Public Law 118–159: To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2025 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.

A proposal for the development and implementation of a cost-effective, scalable solution to modernize and centralize security operations across Army facilities in the United States with full consideration given to minimizing operational impacts while maximizing technological advantages for enhanced security.

Identification of at least three military installations selected to host the Program. These locations shall—

A comprehensive breakdown of the full costs of the Program, including—

An assessment of the viability of funding and sustaining the Program across the period covered by the most recent future-years defense program submitted to Congress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code (as of the date of the plan), considering—

A list of any additional authorities, appropriations, or other resources necessary to ensure the success of the Program.

Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Army shall implement the Program by not later than January 1, 2027.

In the event the certification described in subsection (d) is not submitted on or before January 1, 2027, the Secretary of the Army shall implement the Program as soon as practicable after the date on which such certification is so submitted.

to increase the lethality of the combined fighting force of the Army by providing reserve component and National Guard infantry units with the opportunity to conduct realistic live fire training on state-of-the-art moving robotic target systems; and

to demonstrate the effect of such training on small arms proficiency and lethality in ground combat operations.

the past performance of the unit;138 STAT. 1803

the readiness status of the unit, with an emphasis on providing training to those units designated as preparing to deploy or at a similarly designated readiness status; and

the likelihood that a unit would be actively deployed or commanded to conduct decisive action.

the manner in which the program was conducted at such installation; and

any results achieved under the program at such installation.

The Secretary of the Army is authorized to enter into one or more contracts for the procurement of moving robotic target systems for use in the pilot program under subsection (a).

Robotic target systems procured under paragraph (1) shall be capable of—

List.

A list of all energetic materials that are in production at a Federal Government-owned production facility but that are nonetheless procured by the Army from a source outside of the United States.

The authorities and production capacity the Army has available to ensure it procures energetic materials, to the maximum extent practicable, from domestic sources to meet the national security needs of the United States.

Evaluation.

An evaluation of the factors that the Army considers when procuring energetic materials from a source outside of the United States, including the production capacity for such materials at Federal Government-owned production facilities, the cost of materials, and the timelines associated with the production of end items.

The term “” has the meaning given that term in section 4863(m) of title 10, United States Code.

The term “” means critical chemicals and formulations that—

in the subsection heading, by “Across Programs” after “Advance Procurement”; and

by “across programs” after “advance procurement”;

redesignating

inserting

striking

inserting

striking

inserting

in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by “and the CVN–81” and “the CVN–81, and each subsequent Ford-class aircraft carrier”; and

by at the end the following new subparagraphs:; and

adding

CH–53K aircraft.

T408 engines for such aircraft.

provided only to the Navy Reserve; and

used to recapitalize and maintain, within the Navy Reserve, a threat representative adversary support capability that may be used in support of training activities of the Department of Defense.

a description of any funding and other resources needed to establish and maintain such capability; and

Timeline.

a proposed timeline for the implementation of such capability.138 STAT. 1807

covered F–18 aircraft

The limitation in subsection (a) does not apply to the lead ship of the Landing Ship Medium program if such a ship is a commercial or nondevelopmental item.

In a case in which the exemption under paragraph (1) applies, the service acquisition executive of the Navy may exempt a contract or other agreement for the lead ship of the Landing Ship Medium program from the requirements of full and open competition under section 3201 of title 10, United States Code.

basic and functional design

the Secretary’s compliance with this section; and

the completeness of the basic and functional design drawings described in such subsection.

to result in levels of performance, survivability, lethality, interoperability, mission execution, and overall safety of the helicopter platform that match or exceed the levels that would otherwise be achievable by completing such upgrades at a facility owned by the original equipment manufacturer for the model of helicopter involved;

to provide improved onboard electrical power capacity and ensure adequate power margin for integrating future capabilities;

to improve and expand future weapons interfaces; and

to allow for improved ease of maintenance.

covered upgrades

Assessment.

