H. R. 1735—263 
(2) summaries of any plans developed in accordance with 
the guidance developed under paragraph (2) of such subsection. 
SEC. 1061. EXPEDITED MEETINGS OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON 
THE FUTURE OF THE ARMY. 
Section 1702(f) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 128 Stat. 3665) is amended 
by adding at the end the following new sentence: ‘‘Section 10 of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. I) shall not 
apply to a meeting of the Commission unless the meeting is 
attended by five or more members of the Commission.’’. 
SEC. 1062. MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN REPORTS SUBMITTED BY 
COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES. 
(a) REPORT ON NNSA BUDGET REQUESTS.—Section 3255(a)(2) 
of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 
2455(a)(2)) is amended by inserting before ‘‘, the Comptroller Gen-
eral’’ the following: ‘‘in an even-numbered year, and not later than 
150 days after the date on which the Administrator submits such 
materials in an odd-numbered year’’. 
(b) REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.—Section 3134 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 
(Public Law 111–84; 123 Stat. 2713), as amended by section 3134(a) 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 
(Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 2193), is further amended— 
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘a series of three reviews, 
as described in subsections (b), (c), and (d),’’ and inserting 
‘‘reviews as described in subsections (b) and (c)’’; 
(2) by striking subsection (d); and 
(3) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (d). 
SEC. 1063. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GEOGRAPHICALLY 
DISTRIBUTED FORCE LAYDOWN IN THE AREA OF RESPON-
SIBILITY OF UNITED STATES PACIFIC COMMAND. 
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than March 1, 2016, the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Commander of the 
United States Pacific Command, shall submit to the congressional 
defense committees a report on Department of Defense plans for 
implementing the geographically distributed force laydown in the 
area of responsibility of United States Pacific Command. 
(b) MATTERS TO BE INCLUDED.—The report required under sub-
section (a) shall include the following: 
(1) A description of the force laydown. 
(2) A discussion of how the force laydown affects the oper-
ational and contingency plans in the area of responsibility 
of United States Pacific Command, including a discussion on 
how timeliness, availability of forces, and risk in meeting the 
military objectives contained in those plans are affected. 
(3) A discussion of the specific support asset requirements 
derived 
from 
the 
force 
laydown, 
including 
logistical 
sustainment, pre-positioned stocks, sea and air lift and, com-
mand and control. 
(4) A discussion of the specific infrastructure and military 
construction requirements derived from the force laydown. 
(5) A discussion on how Department of Defense plans to 
meet the requirements identified in paragraphs (3) and (4), 
including the ability of United States Transportation Command,
H. R. 1735—264 
the United States Combat Logistics Force, and the Armed 
Forces to meet those requirements. 
(6) Any other matters the Secretary of Defense determines 
to be appropriate. 
(c) FORM.—The report required under subsection (a) shall be 
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. 
SEC. 1064. INDEPENDENT STUDY OF NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY 
FORMULATION PROCESS. 
(a) REQUIREMENT FOR STUDY.—The Secretary of Defense shall 
enter into a contract with an independent research entity described 
in subsection (c) to carry out a comprehensive study of the role 
of the Department of Defense in the formulation of national security 
strategy. 
(b) MATTERS COVERED.—The study required by subsection (a) 
shall include, at a minimum, the following: 
(1) Several case studies of the role of the Department 
of Defense and its process for the formulation of previous 
national security strategies in place throughout the history 
of the United States, with specific emphasis on the development 
and execution of previous strategies, as well as the factors 
that contributed to the development and execution of successful 
previous strategies with specific emphasis on— 
(A) the frequency of strategy updates; 
(B) the synchronization of timelines and content among 
different strategies; 
(C) the prioritization of objectives; 
(D) the assignment of roles and responsibilities among 
relevant agencies; 
(E) the links between strategy and resourcing; 
(F) the implementation of strategy within the planning 
documents of relevant agencies; 
(G) the value of a competition of ideas; and 
(H) recommendations for the executive and legislative 
branches on the best practices and organizational lessons 
learned for enabling the Department of Defense to formu-
late long-term defense strategy. 
(2) A complete review and analysis of the current national 
security strategy formulation process, as it relates to the 
Department of Defense, including an analysis of the following: 
(A) All major Government products and documents 
of national security strategy relevant to the Department 
of Defense and how they fit together, including— 
(i) the National Military Strategy prepared by the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under section 
153(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code; 
(ii) the most recent quadrennial defense review 
conducted by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to 
section 118 of title 10, United States Code; 
(iii) the national security strategy report required 
under section 108 of the National Security Act of 1947 
(50 U.S.C. 3043); and 
(iv) any other relevant national security strategy 
products and documents. 
(B) The time periods during which the products and 
documents covered by subparagraph (A) are prepared and 
published, and how they fit together.
