Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2501
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 09:04:35+00:00

Document:
the future-years defense program submitted to Congress by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to section 221 of this title.
Sustaining production, maintenance, repair, logistics, and other activities in support of military operations of various durations and intensity.
Maintaining advanced research and development activities to provide the armed forces with systems capable of ensuring technological superiority over potential adversaries.
Reconstituting within a reasonable period the capability to develop, produce, and support supplies and equipment, including technologically advanced systems, in sufficient quantities to prepare fully for a war, national emergency, or mobilization of the armed forces before the commencement of that war, national emergency, or mobilization.
Providing for the development, manufacture, and supply of items and technologies critical to the production and sustainment of advanced military weapon systems within the national technology and industrial base.
Providing for the generation of services capabilities that are not core functions of the armed forces and that are critical to military operations within the national technology and industrial base.
Providing for the development, production, and integration of information technology within the national technology and industrial base.
Maintaining critical design skills to ensure that the armed forces are provided with systems capable of ensuring technological superiority over potential adversaries.
Ensuring reliable sources of materials that are critical to national security, such as specialty metals, essential minerals, armor plate, and rare earth elements.
Reducing, to the maximum extent practicable, the presence of counterfeit parts in the supply chain and the risk associated with such parts.
Relying, to the maximum extent practicable, upon the commercial national technology and industrial base that is required to meet the national security needs of the United States.
Reducing the reliance of the Department of Defense on technology and industrial base sectors that are economically dependent on Department of Defense business.
Reducing Federal Government barriers to the use of commercial products, processes, and standards.
A prior section 2501, added Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title VIII, § 821(b)(1)(B), Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 2014, related to centralized guidance, analysis, and planning, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 102–484, § 4202(a).
Another prior section 2501 was renumbered section 2533 of this title.
2016—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 114–328, in introductory provisions, substituted “The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the United States attains” for “It is the policy of Congress that the United States attain”.
2014—Subsec. (a)(1)(A). Pub. L. 113–291 substituted “(50 U.S.C. 3043)” for “(50 U.S.C. 404a)”.
2013—Pub. L. 112–239, § 1603(a)(1)(A), substituted “strategy for” for “objectives concerning” in section catchline.
Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 112–239, § 1603(a)(1)(B)(i), (ii), substituted “Strategy” for “Objectives” in heading and “The Secretary of Defense shall develop a national security strategy for the national technology and industrial base. Such strategy shall be based on a prioritized assessment of risks and challenges to the defense supply chain and shall ensure that the national technology and industrial base is capable of achieving the following national security objectives:” for “It is the policy of Congress that the national technology and industrial base be capable of meeting the following national security objectives:” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (a)(9), (10). Pub. L. 112–239, § 1603(a)(1)(B)(iii), added pars. (9) and (10).
2011—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 111–383, § 895(b)(1), substituted “Supplying, equipping, and supporting” for “Supplying and equipping” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 111–383, § 895(b)(2), substituted “logistics, and other activities in support of” for “and logistics for”.
Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 111–383, § 895(b)(3), substituted “, produce, and support” for “and produce”.
Subsec. (a)(6) to (8). Pub. L. 111–383, § 895(b)(4), added pars. (6) and (7) and redesignated former par. (6) as (8).
2009—Subsec. (a)(6). Pub. L. 111–23 added par. (6).
1996—Pub. L. 104–106, § 1081(a)(2), substituted “National security objectives concerning national technology and industrial base” for “Congressional defense policy concerning national technology and industrial base, reinvestment, and conversion” as section catchline.
Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104–106, § 1081(a)(1)(A)(i), substituted “National Security” for “Defense Policy” in heading.
Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 104–201 added par. (5).
Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 104–106, § 1081(a)(1)(B), (C), redesignated subsec. (c) as (b) and struck out former subsec. (b) which stated policy objectives of Congress relating to defense reinvestment, diversification, and conversion.
1993—Subsec. (a)(1)(A). Pub. L. 103–35 substituted “section 108” for “section 104”.
Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 103–160, § 1313, added par. (5).
Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 103–160, § 1182(a)(10), substituted “that, by reducing the public sector demand for capital, increases the amount of capital available” for “and thereby free up capital”.
