, 
strengthen culture and morale, and identify areas in need 
of investment by soliciting input from airmen performing inter-
continental ballistic missile operations. 
(2) The intercontinental ballistic missile force improvement 
program generated more than 300 recommendations to 
strengthen intercontinental ballistic missile operations and 
served as a model for subsequent force improvement programs 
in other mission areas, such as bomber operations and 
sustainment. 
(3) On May 28, 2014, as part of the nuclear force improve-
ment program, the Air Force announced it would make imme-
diate improvements in the nuclear mission of the Air Force, 
including enhancing career opportunities for airmen in the 
nuclear career field, ensuring training activities focused on 
performing the mission in the field, reforming the personnel 
reliability program, establishing special pay rates for positions 
in the nuclear career field, and creating a new service medal 
for nuclear deterrence operations. 
(4) Chief of Staff of the Air Force Mark Welsh has said 
that, as part of the nuclear force improvement program, the 
Air Force will increase nuclear-manning levels and strengthen 
professional development for the members of the Air Force 
supporting the nuclear mission of the Air Force in order ‘‘to 
address shortfalls and offer our airmen more stable work 
schedule and better quality of life’’. 
(5) Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James, in rec-
ognition of the importance of the nuclear mission of the Air
H. R. 1735—402 
Force, proposed elevating the grade of the commander of the 
Air Force Global Strike Command from lieutenant general to 
general, and on March 30, 2015, the Senate confirmed a general 
as commander of that command. 
(6) The Air Force redirected more than $160,000,000 in 
fiscal year 2014 to alleviate urgent, near-term shortfalls within 
the nuclear mission of the Air Force as part of the nuclear 
force improvement program. 
(7) The Air Force plans to spend more than $200,000,000 
on the nuclear force improvement program in fiscal year 2015, 
and requested more than $130,000,000 for the program for 
fiscal year 2016. 
(8) Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said on November 
14, 2014, that ‘‘[t]he nuclear mission plays a critical role in 
ensuring the Nation’s safety. No other enterprise we have is 
more important’’. 
(9) Secretary Hagel also said that the budget for the nuclear 
mission of the Air Force should increase by 10 percent over 
a five-year period. 
(10) Section 1652 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ 
McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2015 (Public Law 113–291; 128 Stat. 3654; 10 U.S.C. 491 note) 
declares it the policy of the United States ‘‘to ensure that 
the members of the Armed Forces who operate the nuclear 
deterrent of the United States have the training, resources, 
and national support required to execute the critical national 
security mission of the members’’. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that— 
(1) the nuclear mission of the Air Force should be a top 
priority for the Department of the Air Force and for Congress; 
(2) the members of the Air Force who operate and maintain 
the nuclear deterrent of the United States perform work that 
is vital to the security of the United States; 
(3) the nuclear force improvement program of the Air Force 
has made significant near-term improvements for the members 
of the Air Force in the nuclear career field of the Air Force; 
(4) Congress should support long-term investments in the 
Air Force nuclear enterprise that sustain the progress made 
under the nuclear force improvement program; 
(5) the Air Force should— 
(A) regularly inform Congress on the progress being 
made under the nuclear force improvement program and 
its efforts to strengthen the nuclear enterprise; and 
(B) make Congress aware of any additional actions 
that should be taken to optimize performance of the nuclear 
mission of the Air Force and maximize the strength of 
the strategic deterrent of the United States; and 
(6) future budgets for the Air Force should reflect the 
importance of the nuclear mission of the Air Force and the 
need to provide members of the Air Force assigned to the 
nuclear mission the best possible support and quality of life.