An assessment of the status of each supplier of surface ship components using the same or a similar methodology to that used in the Navy’s evaluation tool for suppliers of components for Columbia-class submarines.

Action plan.

If the assessment described in paragraph (1) indicates that the supply base of any surface ship component is in an at-risk status, a plan for actions to stabilize that supply base.

“§ 9062a.

Time periods.

Plans.

10 USC 9062a.

Annual report on Air Force tactical fighter aircraft force structure.

is amended

in subsection (a), by “1,112 aircraft” and “1,101 aircraft”; and

in subsection (c)(1), by “2024” and “2025”.138 STAT. 1810

is amended

striking

inserting

is amended

striking

inserting

is amended

striking

inserting

redesignating

inserting

the planned milestones for execution of the implementation plan;

any data, staff, and funding needed to effectively carry out such plan; and

the progress of the Secretary in meeting such milestones as of the date of the report.

may not take any action that would reduce the inventory of air refueling tanker aircraft assigned to a reserve component below the levels set forth in the budget of the President for fiscal year 2025 (as submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code); and

shall ensure that, in the event a reserve component unit is assigned a greater number of KC–135 aircraft than are being replaced with a KC–46 or later-generation air refueling tanker aircraft, any KC–135 aircraft remaining after such replacement will remain within the reserve component for redistribution within that component.

covered reserve KC–135 aircraft

primary mission aircraft inventory

The Secretary of the Air Force may not retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage or on backup aircraft inventory status any F–15E aircraft until September 30, 2027.

The prohibition under paragraph (1) of shall not apply to individual F–15E aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case by case basis, to be no longer mission capable and uneconomical to repair because of aircraft accidents, mishaps, or excessive material degradation and non-airworthiness status of certain aircraft.

The prohibition under paragraph (1) supercedes any provision of section 9062(l) of title 10, United States Code, that is inconsistent with such prohibition.

The Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into a contract or other agreement with a federally funded research and development center pursuant to which the center shall carry out—

The federally funded research and development center that carries out the study and analysis under paragraph (1) shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a report on the results of such study and analysis.

Not later than March 15, 2026, the Secretary of Defense shall—

(B)

fighter aircraft

F–15, F–16, F–22, and F–35 aircraft; and

the Next Generation Air Dominance piloted combat aircraft.

delivery date

Expeditionary mobile protection for dispersed air bases.

Fixed protection for primary air bases.

Ground-based protection systems that incorporate kinetic and non-kinetic capabilities.

Counter-unmanned aircraft systems.

Counter-fixed and Counter-rotary wing aircraft capabilities.

Counter-cruise missile capabilities.

Interoperability with joint command and control networks.

360-degree active and passive sensors.

Systems and software that enable reduced staffing.

Deadline.

by not later than September 30, 2027, field a total of not fewer than four air base air defense sites, of which not fewer than two such sites shall be located in the United States; and

Time periods.

in each of fiscal years 2028 through 2031, field at least four air base air defense sites per year, of which not 138 STAT. 1814 fewer than two of the sites fielded each year shall be located in the United States.

an estimate of the costs of maintaining F–16 simulators at Air National Guard training centers that have such simulators as of the date of the plan;

an estimate of the costs of establishing F–16 simulators at all Air National Guard training centers that are required to, but do not, have such simulators as of the date of the plan, including training centers for Air National Guard units converting from the A–10 aircraft to the F–16 aircraft; and

a plan for allocating funding to pay the costs described in paragraphs (1) and (2), including the proportion of such funding expected to be provided by the Air Force and the Air National Guard, respectively.

the plan developed under subsection (a); and

Assessment.

