To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 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.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016”.

SEC. 2. Organization of Act into divisions; table of contents.

(a) Divisions.—This Act is organized into four divisions as follows:

(1) Division A—Department of Defense Authorizations.

(2) Division B—Military Construction Authorizations.

(3) Division C—Department of Energy National Security Authorizations and Other Authorizations.

(4) Division D—Funding Tables.

(b) Table of contents.—The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

SEC. 3. Congressional defense committees.

In this Act, the term “congressional defense committees” has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)(16) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 4. Budgetary effects of this Act.

The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purposes of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the latest statement titled “Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation” for this Act, jointly submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the Chairmen of the House and Senate Budget Committees, provided that such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage in the House acting first on the conference report or amendment between the Houses.

SEC. 101. Authorization of appropriations.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2016 for procurement for the Army, the Navy and the Marine Corps, the Air Force, and Defense-wide activities, as specified in the funding table in section 4101.

SEC. 111. Prioritization of upgraded UH–60 Blackhawk helicopters within Army National Guard.

(a) Prioritization of upgrades.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall issue guidance regarding the fielding of upgraded UH–60 Blackhawk helicopters to units of the Army National Guard. Such guidance shall prioritize for such fielding the units of the Army National Guard with assigned UH–60 helicopters that have the most flight hours and the highest annual usage rates within the UH–60 fleet of the Army National Guard, consistent with the force generation unit readiness requirements of the Army.

(b) Report.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Chief of the National Guard Bureau issues the guidance under subsection (a), the Chief shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that details such guidance.

SEC. 112. Roadmap for replacement of A/MH–6 Mission Enhanced Little Bird aircraft to meet special operations requirements.

(a) Roadmap.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a roadmap for replacing A/MH–6 Mission Enhanced Little Bird aircraft to meet the rotary-wing, light attack, reconnaissance requirements particular to special operations.

(b) Elements.—The roadmap under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) An updated schedule and display of programmed A/MH–6 Block 3.0 modernization and upgrades, showing usable life of the fleet, and the anticipated service life extensions of all A/MH–6 platforms.

(2) A description of current and anticipated rotary-wing, light attack, reconnaissance requirements and platforms particular to special operations, including key performance parameters of anticipated platforms.

(3) The feasibility of service-common platforms satisfying future rotary-wing, light attack, reconnaissance requirements particular to special operations.

(4) The feasibility of commercially available platforms satisfying future rotary-wing, light attack, reconnaissance requirements particular to special operations.

(5) The anticipated funding requirements for the special operation forces major force program for the development and procurement of an A/MH–6 replacement platform if the service-common platforms described in paragraph (3) are not available or if commercially available platforms described in paragraph (4) are leveraged.

(6) A description of efforts as of the date of the roadmap to coordinate with the military departments on a service-common platform to satisfy replacement platform requirements.

(7) Any other matters the Secretary considers appropriate.

SEC. 113. Report on options to accelerate replacement of UH–60A Blackhawk helicopters of Army National Guard.

Not later than March 1, 2016, the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report containing detailed options for the potential acceleration of the replacement of all UH–60A helicopters of the Army National Guard by not later than September 30, 2020. The report shall include the following:

(1) The additional funding and quantities required, listed by each of fiscal years 2017 through 2020, for H–60M production, UH–60A-to-L RECAP, and UH–60L-to-V RECAP that is necessary to achieve such replacement of all UH–60A helicopters by September 30, 2020.

(2) Any industrial base limitations that may affect such acceleration, including with respect to the production schedules for the other variants of the UH–60 helicopter.

(3) The potential effects of such acceleration on the planned replacement of all UH–60A helicopters of the regular components of the Armed Forces by September 30, 2025.

(4) Identification of any additional funding or resources required to train members of the National Guard to operate and maintain UH–60M aircraft in order to achieve such replacement of all UH–60A helicopters by September 30, 2020.

(5) Any other matters the Secretary determines appropriate.

SEC. 114. Sense of Congress on tactical wheeled vehicle protection kits.

It is the sense of Congress that—

(1) members of the Army face an increasingly complex and evolving threat environment that requires advanced and effective technology to protect soldiers while allowing the soldiers to effectively carry out the mission of the Army;

(2) the heavy tactical vehicle protection kits program provides the Army with improved and necessary ballistic protection for the heavy tactical vehicle fleet;

(3) a secure heavy tactical vehicle fleet provides the Army with greater logistical tractability and offers soldiers the necessary flexibility to tailor armor levels based on threat levels and mission requirements; and

(4) as Congress provides for a modern and secure Army, it is necessary to provide the appropriate funding levels to meet the tactical wheeled vehicle protection kits acquisition objectives of the Army.