The Secretary of Defense may, in coordination with the Secretary of Commerce and working in coordination with the defense manufacturing institutes, establish within the Department of Defense a program to make long-term investments in critical skills, facilities, research and development, and small business support in order to strengthen the national security innovation base by designating and supporting consortiums as defense manufacturing communities.
The program authorized by this section shall be known as the ‘Defense Manufacturing Community Support Program’ (in this section referred to as the ‘Program’).
The Secretary of Defense may designate eligible consortiums as defense manufacturing communities through a competitive process, and in coordination with the defense manufacturing institutes.
complementarity with defense manufacturing institutes.
Each designation under paragraph (1) shall be for a period of five years.
The Secretary may renew a designation made under paragraph (1) for up to two additional two-year periods. Any designation as a defense manufacturing community or renewal of such designation that is in effect before the date of the enactment of this Act [Aug. 13, 2018] shall count toward the limit set forth in this subparagraph.
such other criteria as the Secretary considers appropriate.
Under the Program, the Secretary of Defense may award financial or technical assistance to a member of a consortium designated as a defense manufacturing community under the Program as appropriate for purposes of the Program.
A recipient of financial or technical assistance under the Program may use such financial or technical assistance to support an investment that will improve the defense industrial base.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017], the Secretary of Defense shall establish a process, or designate an existing process, for enhancing the ability of the Department of Defense to analyze, assess, and monitor the vulnerabilities of, and concentration of purchases in, the defense industrial base.
Designation of a senior official responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of the process.
Development or integration of tools to support commercial due diligence and business intelligence or to otherwise analyze and monitor commercial activity to understand business relationships affecting the defense industrial base.
Development of risk profiles of products, services, or entities based on business intelligence, commercial due diligence tools and data services.
As the Secretary determines necessary, integration with intelligence sources to develop threat profiles of entities attempting transactions with a defense industrial base companies [sic].
Other matters as the Secretary deems necessary.
Identification of the official required to be designated under paragraph (2)(A).
Identification of the tools described in paragraph (2)(B) that are currently available to [the] Department of Defense and any other tools available commercially or otherwise that might contribute to enhancing the analytic capability of the process.
Identification of, or recommendations for, any statutory changes needed to improve the effectiveness of the process.
Projected resources necessary to purchase any commercially available tools identified under subparagraph (B) and to carry out any statutory changes identified under subparagraph (C).
The report required under section 721(m) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4565(m)) (relating to concentrations of purchases of the defense industrial base).
The report required under section 723(a) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4568(a)) (relating to offsets in defense production).
The report required under section 2504 of title 10, United States Code (relating to annual industrial capabilities).
Any other reports the Secretary determines appropriate.
A consolidated report under subparagraph (A) shall be submitted by not later than March 31 of the fiscal year following the fiscal year for which the report is submitted.
Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017], the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report describing any need for reforms of policies governing the export of technology or related intellectual property, along with any proposed legislative changes the Secretary believes are necessary.
Each report submitted under this subsection shall be in unclassified form, but may contain a classified annex.
A description of the various components of the national technology and industrial base, including government entities, universities, nonprofit research entities, nontraditional and commercial item contractors, and private contractors that conduct commercial and military research, produce commercial items that could be used by the Department of Defense, and produce items designated and controlled under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act [22 U.S.C. 2778] (also known as the ‘United States Munitions List’).
Identification of the barriers to the seamless integration of the transfer of knowledge, goods, and services among the persons and organizations of the national technology and industrial base.
Identification of current authorities that could contribute to further integration of the persons and organizations of the national technology and industrial base, and a plan to maximize the use of those authorities.
Identification of changes in export control rules, procedures, and laws that would enhance the civil-military integration policy objectives set forth in section 2501(b) of title 10, United States Code, for the national technology and industrial base to increase the access of the Armed Forces to commercial products, services, and research and create incentives necessary for nontraditional and commercial item contractors, universities, and nonprofit research entities to modify commercial products or services to meet Department of Defense requirements.
any other agreements among the countries comprising the national technology and industrial base.
developing and implementing new policies and acquisition and business practices.
criteria for evaluation of an application for funding or changes to policies or acquisition and business practices by such a department, agency, or command for purposes of the program.