Evaluation.

an assessment from the Secretary and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau evaluating how the readiness of Air National Guard Units requiring F–16 simulators may be affected if such simulators are not established and maintained at mission training centers as proposed under the plan.

identify each of the 25 fighter aircraft squadrons of the Air National Guard in existence on the date of the enactment of this Act;

provide a plan for recapitalization of all such squadrons at a similar rate as the fighter aircraft squadrons of the active components of the Armed Forces, with the same combination of legacy capability fighter aircraft and advanced capability fighter aircraft found in fighter aircraft squadrons of the active components of the Armed Forces;

Timeline.

establish a timetable for a plan or actions for the recapitalization proposed under paragraph (2), disaggregated by fighter aircraft squadron and fiscal year, which shall identify funding required for each fiscal year;138 STAT. 1815

Assessment.

assess budgetary effects on the active components of the Armed Forces if the recapitalization plan proposed under paragraph (2) were implemented in accordance with the timeline established in paragraph (3); and

Assessment.

assess the effects of such plan on the operational readiness and personnel readiness of the active and reserve components of the Armed Forces, including the effects of such plan on the ability of such components to meet steady state and contingency force presentation and mission requirements of combatant commanders.

Not later than July 1, 2025, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the sustainment and recapitalization plan required under subsection (a).

The report required under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified annex.

The term “”—

The term “”, with respect to fighter aircraft, means an F–22 or F–35 aircraft.

The term “” has the meaning given that term in section 9062(i)(2) of title 10, United States Code.

The term “” means pre-fifth generation fighter aircraft, including an F–16, both pre-block and post-block, F–15C/D, F–15E/EX, and A–10.

striking

inserting

inserting

to identify risks in the supply chain for small unmanned aerial systems (referred to in this section as “sUAS”); and138 STAT. 1816

to increase the resiliency of such sUAS supply chain using parts supplied by domestic sources and from allies and partners of the United States.

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and not less frequently than once every three years thereafter until 2034, the Secretary of Defense shall fully disassemble a drone aircraft made by Da Jiang Innovations or a similar commercially available sUAS manufactured in a covered foreign country in order to—

Not later than 150 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and using the taxonomy developed under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of Defense shall develop a supply chain risk framework in order to—

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and based on the analyses conducted under paragraphs (1) and (2), the Secretary of Defense shall develop a strategy to develop a secure and resilient domestic and allied supply chain of critical components for sUASs, which shall include—

(D) 138 STAT. 1817

List.

a list of each component identified under subsection (b)(1), including a description of any security vulnerabilities associated with such component;

a description of the supply chain risk framework developed under subsection (b)(2);

Recommenda-

tions.

any recommendations for the inclusion of companies on the list described in subsection (b)(2)(C); and

the full strategy developed under subsection (b)(3).

covered foreign country

Whether the fixed-base operator is able to maintain sufficient onsite fuel storage.

Whether the fixed-base operator’s total number of employees is sufficient to service military customers.

Whether the fixed-based operator is capable of performing a sufficient range of cargo on-load, off-load, and handling operations, including for dangerous goods and cargo, for military aircraft of all sizes.

Whether the fixed-based operator has acceptable past performance history on similar procurements.

Any other factors the Director determines appropriate.

heavy-lift aircraft

a covered light detection and ranging technology (referred to in this section as “LiDAR technology”) that—

a system or systems that incorporates, interfaces with, or otherwise uses LiDAR technology as described in paragraph (1).

The term “” means any of the following:

The term “” means any of the following:

(B)

(C)

The term “” means LiDAR technology and any related services and equipment manufactured by a covered LiDAR company.