SEC. 121. Modification of CVN–78 class aircraft carrier program.

(a) Reports on design and engineering changes.—Subsection (f) of section 122 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364; 120 Stat. 2104), as added by section 121(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 692), is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(3) CVN–78 CLASS AIRCRAFT CARRIERS CHANGE ORDERS.—

“(A) As part of each report required under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include a description of new design and engineering changes to CVN–78 class aircraft carriers if applicable.

“(B) The additional reporting requirement in subparagraph (A) shall include, with respect to CVN–78 class aircraft carriers in each reporting period—

“(i) any design or engineering change with an associated cost greater than $5,000,000;

“(ii) any program or ship cost increases for each design or engineering change identified in subparagraph (A); and

“(iii) any cost reduction achieved.

“(C) The Secretary and the Chief of Naval Operations, without delegation, shall jointly certify the design and engineering changes included in each report under paragraph (1), as required by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph. Each certification shall include a determination that each such change—

“(i) serves the national security interests of the United States; and

“(ii) cannot be deferred to a future ship because of operational necessity, safety, or substantial cost reduction that still meets threshold requirements.”.

(b) Conforming amendments.—Such subsection is further amended—

(1) by striking the heading and inserting the following new heading: “Requirements for CVN–78 class aircraft carriers”; and

(2) in paragraph (1), by striking the heading and inserting the following new heading: “CVN–79 quarterly cost estimate”.

SEC. 122. Amendment to cost limitation baseline for CVN–78 class aircraft carrier program.

(a) Cost limitation.—Section 122(a)(2) of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364; 120 Stat. 2104), as amended by section 121(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 691), is further amended by striking “$11,498,000,000” and inserting “$11,398,000,000”.

(b) Factor for adjustment.—Subsection (b) of such section 122, as amended by section 121(b)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(8) With respect to the aircraft carrier designated as CVN–79, the amounts of increases not exceeding $100,000,000 if the Chief of Naval Operations determines that achieving the amount set forth in subsection (a)(2) (as amended by section 122(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016) would result in unacceptable reductions to the operational capability of the ship.”.

SEC. 123. Extension and modification of limitation on availability of funds for Littoral Combat Ship.

Section 124(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 693), as amended by section 123 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 128 Stat. 3314), is further amended—

(1) by striking “this Act, the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘Buck’ McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, or otherwise made available for fiscal years 2014 or 2015” and inserting “this Act, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, or otherwise made available for fiscal years 2014, 2015, or 2016”; and

(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:

“(6) A Littoral Combat Ship seaframe acquisition strategy for the Littoral Combat Ships designated as LCS 25 through LCS 32, including upgrades to be installed on these ships that were identified for the upgraded Littoral Combat Ship, which is proposed to commence with LCS 33.

“(7) A Littoral Combat Ship mission module acquisition strategy to reach the total acquisition quantity of each mission module.

“(8) A cost and schedule plan to outfit Flight 0 and Flight 0+ Littoral Combat Ships with capabilities identified for the upgraded Littoral Combat Ship.

“(9) A current Test and Evaluation Master Plan for the Littoral Combat Ship Mission Modules, approved by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, which includes the performance levels expected to be demonstrated during developmental testing for each component and mission module prior to commencing the associated operational test phase.”.

SEC. 124. Modification to multiyear procurement authority for Arleigh Burke class destroyers and associated systems.

Section 123(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 1655) is amended by inserting “or Flight III” after “Flight IIA”.

SEC. 125. Procurement of additional Arleigh Burke class destroyer.

(a) Procurement authority.—

(1) ADDITIONAL DESTROYER.—The Secretary of the Navy may procure one Arleigh Burke class destroyer, in addition to any other procurement of such ships otherwise authorized by law, to be procured either—

(A) as an addition to the contract covering the 10 Arleigh Burke class destroyers authorized to be procured under section 123 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 1655); or

(B) under a separate contract in fiscal year 2018.

(2) INCREMENTAL FUNDING.—The Secretary may employ incremental funding for the procurement authorized under paragraph (1).

(b) Condition on Out-year Contract Payments.—A contract entered into under subsection (a) shall provide that any obligation of the United States to make a payment under such contract for any fiscal year after fiscal year 2016 is subject to the availability of appropriations for that purpose for such fiscal year.