Under the program established under subsection (a)(1), not less frequently than annually, the Secretary shall solicit from the heads of the military departments, the Defense Agencies, and the combatant commands applications for funding to be used to enter into contracts, cooperative agreements, or other transaction agreements entered into pursuant to section 2371b of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 815, with appropriate entities for the fielding or commercialization of technologies.
Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to require any official of the Department of Defense to provide funding under this section to any Congressional earmark as defined pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives or any congressionally directed spending item as defined pursuant to paragraph 5 of rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate.
Subject to the availability of appropriations for such purpose, of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act [see Tables for classification] or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-wide, not more than $300,000,000 may be used for each such fiscal year for the program established under subsection (a)(1).
Of the funds specified in paragraph (1) for any of fiscal years 2016 through 2020, not more than $150,000,000 may be used for each such fiscal year for activities in the field of directed energy.
The Secretary may transfer funds available for the program established under subsection (a)(1) to the research, development, test, and evaluation accounts of a military department, Defense Agency, or a combatant command pursuant to an application, or any part of an application, that the Secretary determines would support the purposes of the program.
The transfer authority provided in paragraph (1) is in addition to any other transfer authority available to the Secretary of Defense.
The authority to carry out the program under subsection (a)(1) shall terminate on September 30, 2020.
The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program to expand the industrial base of the Department of Defense to increase the Department’s access to innovation and the benefits of competition.
The program established under subsection (a) shall use tools and resources available within the Federal Government and available from the private sector to provide a capability for identifying and communicating with firms that are not traditional suppliers, including commercial firms and firms of all business sizes, that are engaged in markets of importance to the Department of Defense in which such firms can make a significant contribution.
The program established under subsection (a) shall include outreach, using procurement technical assistance centers, to firms of all business sizes in the vicinity of Department of Defense installations regarding opportunities to obtain contracts and subcontracts to perform work at such installations.
The program established under subsection (a) shall include a continuous effort to review the industrial base supporting the Department of Defense, including the identification of markets of importance to the Department of Defense in which firms that are not traditional suppliers can make a significant contribution.
For purposes of this section, a firm is not a traditional supplier of the Department of Defense if it does not currently have contracts and subcontracts to perform work for the Department of Defense with a total combined value in excess of $500,000.
Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 14, 2008], the Secretary of Defense shall designate a senior official of the Department of Defense to act as the executive agent for printed circuit board technology.
Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 14, 2008], and in accordance with Directive 5101.1, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the executive agent designated under subsection (a).
Development and maintenance of a printed circuit board and interconnect technology roadmap that ensures that the Department of Defense has access to the manufacturing capabilities and technical expertise necessary to meet future military requirements regarding such technology.
Development of recommended funding strategies necessary to meet the requirements of the roadmap developed under subparagraph (A).
Assessment of the vulnerabilities, trustworthiness, and diversity of the printed circuit board supply chain, including the development of trustworthiness requirements for printed circuit boards used in defense systems, and to develop strategies to address matters that are identified as a result of such assessment.
Such other roles and responsibilities as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.
In accordance with Directive 5101.1, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the military departments,Defense Agencies, and other components of the Department of Defense provide the executive agent designated under subsection (a) with the appropriate support and resources needed to perform the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the executive agent.
The term ‘Directive 5101.1’ means Department of Defense Directive 5101.1, or any successor directive relating to the responsibilities of an executive agent of the Department of Defense.
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title II, § 253(c), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3180, provided that whenever the Secretary of Defense provided for the conduct of a study referred to as a Technology Area Review and Assessment, the Secretary, not later than March 1 of the year following the year in which that study was conducted, was to submit to the Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report containing a summary of each such Technology Area Review and Assessment conducted during that year, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, § 236, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 47.
“SEC. 811. CONSISTENCY WITH UNITED STATES OBLIGATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
“No provision of this subtitle [subtitle B (§§ 811–828) of title VIII of div. A of Pub. L. 108–136, enacting section 2436 of this title, amending sections 2533a and 2534 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 2436, 2505, 2521, and 2534 of this title] or any amendment made by this subtitle shall apply to the extent the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, the United States Trade Representative, and the Secretary of State, determines that it is inconsistent with United States obligations under an international agreement.