The terms “light detection and ranging” and “LiDAR” mean a sensor that emits light, often in the form of a pulsed or modulated laser, and scans or flashes the environment to detect and measure the range of its surroundings.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a plan, with appropriate actions and milestones, to develop and field F–35 aircraft and mission systems digital-twin models across the F–35 enterprise.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a plan, with appropriate actions and milestones, to procure at least one new cooperative avionics flying test bed aircraft for the F–35 enterprise.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a plan, with appropriate actions and milestones, to procure and construct a new F–35 mission software integration laboratory to enable concurrent testing of TR–2 and TR–3 mission system hardware, software, and any existing or new F–35 capabilities.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a plan of corrective actions and milestones to resolve all deficiencies and recommendations identified in the 2024 F–35 Initial Operational Testing and Evaluation report submitted to Congress by the Director of Operational Testing and Evaluation.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a plan of corrective actions and milestones to minimize F–35 new aircraft production interruptions and resolve all programmatic deficiencies associated with the new F–35 mission system radar hardware and software related to the development, testing, acceptance, certification, production, and fielding of the radar as identified by the Director of the F–35 Joint Program Office.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a plan of corrective 138 STAT. 1820 actions and milestones to resolve all deficiencies and recommendations identified in the report of the F–35 software Independent Review Team commissioned by the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the F–35 Joint Program Office.

The Secretary has submitted to Congress (in accordance with subsection (b)) and is implementing a corrective action plan with appropriate actions, milestones, necessary technical data and other resources, and metrics for measuring improvements, to address long-standing sustainment challenges and improve fleetwide mission capable and full mission capable rates for F–35 aircraft. At a minimum, such plan shall provide for—

The Secretary has submitted all plans and corrective action plans described in paragraphs (1) through (7) to the congressional defense committees as required under subsection (b).

The Secretary has met the requirements of subsections (b)(5) and (c) of section 226 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118–31; 137 Stat. 196) and has submitted all documentation required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to such subsections.

The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees all plans and corrective action plans described in paragraphs (1) through (7) of subsection (a).

Each plan submitted under paragraph (1) shall include—

Each plan described in paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified annex.

Thirty F–35A aircraft.

Nine F–35B aircraft.

Nine F–35C aircraft.

Not later than April 1, 2025, and on an annual basis thereafter for the following five years, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes a comprehensive update on all plans that—

Each report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may contain a classified annex.

covered F–35

that are authorized to be procured using funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2025 for the Department of Defense; and

the procurement of which is fully funded by the United States.

Time period.

assess planned deliveries of air-to-air missiles through 2029 and the total available missiles by type in each year through 2029;

assess combined requirements for air-to-air missiles to support operational plans of the United States Central Command, the United States Indo-Pacific Command, the United States Northern Command, and the United States European Command, at low, medium, and high risk;

consider emerging requirements for surface-to-air defense and collaborative combat aircraft and how those additional missions will affect inventory requirements for air-to-air missiles;

consider the sufficiency of planned acquisition for air-to-air missiles through 2029 to meet operational requirements;

consider whether continuing production of the advanced medium-range air-to-air missile program of record through 2029 would enhance available inventories of air-to-air missiles; and

Recommenda-

tions.

develop recommendations to adjust the planned mix of missiles, including an assessment of whether extending the range or capability of existing air-to-air missiles would better support combined combatant command requirements at medium risk.

define the signals intelligence requirements for armed overwatch aircraft, including the required signals intelligence capabilities and the number of aircraft to be equipped with such capabilities;

articulate the resources necessary by fiscal year to fulfill the requirements described in paragraph (1); and

include any other matters the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict and the Commander of the United States Special Operations Command consider relevant.

“(d)

Budgeting and Funding Requirements.—

striking

inserting

in paragraph (1), by “and” at the end;

in paragraph (2), by the period at the end and “; and”; and

by at the end the following new paragraph:.

striking

striking

inserting

adding

is amended

striking

inserting

is amended

by paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);

by after paragraph (1) the following new paragraph (2):; and

in paragraph (3), as so redesignated—

striking

inserting

adding

in paragraph (1)—

in paragraph (2), by subparagraph (A) to read as follows:.

is amended

adding

repealed

striking

striking

inserting

adding

striking

inserting

striking

inserting

adding

striking

inserting

inserting

is amended

striking

inserting

the positions included in the artificial intelligence workforce of the Department as of the date of the briefing;

any positions not identified under paragraph (1) that should be included in the artificial intelligence workforce of the Department;

which positions require Department of Defense personnel with artificial intelligence skills;

the current state of the artificial intelligence workforce of the Department as of the ate of the briefing; and

planned or proposed future requirements for the artificial intelligence workforce of the Department.