SEC. 126. Refueling and complex overhaul of the U.S.S. George Washington.

(a) Refueling and complex overhaul.—The Secretary of the Navy may carry out the nuclear refueling and complex overhaul of the U.S.S. George Washington (CVN–73).

(b) Use of incremental funding.—With respect to any contract entered into under subsection (a) for the nuclear refueling and complex overhaul of the U.S.S. George Washington, the Secretary may use incremental funding for a period not to exceed six years after advance procurement funds for such nuclear refueling and complex overhaul effort are first obligated.

(c) Condition for out-year contract payments.—Any contract entered into under subsection (a) shall provide that any obligation of the United States to make a payment under the contract for a fiscal year after fiscal year 2016 is subject to the availability of appropriations for that purpose for that later fiscal year.

SEC. 127. Fleet Replenishment Oiler Program.

(a) Contract authority.—The Secretary of the Navy may enter into one or more contracts to procure up to six Fleet Replenishment Oilers. Such procurements may also include advance procurement for economic order quantity and long lead time materials, beginning with the lead ship, commencing not earlier than fiscal year 2016.

(b) Liability.—Any contract entered into under subsection (a) shall provide that any obligation of the United States to make a payment under the contract is subject to the availability of appropriations for that purpose, and that total liability to the Government for termination of any contract entered into shall be limited to the total amount of funding obligated at the time of termination.

SEC. 128. Limitation on availability of funds for U.S.S. John F. Kennedy (CVN–79).

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for procurement for the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy (CVN–79), $100,000,000 may not be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees the certification under subsection (b)(1) or the notification under paragraph (2) of such subsection, as the case may be, and the reports under subsections (c) and (d).

(b) Certification regarding full ship shock trials.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by paragraph (2), not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a certification that the Navy will conduct full ship shock trials on the U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford (CVN–78) prior to the first deployment of such ship.

(2) WAIVER.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the certification required under paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a notification of such waiver, including—

(A) the rationale of the Secretary for issuing such waiver;

(B) a certification that the Secretary has analyzed and accepts the operational risk of the U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford deploying without having conducted full ship shock trials; and

(C) a certification that full ship shock trials will be completed on the U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford after the first deployment of such ship and prior to the first major maintenance availability of such ship.

(c) Report on costs relating to CVN–79 and CVN–80.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that evaluates cost issues related to the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy (CVN–79) and the U.S.S. Enterprise (CVN–80).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) Options to achieve ship end cost of no more than $10,000,000,000.

(B) Options to freeze the design of CVN–79 for CVN–80, with exceptions only for changes due to full ship shock trials or other significant test and evaluation results.

(C) Options to reduce the plans cost for CVN–80 to less than 50 percent of the CVN–79 plans cost.

(D) Options to transition all non-nuclear Government-furnished equipment, including launch and arresting equipment, to contractor-furnished equipment.

(E) Options to build the ships at the most economic pace, such as four years between ships.

(F) A business case analysis for the Enterprise Air Search Radar modification to CVN–79 and CVN–80.

(G) A business case analysis for the two-phase CVN–79 delivery proposal and impact on fleet deployments.

(d) Report on future development.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than April 1, 2016, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on potential requirements, capabilities, and alternatives for the future development of aircraft carriers that would replace or supplement the CVN–78 class aircraft carrier.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) A description of fleet, sea-based tactical aviation capability requirements for a range of operational scenarios beginning in the 2025 timeframe.

(B) A description of alternative aircraft carrier designs that meet the requirements described under subparagraph (A).

(C) A description of nuclear and non-nuclear propulsion options.

(D) A description of tonnage options ranging from less than 20,000 tons to greater than 100,000 tons.

(E) Requirements for unmanned systems integration from inception.

(F) Developmental, procurement, and lifecycle cost assessment of alternatives.

(G) A notional acquisition strategy for the development and construction of alternatives.

(H) A description of shipbuilding industrial base considerations and a plan to ensure opportunity for competition among alternatives.

(I) A description of funding and timing considerations related to developing the Annual Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels required under section 231 of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 129. Limitation on availability of funds for U.S.S. Enterprise (CVN–80).

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for advance procurement for the U.S.S. Enterprise (CVN–80), $191,400,000 may not be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees the certification under subsection (b) and the report under subsection (c).