“SEC. 812. ASSESSMENT AND ANNUAL REPORT OF UNITED STATES DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE CAPABILITIES AND ACQUISITIONS OF ARTICLES, MATERIALS, AND SUPPLIES MANUFACTURED OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.
the capabilities of the United States defense industrial base to produce military systems necessary to support the national security objectives set forth in section 2501 of title 10, United States Code.
For purposes of the assessment program, the Secretary shall use existing data, as required under subsection (b), and submit an annual report, as required under subsection (c).
Whether the contractor is a United States or foreign contractor.
The principal place of business of the contractor and the principal place of performance of the contract.
Whether the contract was awarded on a sole source basis or after receipt of competitive offers.
The dollar value of the contract.
The Federal Procurement Data System described in section 1122(a)(4)(A) of title 41, United States Code, or any successor system, shall collect from contracts described in paragraph (1) the information specified in that paragraph.
Information obtained in the implementation of this section is subject to the same limitations on disclosure, and penalties for violation of such limitations, as is provided under section 2507 of title 10, United States Code. Such information also shall be exempt from release under section 552 of title 5, United States Code.
For purposes of meeting the requirements set forth in this section, the Secretary of Defense may not require the provision of information beyond the information that is currently provided to the Department of Defense through existing data collection systems by non-Federal entities with respect to contracts and subcontracts with the Department of Defense or any military department.
The Secretary of Defense shall make the report submitted under subsection (c) publicly available to the maximum extent practicable.
This section shall not apply to acquisitions made by an agency, or component thereof, that is an element of the intelligence community as set forth in or designated under section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4)).
“SEC. 814. PRODUCTION CAPABILITIES IMPROVEMENT FOR CERTAIN ESSENTIAL ITEMS USING DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE CAPABILITIES FUND.
There is established in the Treasury of the United States a separate fund to be known as the Defense Industrial Base Capabilities Fund (hereafter in this section referred to as the ‘Fund’).
There shall be credited to the Fund amounts appropriated to it.
The Secretary of Defense is authorized to use all amounts in the Fund, subject to appropriation, for the purposes of enhancing or reconstituting United States industrial capability to produce items on the military system essential item breakout list (as described in section 812(b)) or items subject to section 2534 of title 10, United States Code, in the quantity and of the quality necessary to achieve national security objectives.
Before the obligation of any amounts in the Fund, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report describing the Secretary’s plans for implementing the Fund established in subsection (a), including the priorities for the obligation of amounts in the Fund, the criteria for determining the recipients of such amounts, and the mechanisms through which such amounts may be provided to the recipients.
“This subtitle may be cited as the ‘Air Force Science and Technology for the 21st Century Act’.
“SEC. 252. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING.
the value of Air Force science and technology development is made increasingly apparent to the warfighters, by linking the needs of those warfighters with decisions on science and technology development.
Complete and adopt a policy directive that provides for changes in how the Air Force makes budgetary and nonbudgetary decisions with respect to its science and technology development programs and how it carries out those programs.
At least once every five years, conduct a review of the long-term challenges and short-term objectives of the Air Force science and technology programs that is consistent with the review specified in section 252 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106–398; 114 Stat. 1654A–46 [set out as a note below]).
Ensure that development and science and technology planning and investment activities are carried out for future space warfighting systems and for future nonspace warfighting systems in an integrated manner.
Elevate the position within the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force that has primary responsibility for budget and policy decisions for science and technology programs.
Coordinating the needs of Air Force warfighters with decisions on science and technology development.
Giving input into the establishment of priorities among science and technology programs.
Analyzing Air Force capability options for the allocation of Air Force resources.
Developing concepts for technology, warfighting systems, and operations with which the Air Force can achieve its critical future goals.
Evaluating concepts for systems and operations that leverage technology across Air Force organizational boundaries.
Ensuring that a ‘system-of-systems’ approach is used in carrying out the various Air Force capability planning exercises.
Utilizing existing analysis capabilities within the Air Force product centers in a collaborative and integrated manner.
Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 28, 2001], the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to Congress a report on the implementation of the planning process required by paragraph (1). The report shall include the annual amount that the Secretary considers necessary to carry out paragraph (1).