“(d)

10 USC note

prec. 2001.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Education Platforms.—

inserting

inserting

by paragraph (1) to read as follows:; and

in paragraph (2)—

adding

redesignating

inserting

striking

inserting

redesignating

inserting

in paragraph (1), by “and on the periodic reviews conducted pursuant to subsection (e)” after “by subsection (a)”; and

in paragraph (2)—

adding

“Each such briefing shall include—

striking

inserting

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a council to identify, evaluate, and coordinate existing research efforts, or propose new research topics, relating to 138 STAT. 1833 economic competition activities, such as economic coercion, manipulation, or other uses of economic power to undermine the national defense strategy of the United States and the partners and allies of the United States.

The council established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the “National Defense Economic Competition Research Council” (referred to in this section as the “Council”).

Conducting analysis of ongoing or proposed government and academic research relating to economic competition.

Making proposals for new areas of research to increase understanding of adversarial uses of economic tools in support of military objectives to improve understanding of threats, vulnerabilities, and defensive options to mitigate such threats and vulnerabilities.

Informing the tools available to the Department of Defense to defend against such economic competition, coercion and manipulation activities, including the use of adversarial capital to acquire technology, real estate, or other infrastructure, or to preemptively deny access by the United States.

Assessing current data needs or shortfalls impairing understanding of threats and vulnerabilities relating to economic competition.

Convening groups, which may include academic institutions, nonprofit organizations, commercial entities, other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, and international partners, to better understand regional requirements or inform the understanding of regional partners on the threats and vulnerabilities relating to military objectives as a result of increasing economic competition.

Carrying out such other activities relating to economic competition as the Secretary deems appropriate.

The co-chairs of the Council shall be the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

The co-chairs of the Council shall ensure that the Council includes participation from each of the following:

To develop and implement a strategy to transition capabilities developed under the Agility Prime program of the Air Force to program executive offices of the covered Armed Forces, as appropriate.

To provide a forum for members of the Working Group to coordinate activities relating to hybrid and electric vertical takeoff and landing capabilities developed under the Agility Prime program, including—

To identify programs, projects, activities, and requirements of the covered Armed Forces that may be supported by technologies and capabilities developed under the Agility Prime program, including hybrid and electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, advanced air mobility platforms, autonomous flight capabilities, test and evaluation software, and related technologies.

To identify requirements of the combatant commands and the covered Armed Forces that align with previous, ongoing, or planned efforts under the Agility Prime program.

To assess whether previous, ongoing, or planned efforts under the Agility Prime program and other vertical take off and landing aircraft capability development efforts align with other current, planned, or future acquisition programs of the covered Armed Forces.138 STAT. 1835

Identify any changes to doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership, personnel, facilities, and policy (commonly known as “DOTMLPF–P”) required to successfully integrate hybrid and electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft platforms into future force design.

To assist the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment in preparing the reports required under subsection (g).

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

The military departments.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

The Defense Innovation Unit.

The Office of Strategic Capital.

The United States Special Operations Command.

The United States Transportation Command.

Such other organizations and elements of the Department of Defense as the Chairperson of the Working Group determines appropriate.

any funding under the categories of research, development, test, and evaluation, procurement, or operation and maintenance that is expected to be used for further development or procurement of hybrid and electric vertical takeoff and landing capabilities in the fiscal year of the report and the in the following fiscal year;

any planned transitions of hybrid and electric vertical takeoff and landing technologies to—

any actions taken by the Working Group;

any milestones achieved by the Working Group; and

such other matters as the Under Secretary determines appropriate.

The term “” means the program of the Air Force under which the Air Force is developing hybrid and electric vertical takeoff and landing capabilities in 138 STAT. 1836 collaboration with partners in commercial industry and other sectors.