(b) Certification regarding CVN–80 design.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a certification that the design of the U.S.S. Enterprise (CVN–80) will repeat the design of CVN–79, with modifications only for significant test and evaluation results or significant cost reduction initiatives that still meet threshold requirements.

(c) Report.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that details the costs of the plans related to the U.S.S. Enterprise (CVN–80).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report under paragraph (1) shall include the following elements, reported by total cost and cost by fiscal year, with a detailed description and a justification for why each cost is recurring and attributable to the U.S.S. Enterprise (CVN–80):

(A) Overall plans.

(B) Propulsion plant detail design.

(C) Platform detail design.

(D) Lead yard services and hull planning yard.

(E) Platform detail design (Steam and Electric Plant Planning Yard).

(F) Other.

SEC. 130. Limitation on availability of funds for Littoral Combat Ship.

Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research and development, design, construction, procurement, or advanced procurement of materials for the Littoral Combat Ships designated as LCS 33 or subsequent, not more than 50 percent may be obligated or expended until Secretary of the Navy submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives each of the following:

(1) A capabilities based assessment, or equivalent report, to assess capability gaps and associated capability requirements and risks for the upgraded Littoral Combat Ship, which is proposed to commence with LCS 33. Such assessment shall conform with the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3170.01H.

(2) A certification that the Joint Requirements Oversight Council has validated an updated Capabilities Development Document for the upgraded Littoral Combat Ship.

(3) A report describing the upgraded Littoral Combat Ship modernization, which shall, at a minimum, include the following elements:

(A) A description of capabilities that the Littoral Combat Ship program delivers, and a description of how these relate to the characteristics of the future joint force identified in the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations, concept of operations, and integrated architecture documents.

(B) A summary of analyses and studies conducted on Littoral Combat Ship modernization.

(C) A concept of operations for Littoral Combat Ship at the operational level and tactical level describing how they integrate and synchronize with joint and combined forces to achieve the Joint Force Commander’s intent.

(D) A description of threat systems of potential adversaries that are projected or assessed to reach initial operational capability within 15 years against which the lethality and survivability of the Littoral Combat Ship should be determined.

(E) A plan and timeline for Littoral Combat Ship modernization program execution.

(F) A description of system capabilities required for Littoral Combat Ship modernization, including key performance parameters and key system attributes.

(G) A plan for family of systems or systems of systems synchronization.

(H) A plan for information technology and national security systems supportability.

(I) A plan for intelligence supportability.

(J) A plan for electromagnetic environmental effects and spectrum supportability.

(K) A description of assets required to achieve initial operational capability of a Littoral Combat Ship modernization increment.

(L) A schedule and initial operational capability and full operational capability definitions.

(M) A description of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership, education, personnel, facilities, and policy considerations.

(N) A description of other system attributes.

(4) A plan for future periodic combat systems upgrades, which are necessary to ensure relevant capability throughout the Littoral Combat Ship or Frigate class service lives, using the process described in paragraph (3).

SEC. 131. Reporting requirement for Ohio-class replacement submarine program.

If the budget of the President submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, for a fiscal year includes a request for funds for the Ohio-class replacement submarine program, the Secretary of Defense shall include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Defense budget for such fiscal year a report that includes the following elements regarding such program (described in terms of both fiscal year 2010 dollars and current fiscal year dollars as of the date of the report):

(1) Lead ship end cost (with plans).

(2) Lead ship end cost (less plans).

(3) Lead ship non-recurring engineering cost.

(4) Average follow-on ship cost.

(5) Average operations and sustainment cost per hull per year.

(6) The average follow-on ship affordability target as determined by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

(7) The operations and sustainment cost per hull per year affordability target as determined by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

SEC. 141. Backup inventory status of A–10 aircraft.

(a) Maximum number.—In carrying out section 133(b)(2)(A) of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 128 Stat. 3316), the Secretary of the Air Force may not move more than 18 A–10 aircraft in the active component to backup flying status pursuant to an authorization made by the Secretary of Defense under such section.

(b) Conforming amendment.—Such section 133(b)(2)(A) is amended by striking “36” and inserting “18”.

SEC. 142. Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement of A–10 aircraft.

(a) Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement.—Except as provided by section 141, none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage or on backup aircraft inventory status any A–10 aircraft.

(b) Additional limitations on retirement.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided by section 141, and in addition to the limitation in subsection (a), during the period before December 31, 2016, the Secretary of the Air Force may not retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage or on backup flying status any A–10 aircraft.