“SEC. 253. STUDY AND REPORT ON EFFECTIVENESS OF AIR FORCE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM CHANGES.
The Secretary of the Air Force, in cooperation with the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, shall carry out a study to determine how the changes to the Air Force science and technology program implemented during the past two years affect the future capabilities of the Air Force.
That the concerns about the management of the science and technology program that have been raised by Congress, the Defense Science Board, the Air Force Science Advisory Board, and the Air Force Association have been adequately addressed.
That appropriate and sufficient technology is available to ensure the military superiority of the United States and counter future high-risk threats.
That the science and technology investments are balanced to meet the near-, mid-, and long-term needs of the Air Force.
That technologies are made available that can be used to respond flexibly and quickly to a wide range of future threats.
That the Air Force organizational structure provides for a sufficiently senior level advocate of science and technology to ensure an ongoing, effective presence of the science and technology community during the budget and planning process.
Whether the biannual science and technology summits provide sufficient visibility into, and understanding and appreciation of, the value of the science and technology program to the senior level of Air Force budget and policy decisionmakers.
Whether the applied technology councils are effective in contributing the input of all levels beneath the senior leadership into the coordination, focus, and content of the science and technology program.
Whether the designation of the commander of the Air Force Materiel Command as the science and technology budget advocate is effective to ensure that an adequate Air Force science and technology budget is requested.
Whether the revised development planning process is effective to aid in the coordination of the needs of the Air Force warfighters with decisions on science and technology investments and the establishment of priorities among different science and technology programs.
Whether the implementation of section 252 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106–398; 114 Stat. 1654A–46 [set out as a note below]) is effective to identify the basis for the appropriate science and technology program funding level and investment portfolio.
The Secretary of the Air Force shall conduct a review of the long-term challenges and short-term objectives of the Air Force science and technology programs. The Secretary shall complete the review not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 30, 2000].
An assessment of the budgetary resources that are being used for fiscal year 2001 for addressing the long-term challenges and the short-term objectives of the Air Force science and technology programs.
The budgetary resources that are necessary to address those challenges and objectives adequately.
A course of action for each projected or ongoing Air Force science and technology program that does not address either the long-term challenges or the short-term objectives.
The matters required under subsection (c)(5) and (d)(6).
The Secretary of the Air Force shall establish an integrated product team to identify high-risk, high-payoff challenges that will provide a long-term focus and motivation for the Air Force science and technology programs over the next 20 to 50 years following the enactment of this Act [Oct. 30, 2000]. The integrated product team shall include representatives of the Office of Scientific Research and personnel from the Air Force Research Laboratory.
The team shall solicit views from the entire Air Force science and technology community on the matters under consideration by the team.
should not select a linear extension of any ongoing Air Force science and technology program for consideration as a science and technology challenge under subparagraph (A).
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering shall designate a technical coordinator and a management coordinator for each science and technology challenge identified pursuant to this subsection. Each technical coordinator shall have sufficient expertise in fields related to the challenge to be able to identify other experts in such fields and to affirm the credibility of the challenge. The coordinator for a science and technology challenge shall conduct workshops within the relevant scientific and technological community to obtain suggestions for possible approaches to addressing the challenge and to identify ongoing work that addresses the challenge, deficiencies in current work relating to the challenge, and promising areas of research.
identify any work not currently funded by the Air Force that should be performed to meet the challenge.
The Secretary of the Air Force shall establish a task force to identify short-term technological objectives of the Air Force science and technology programs. The task force shall be chaired by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering and shall include representatives of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the specified combatant commands of the Air Force.
The task force shall solicit views from the entire Air Force requirements community, user community, and acquisition community.
likely attainment of the desired benefits within a five-year period.
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering shall establish an integrated product team for each short-term objective identified pursuant to this subsection. Each integrated product team shall include representatives of the requirements community, the user community, and the science and technology community with relevant expertise.
working with the Air Force science and technology community to identify science and technology projects and programs that should be undertaken to eliminate each deficiency in an enabling capability.
identify the science and technology work of the Air Force that should be undertaken to eliminate each deficiency in enabling capabilities that is identified by the integrated product team pursuant to subparagraph (B) of that paragraph.
Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of the Air Force completes the review required by subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the review. The report shall include the Comptroller General’s assessment regarding the extent to which the review was conducted in compliance with the requirements of this section.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title II, § 243, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 551, required the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the actions necessary to promote the research base and technological development needed for ensuring that the Armed Forces had the military capabilities necessary for meeting national security requirements over the next two to three decades.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title II, § 212, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 542, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, § 1031(h)(1), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1604; Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, § 217, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2125, which provided the sense of Congress as to funding objectives for the Defense Science and Technology Program, was repealed by Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title II, § 213, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2226.
It is the sense of Congress that, for each of the fiscal years 2000 through 2008, it should be an objective of the Secretary of Defense to increase the budget for the Defense Science and Technology Program for the fiscal year over the budget for that program for the preceding fiscal year by a percent that is at least two percent above the rate of inflation as determined by the Office of Management and Budget.
The sustainment of research capabilities in scientific and engineering disciplines critical to the Department of Defense.
The education and training of the next generation of scientists and engineers in disciplines that are relevant to future defense systems, particularly through the conduct of basic research.
The continued support of the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research and research programs at historically black colleges and universities and minority institutions.
It is the sense of Congress that, in supporting projects within the Defense Science and Technology Program, the Secretary of Defense should attempt to leverage commercial research, technology, products, and processes for the benefit of the Department of Defense.
the adaptation of commercial technology, products, or processes for military purposes.
It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense should have the flexibility to allocate a combination of funds available for the Department of Defense for basic and applied research and for advanced development to support any individual project or program within the Defense Science and Technology Program, but such flexibility should not change the allocation of funds in any fiscal year among basic and applied research and advanced development.
of particular concern, the Secretary of the Air Force should take appropriate measures to ensure that sufficient numbers of scientists and engineers are maintained to address the technological challenges faced in the areas of air, space, and information technology.
The Secretary of Defense, in cooperation with the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, shall conduct a study on the technology base of the Department of Defense.
result in recommendations on the appropriate levels of staff with baccalaureate, masters, and doctorate degrees, and the optimal ratio of civilian and military staff holding such degrees, to ensure that science and technology functions of the Department of Defense remain vital.
Not later than 120 days after the date on which the study required under paragraph (1) is completed, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study.
The term ‘Defense Science and Technology Program’ means basic and applied research and advanced development.
The term ‘basic and applied research’ means work funded in program elements for defense research and development under Department of Defense category 6.1 or 6.2.
Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title II, § 270, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2469, as amended by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title II, § 242, title X, § 1067(5), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 551, 774; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title II, § 253(a), (b), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3179, 3180, which required biennial submission to Congress by the Secretary of Defense of a plan for ensuring that the science and technology program of the Department of Defense supported the development of the future joint warfighting capabilities identified as priority requirements for the Armed Forces, was repealed by Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title II, § 241, Oct 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2237.
Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title VIII, § 808, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 393, authorized Secretary of Defense to enter into agreements with defense contractors under which certain cost reimbursement rules would be applied and required submission of report to congressional defense committees not later than one year after Feb. 10, 1996, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, § 1027(d), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1880. See section 7315 of this title.
Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XIII, § 1303, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1784, provided that during each of the fiscal years 1994, 1995, and 1996, the Secretary of Defense was to prepare a report that assessed the effectiveness of all defense conversion, reinvestment, and transition assistance programs, as defined in section 1302 of Pub. L. 103–160, 107 Stat. 1783, during the preceding fiscal year.
“This subtitle [subtitle D, §§ 1351–1363 of title XIII of div. A of Pub. L. 103–160, enacting sections 1279d, 1279e, and 1280a of the Appendix to Title 46, Shipping, amending section 31326 of Title 46 and sections 1271, 1273, 1274, and 1274a of the Appendix to Title 46, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 1279b and 1279d of the Appendix to Title 46] may be cited as the ‘National Shipbuilding and Shipyard Conversion Act of 1993’.
“SEC. 1352. NATIONAL SHIPBUILDING INITIATIVE.
There shall be a National Shipbuilding Initiative program, to be carried out to support the industrial base for national security objectives by assisting in the reestablishment of the United States shipbuilding industry as a self-sufficient, internationally competitive industry.
by the Secretary of Transportation, with respect to programs under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Transportation.