The term “” means the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Space Force.

to enable the Office of Strategic Capital to rapidly acquire industry-specific context and technical competence across high priority technology and industrial focus areas through immersion in highly relevant emerging technology and business ecosystems across the United States; and

to enhance, among personnel of the Department—

Analysis.

Assessment.

use digital automation and analysis capability to optimize the identification, assessment, and placement of participants within the program, which shall include the ability to match and track private-sector organizations with employees of the Office participating in the program in a manner that aligns the priorities, needs, and expertise of such employees, organizations, and the Office; and

Database.

establish a database or other digital automation capability that—

qualifying private-sector organization

The Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency shall establish and carry out an initiative to rapidly expand and support efforts to evaluate concepts, development plans, and prototypes, components, and subsystems needed to develop a utility-scale quantum computing capability available to the Department of Defense.

The initiative established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the “Quantum Benchmarking Initiative” (referred to in this section as the “Initiative”).

Activities to broaden existing efforts of the Department of Defense to verify and validate commercial efforts to design and build utility-scale quantum computers, including through collaboration with key partners in the Air Force Research Laboratory, the Office of Strategic Capital, the Defense Innovation Unit, and such other partners and organizations of the Department of Defense as the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency deems appropriate.

Working with the Office of Strategic Capital to establish regular interactions with the venture capital and finance community to help accelerate commercial efforts to develop concepts, plans, prototypes, components, and subsystems needed to develop viable utility-scale quantum computers.

Working with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy to connect key performers in fault-tolerant utility-scale quantum computing with support for industrial bases analysis, manufacturing support, and other analysis support to help foster and grow the broader industrial base supporting fault-tolerant utility-scale quantum computing.

Working with the military departments and other components of the Department of Defense to refine use cases for militarily relevant applications of utility-scale quantum computers.

repealed

to expand the availability of the Digital On-Demand Program to—

to actively promote the Program throughout the Department.

Digital On-Demand Program

Strategy.

require development of a strategy to invest in advanced technologies, including automated systems and artificial intelligence, to streamline the process of organizing, indexing, and categorizing data;

require work with vendors to address and resolve limitations imposed by proprietary information and data, including through the adoption of open data and open mission systems approaches;

address data transmission capabilities, such as—

require central compilation of maintenance data and creation of user interfaces, prioritizing analysis of long-lead components;

require the use of vendor-agnostic, government-owned tagging and interoperable systems, except in cases where there is a compelling reason not to use such systems;

Review.

require review of classification policies relating to digital data to ensure that data is appropriately classified without unnecessarily restricting its usability; and

establish protocols for detecting unauthorized access or intrusion into vehicle or platform systems.

the policies developed under subsection (a); and

the status of the implementation of such policies.

does not produce harmful interference;

significantly reduces electromagnetic spectrum guard bands;

maintains signal quality with respect to latency and throughput; and

increases electromagnetic spectrum access within the frequency band.

The Joint Staff.

The military departments and their associated research labs.

Other Department of Defense organizations and agencies.

The Federal Communications Commission.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

Other Federal agencies.

Industry and nongovernmental entities.

the facilities and services of a Department of Defense laboratory to perform experimentation for biotechnology applications to aid in the validation of artificial intelligence models; and

computing and data storage infrastructure and capabilities of the Department of Defense.

Deadline.

commence not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act; and

Termination date.

terminate five years after the date of the on which the program commences under paragraph (1).

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and not later than December 1 of every other year thereafter until the termination date specified in subsection (d)(2), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the pilot program.138 STAT. 1841

Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall include, for the period covered by the report, the following:

(G)

Each report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

Timeline.

A transition timeline.

Costs.

Associated projected annual cost of operating the program.

Additional infrastructure that might be needed, including associated costs.

Analysis.

A descriptive analysis of the relevant technical, engineering and commercial biotechnology ecosystem, including entities within the Department and external stakeholders.