H. R. 1735—265 
(C) The interaction between the White House and the 
agencies that develop such products and documents and 
formulate strategy. 
(D) All the current entities in the Federal Government 
that contribute to the national security strategy formula-
tion process and how they fit together. 
(c) INDEPENDENT RESEARCH ENTITY.—The entity described in 
this subsection is an independent research entity that is a not- 
for-profit entity or a federally funded research and development 
center with appropriate expertise and analytical capability. 
(d) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the independent research entity shall provide 
to the Secretary a report on the results of the study. Not later 
than 90 days after receipt of the report, the Secretary shall submit 
such report, together with any additional views or recommendations 
of the Secretary, to the congressional defense committees. 
SEC. 1065. REPORT ON THE STATUS OF DETECTION, IDENTIFICATION, 
AND 
DISABLEMENT 
CAPABILITIES 
RELATED 
TO 
REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT. 
Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional 
defense committees a report addressing the suitability of existing 
capabilities to detect, identify, and disable remotely piloted aircraft 
operating within special use and restricted airspace. The report 
shall include the following: 
(1) An assessment of the degree to which existing capabili-
ties to detect, identify, and potentially disable remotely piloted 
aircraft within special use and restricted airspace are able 
to be deployed and combat prevailing threats. 
(2) An assessment of existing gaps in capabilities related 
to the detection, identification, or disablement of remotely 
piloted aircraft within special use and restricted airspace. 
(3) A plan that outlines the extent to which existing 
research and development programs within the Department 
of Defense can be leveraged to fill identified capability gaps 
and/or the need to establish new programs to address such 
gaps as are identified pursuant to paragraph (2). 
SEC. 1066. REPORT ON OPTIONS TO ACCELERATE THE TRAINING OF 
PILOTS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT. 
Not later than February 1, 2016, the Secretary of the Air 
Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
addressing the immediate and critical training and operational 
needs of the remotely piloted aircraft community. The report shall 
include the following: 
(1) An assessment of the viability of using non-rated, 
civilian, contractor, or enlisted pilots to execute remotely piloted 
aircraft missions. 
(2) An assessment of the availability and existing utiliza-
tion of special use airspace available for remotely piloted air-
craft training and a plan for accessing additional special use 
airspace in order to meet anticipated training requirements 
for remotely piloted aircraft. 
(3) A comprehensive training plan aimed at increasing 
the throughput of undergraduate remotely piloted aircraft 
training without sacrificing quality and standards.
H. R. 1735—266 
(4) Establishment of an optimum ratio for the mix of 
training airframes to operational airframes in the remotely 
piloted aircraft inventory necessary to achieve manning require-
ments for pilots and sensor operators and, to the extent prac-
ticable, a plan for fielding additional remotely piloted aircraft 
airframes at the formal training units in the active, National 
Guard, and reserve components in accordance with optimum 
ratios for MQ–9 and Global Hawk remotely piloted aircraft. 
(5) Establishment of optimum and minimum crew ratios 
to combat air patrols taking into account all tasks remotely 
piloted aircraft units execute and, to the extent practicable, 
a plan for conducting missions in accordance with optimum 
ratios. 
(6) Identification of any resource, legislative, or depart-
mental policy challenges impeding the corrective action needed 
to reach a sustainable remotely piloted aircraft operations 
tempo. 
(7) An assessment, to the extent practicable, of the direct 
and indirect impacts that the integration of remotely piloted 
aircraft into the national airspace system has on the ability 
to generate remotely piloted aircraft crews. 
(8) Any other matters the Secretary determines appro-
priate. 
SEC. 1067. STUDIES OF FLEET PLATFORM ARCHITECTURES FOR THE 
NAVY. 
(a) INDEPENDENT STUDIES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide 
for the performance of three independent studies of alternative 
future fleet platform architectures for the Navy in the 2030 
timeframe. 
(2) SUBMISSION
TO
CONGRESS.—Not later than April 1, 
2016, the Secretary shall submit the results of each study 
to the congressional defense committees. 
(3) FORM.—Each such study shall be submitted in unclassi-
fied form, but may contain a classified annex as necessary. 
(b) ENTITIES TO PERFORM STUDIES.—The Secretary of Defense 
shall provide for the studies under subsection (a) to be performed 
as follows: 
(1) One study shall be performed by the Department of 
the Navy and shall include participants from— 
(A) the Office of Net Assessment within the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense; and 
(B) the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Divi-
sion. 
(2) The second study shall be performed by a federally 
funded research and development center. 
(3) The final study shall be conducted by an independent, 
non-governmental institute which is described in section 
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and exempt 
from tax under section 501(a) of such Code, and has recognized 
credentials and expertise in national security and military 
affairs. 
(c) PERFORMANCE OF STUDIES.— 
(1) INDEPENDENT PERFORMANCE.—The Secretary of Defense 
shall require the three studies under this section to be con-
ducted independently of each other.