(2) MINIMUM INVENTORY REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall ensure the Air Force maintains a minimum of 171 A–10 aircraft designated as primary mission aircraft inventory.

(c) Prohibition on availability of funds for significant reductions in manning levels.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to make significant reductions to manning levels with respect to any A–10 aircraft squadrons or divisions.

(d) Additional limitation on significant reductions in manning levels.—In addition to the limitation in subsection (c), during the period before December 31, 2016, the Secretary of the Air Force may not make significant reductions to manning levels with respect to any A–10 aircraft squadrons or divisions.

(e) Study on replacement capability requirements or mission platform for the A–10 aircraft.—

(1) INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT REQUIRED.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall commission an appropriate entity outside the Department of Defense to conduct an assessment of the required capabilities or mission platform to replace the A–10 aircraft. This assessment would represent preparatory work to inform an analysis of alternatives.

(B) ELEMENTS.—The assessment required under subparagraph (A) shall include each of the following:

(i) Future needs analysis for the current A–10 aircraft mission set to include troops-in-contact/close air support, air interdiction, strike control and reconnaissance, and combat search and rescue support in both contested and uncontested battle environments. At a minimum, the needs analysis should specifically address the following areas:

(I) The ability to safely and effectively conduct troops-in-contact/danger close missions or missions in close proximity to civilians in the presence of the air defenses found with enemy ground maneuver units.

(II) The ability to effectively target and destroy moving, camouflaged, or dug-in troops, artillery, armor, and armored personnel carriers.

(III) The ability to engage, target, and destroy tanks and armored personnel carriers, including with respect to the carrying capacity of armor-piercing weaponry, including mounted cannons and missiles.

(IV) The ability to remain within visual range of friendly forces and targets to facilitate responsiveness to ground forces and minimize re-attack times.

(V) The ability to safely conduct close air support beneath low cloud ceilings and in reduced visibilities at low airspeeds in the presence of the air defenses found with enemy ground maneuver units.

(VI) The capability to enable the pilot and aircraft to survive attacks stemming from small arms, machine guns, man-portable air-defense systems, and lower caliber anti-aircraft artillery organic or attached to enemy ground forces and maneuver units.

(VII) The ability to communicate effectively with ground forces and downed pilots, including in communications jamming or satellite-denied environments.

(VIII) The ability to execute the missions described in subclauses (I), (II), (III), and (IV) in a GPS- or satellite-denied environment with or without sensors.

(IX) The ability to deliver multiple lethal firing passes and sustain long loiter endurance to support friendly forces throughout extended ground engagements.

(X) The ability to operate from unprepared dirt, grass, and narrow road runways and to generate high sortie rates under these austere conditions.

(ii) Identification and assessment of gaps in the ability of existing and programmed mission platforms in providing required capabilities to conduct missions specified in clause (i) in both contested and uncontested battle environments.

(iii) Assessment of operational effectiveness of existing and programmed mission platforms to conduct missions specified in clause (i) in both contested and uncontested battle environments.

(iv) Assessment of probability of likelihood of conducting missions requiring troops-in-contact/close air support operations specified in clause (i) in contested environments as compared to uncontested environments.

(v) Any other matters the independent entity or the Secretary of the Air Force determines to be appropriate.

(2) REPORT.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than September 30, 2016, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the assessment required under paragraph (1).

(B) FORM.—The report required under subparagraph (A) may be submitted in classified form, but shall also contain an unclassified executive summary and may contain an unclassified annex.

(3) NONDUPLICATION OF EFFORT.—If any information required under paragraph (1) has been included in another report or notification previously submitted to the congressional defense committees by law, the Secretary of the Air Force may provide a list of such reports and notifications at the time of submitting the report required under paragraph (2) instead of including such information in such report.

SEC. 143. Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement of EC–130H Compass Call aircraft.

(a) Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage or on backup aircraft inventory status any EC–130H Compass Call aircraft.

(b) Additional prohibition on retirement.—In addition to the prohibition in subsection (a), during the period preceding December 31, 2016, the Secretary of the Air Force may not retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage or on backup flying status any EC–130H Compass Call aircraft.

(c) Report on retirement of EC–130H Compass Call aircraft.—Not later than September 30, 2016, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes, at a minimum, the following:

(1) The rationale for the retirement of existing EC–130H Compass Call aircraft, including an operational analysis of the impact of such retirements on the warfighting requirements of the combatant commanders.