Examples of projects from the pilot phase of the program and their outcomes.

The potential impact to Department capabilities of transitioning the program.

Any other details deemed necessary to include by the Secretary.138 STAT. 1842

depots, shipyards, or other manufacturing facilities run by the Department of Defense; and

contract administration for the Department, including—

the establishment of a new pilot program; or

the designation of an existing initiative of the Department of Defense to serve as the pilot program required under such subsection.

use best in breed software platforms;

consider industry best practices in the selection of software programs;

implement the program based on human centered design practices to best identify the business needs for improvement; and

demonstrate connection to enterprise platforms of record with authoritative data sources.

the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment;

the Secretary of the Army;

the Secretary of the Navy; and

the Secretary of the Air Force.

Evaluation.

An evaluation of each software platform used in the pilot program.

Analysis.

An analysis of how workflows and operations were modified as part of the pilot program.

Assessment.

A quantitative assessment of the impact the software had at each of the locations in which the pilot program was carried out.

The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology may waive the limitation under subsection (a), on a case-by-case basis, with respect to an individual grant or contract for an institution of higher education if the Assistant Secretary determines that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

Not later than 30 days after the date on which an award is made by the Department of Defense involving an institution of higher education with respect to which a waiver is made under paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives notice of such waiver.

On an annual basis, as a classified or controlled unclassified information annex to the annual report required by section 1286(f) of the John S McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. 4001 note) (as so redesignated by section 226 of this title), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report annex on the compliance of the Department of Defense and institutions of higher education with the requirements of this section.

Each report annex submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include, for each waiver issued under subsection (b) during the period covered by the report—

The term “” means coordinated activity between an institution of higher education and a covered entity and includes—

The term “”—

The term “” has the meaning given that term in National Security Decision Directive-189 (NSSD-189), National Policy on the Transfer of Scientific, Technical and Engineering Information, dated September 21, 1985, or any successor document.

The term “” has the meaning given that term in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002) and includes—

to ensure the safety and effective implementation of technology by ensuring that human readiness levels are adequately aligned with technology readiness levels; and

to reduce the likelihood that technology will be deployed before adequate human factors considerations are incorporated into such technology.

Review.

shall conduct a review of ANSI/HFES Standard 400-2021;

Analysis.

shall conduct a preliminary analysis of the human readiness levels of the Department of Defense based on ANSI/HFES Standard 400-2021 to determine whether and to what extent those readiness levels align with the current technology readiness levels of technology used in major research and development programs and major defense acquisition programs (as defined in section 4201 of title 10, United States Code);

Consultation.

shall consult with personnel responsible for such programs regarding the effect of incorporating ANSI/HFES 138 STAT. 1845 Standard 400-2021 with respect to the schedule, cost, and performance of such programs; and

may consult with subject matter experts affiliated with the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

The term “” means American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) Standard 400-2021 (pertaining to human readiness level scale in the system development process).

The term “” means a measurement system used to evaluate the suitability and usability of a technology for human use.

The term “” means a measurement system used to assess the maturity level of a particular technology.

identify the strategic objectives of the Department of Defense relating to biotechnology;

Timelines.

for each strategic objective, establish specific goals and milestones for the achievement of such objective, including timelines for meeting such goals and milestones;

in the case of each updated version of the roadmap following submittal of the initial roadmap under subsection (a), include—

identify the biotechnology development needs and priorities for national security applications based on the strategic objectives identified in paragraph (1);

Assessment.

assess the technology maturity of each priority identified pursuant to paragraph (4);

describe funding sources for each priority identified pursuant to paragraph (4), including both current sources and sources covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Congress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code;138 STAT. 1846

Timeline.

provide a plan, timeline, and metrics for research, development, testing, and evaluation activities for the priorities identified pursuant to paragraph (4);

Assessment.

assess opportunities for rapid acquisition and fielding of biotechnology in support of the priorities identified pursuant to paragraph (4);

identify and describe the role of each organization of the Department with responsibilities relating to biotechnology under the strategy, including investment priorities for the Office of Strategic Capital and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency;