A financial incentives program to provide loan guarantees to initiate commercial ship construction for domestic and export sales, encourage shipyard modernization, and support increased productivity.
A technology development program, to be carried out within the Department of Defense by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, to improve the technology base for advanced shipbuilding technologies and related dual-use technologies through activities including a development program for innovative commercial ship design and production processes and technologies.
Enhanced support by the Secretary of Defense for the shipbuilding program of the Department of the Navy known as the Affordability Through Commonality (ATC) program, to include enhanced support (A) for the development of common modules for military and commercial ships, and (B) to foster civil-military integration into the next generation of Naval surface combatants.
Enhanced support by the Secretary of Defense for, and strengthened funding for, that portion of the Manufacturing Technology program of the Navy, and that portion of the Technology Base program of the Navy, that are in the areas of shipbuilding technologies and ship repair technologies.
“SEC. 1353.DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT THROUGH DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY.
“The Secretary of Defense shall designate the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense as the lead agency of the Department of Defense for activities of the Department of Defense which are part of the National Shipbuilding Initiative program. Those activities shall be carried out as part of defense conversion activities of the Department of Defense.
“SEC. 1354.DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY FUNCTIONS AND MINIMUM FINANCIAL COMMITMENT OF NON-FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPANTS.
recommendation of industrial entities, partnerships, joint ventures, or consortia for short- and long-term manufacturing technology investment strategies.
Funding and program management activities to develop innovative design and production processes and the technologies required to implement those processes.
Facilitation of industry and Government technology development and technology transfer activities (including education and training, market assessments, simulations, hardware models and prototypes, and national and regional industrial base studies).
Integration of promising technology advances made in the Technology Reinvestment Program of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency into the National Shipbuilding Initiative to effect full defense conversion potential.
The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the amount of funds provided by the Secretary to a non-Federal government participant does not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of technology development and technology transfer activities.
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title I, §§ 191–195, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2347–2349, as amended by Pub. L. 103–35, title II, § 202(a)(1), May 31, 1993, 107 Stat. 100; Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XI, § 1141(a), (b), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2879; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title I, § 143, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2449; Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title I, § 115, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1939; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title I, § 116, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 533, known as the “Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support Act of 1992”, authorized the Secretary of the Army, during fiscal years 1993 through 2001, to carry out the Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title III, § 344(d)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–71.
Pub. L. 102–484, div. D, title XLII, § 4218, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2671, related to collection of information, completion of assessments, and issuance of plans required by this subchapter, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title VIII, § 829(h), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2614.
directly to the Secretary of Labor.
impose a similar notice and pass through requirement to subcontractors in an amount in excess of $100,000 at all tiers.
the State or entity designated by the State to carry out rapid response activities under [former] section 134(a)(2)(A) of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 [former 29 U.S.C. 2864(a)(2)(A)], and the chief elected official of the unit of general local government within which the adverse effect may occur.
The notice of termination of, or substantial reduction in, a defense contract provided under subsection (c)(1) to an employee of a contractor shall have the same effect as a notice of termination to such employee for the purposes of determining whether such employee is eligible to participate in employment and training activities carried out under title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 [29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.], except in a case in which the employer has specified that the termination of, or substantial reduction in, the contract is not likely to result in plant closure or mass layoff.
An employee who receives a notice of withdrawal or cancellation of the termination of, or substantial reduction in, contract funding shall not be eligible, on the basis of any related reduction in funding under the contract, to participate in employment and training activities under title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 [29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.], beginning on the date on which the employee receives the notice.
The term ‘major defense program’ means a program that is carried out to produce or acquire a major system (as defined in section 2302(5) of title 10, United States Code).

References: § 821
 § 4202
 § 1603
 § 1603
 § 1603
 § 895
 § 895
 § 895
 § 895
 § 1081
 § 1081
 § 1081
 § 1313
 § 1182
 § 253
 § 236
 § 243
 § 212
 § 1031
 § 217
 § 213
 § 270
 § 242
 § 1067
 § 253
 § 241
 § 808
 § 1027
 § 1303
 § 202
 § 1141
 § 143
 § 115
 § 116
 § 1
 § 344
 § 4218
 § 829