Assessment.

assess the overall risk to the security of the United States of the biotechnology efforts covered by the strategy;

Analysis.

analyze any requirements of the Federal Government that hinder the ability of the Department to advance and use biotechnology;

provide for the development and support of the biotechnology workforce of the Department, including personnel with responsibilities relating directly to biotechnology and personnel who indirectly support the biotechnology efforts of the Department such as personnel involved program management, acquisition, investment, and legal matters;

with respect to the biotechnology workforce described in paragraph (12)—

(A)

(C)

address collaboration between the Department and international partners to advance research on biotechnology, which shall include—

(C)

Review.

review and update the roadmap; and

submit an updated version of the roadmap to the congressional defense committees.

complete an evaluation of the roadmap; and

submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Comptroller General with respect to such evaluation.

biotechnology

Actions and resourcing required to ensure that the Department of Defense has the personnel and expertise required to engage meaningfully in the international activities described in subsection (a).

Processes.

Processes to increase pre-coordination with relevant domestic partners and Federal agencies on matters relating to the international activities described in subsection (a), including the defense industrial base and industry.

Appropriate avenues to increase cooperation activities with friendly foreign partners relating to the international activities described in subsection (a).

Identification of QIS technologies that have the potential to solve operational challenges faced by the Department of Defense.

Plans to transition technologies identified under paragraph (1) from the research, development, and prototyping phases into operational use within the Department.

Plans for the continuous evaluation, development, and implementation of QIS technology solutions within the Department.

the strategic plan developed under subsection (a); and

Assessment.

an assessment of whether the budgets proposed for QIS-related activities of the Department of Defense and each of the covered Armed Forces appropriately balance the use of research, development, test, and evaluation funds designated as budget activity 1 (basic research), budget activity 2 (applied research), and budget activity 3 (advanced technology development) (as those budget activity classifications are set forth in volume 2B, chapter 5 of the Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation (DOD 7000.14–R)) to achieve the objectives of the strategic plan over near-, mid-, and long-term timeframes.

covered Armed Force

The history and rationale for the split funding of the United States facilities and capabilities on Kwajalein Atoll between an Army Garrison and a Major Range and Test Facility Base and whether those objectives have been achieved and, if not, an explanation of the reasons those objectives have not been achieved.

The status of the garrison infrastructure and operations.

The status of the test asset operability, usage, and maintainability.

The interrelationship between garrison infrastructure and test asset operability.

The status of the supported or supporting relationship between the United States Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll, the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, and the Lincoln Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the long-term outlook for this partnership.

The role of the Kwajalein Atoll in supporting current and future missions of the Department of Defense.

Such other matters as the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering or the Defense Science Board consider appropriate.

Major Range and Test Facility Base

is amended

striking

inserting

repealed

is amended

adding

Carrying out science-based management and control programs to reduce the effect of the coconut rhinoceros beetle on military installations and to prevent the introduction or spread of the coconut rhinoceros beetle to areas where such beetle has not yet been established.

Providing support for interagency and intergovernmental response efforts to control, interdict, monitor, and eradicate the coconut rhinoceros beetle on military installations in Hawaii.

Pursuing chemical, biological, and other control techniques, technology transfer, and best practices to support 138 STAT. 1853 management, control, interdiction and, where possible, eradication of the coconut rhinoceros beetle from Hawaii.

Establishing an early detection and rapid response mechanism to monitor and deploy coordinated efforts if the coconut rhinoceros beetle, or another newly detected invasive alien species, is detected at new sites on military installations in Hawaii.

Carrying out such other activities as the Secretary determines appropriate to manage, control, and interdict the coconut rhinoceros beetle on military installations in Hawaii.

in paragraph (1)—

in paragraph (2)—

(i)

adding

in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by “2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025” and “2025, 2026, and 2027”;