(2) Future needs analysis for the current EC–130H Compass Call aircraft electronic warfare mission set to include suppression of sophisticated enemy air defense systems, advanced radar jamming, avoiding radar detection, communications, sensing, satellite navigation, command and control, and battlefield awareness.

(3) A review of operating concepts for airborne electronic attack.

(4) An assessment of upgrades to the electronic warfare systems of EC–130H Compass Call aircraft, the costs of such upgrades, and expected upgrades through 2025, and the expected service life of EC–130H Compass Call aircraft.

(5) A review of the global proliferation of more sophisticated air defenses and advanced commercial digital electronic devices which counter the airborne electronic attack capabilities of the United States by state and non-state actors.

(6) An assessment of the ability of the current EC–130H Compass Call fleet to meet tasking requirements of the combatant commanders.

(7) A plan for how the Air Force will recapitalize the capability requirement of the EC–130H Compass Call mission in the future, whether through a replacement program or by integrating such capabilities onto an existing platform.

(8) If the plan under paragraph (7) includes integrating such capabilities onto an existing platform, an analysis that verifies that such platform has the space, weight, cooling, and power necessary to support the integration of the EC–130H Compass Call capability.

(9) Such other matters relating to the required mission capabilities and transition of the EC–130H Compass Call fleet as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(d) Form.—The report under subsection (c) may be submitted in classified form, but shall also contain an unclassified executive summary and may contain an unclassified annex.

(e) Nonduplication of effort.—If any information required in the report under subsection (c) has been included in another report or notification previously submitted to the congressional defense committees by law, the Secretary of the Air Force may provide a list of such reports and notifications at the time of submitting the report required under subsection (c) instead of including such information in such report.

SEC. 144. Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement of Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, EC–130H Compass Call, and Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft.

(a) Prohibition.—Except as provided by subsection (b), none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal years 2016 or 2017 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to retire, or prepare to retire, any covered aircraft.

(b) Exception.—The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to individual covered aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be non-operational because of mishaps, other damage, or being uneconomical to repair.

(c) Covered aircraft.—In this section, the term “covered aircraft” means the following:

(1) Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System aircraft.

(2) EC–130H Compass Call aircraft.

(3) Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft.

SEC. 145. Limitation on availability of funds for F–35A aircraft procurement.

Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for aircraft procurement, Air Force, not more than $4,285,000,000 may be obligated for the procurement of F–35A aircraft until the Secretary of the Air Force certifies to the congressional defense committees that F–35A aircraft delivered during fiscal year 2018 will have full combat capability, as determined as of the date of the enactment of this Act, with Block 3F hardware, software, and weapons carriage.

SEC. 146. Prohibition on availability of funds for retirement of KC–10 aircraft.

(a) Prohibition.—Except as provided by subsection (b), none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal years 2016 or 2017 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to retire, or prepare to retire, any KC–10 aircraft.

(b) Exception.—The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to individual KC–10 aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be non-operational because of mishaps, other damage, or being uneconomical to repair.

SEC. 147. Limitation on availability of funds for transfer of C–130 aircraft.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to transfer from one facility of the Department of Defense to another any C–130H aircraft, initiate any C–130 manpower authorization adjustments, retire or prepare to retire any C–130H aircraft, or close any C–130H unit until a period of 90 days elapses following the date on which the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Army, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and the Chief of Staff of the Army, in consultation with the commanders of the XVIII Airborne Corps, the 82nd Airborne Division, and the United States Army Special Operations Command, jointly certify to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that—

(1) the Secretary of the Air Force will maintain dedicated C–130 wings to support the daily training and contingency requirements of the XVIII Airborne Corps, the 82nd Airborne Division, and the United States Army Special Operations Command at manning levels required to support and operate the number of aircraft that existed as part of regular and reserve Air Force operations in support of such units as of September 30, 2014; or

(2) the failure to maintain such dedicated C–130 wings will not adversely affect the daily training requirement of such airborne and special operations units.

SEC. 148. Limitation on availability of funds for executive communications upgrades for C–20 and C–37 aircraft.

(a) Limitation.—Except as provided by subsection (b), none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to upgrade the executive communications of C–20 and C–37 aircraft until the date on which the Secretary of the Air Force certifies in writing to the congressional defense committees that such upgrades do not—

(1) cause such aircraft to exceed any weight limitation; or

(2) reduce the operational capability of such aircraft.

(b) Waiver.—The Secretary may waive the limitation in subsection (a) if the Secretary—

(1) determines that such waiver is necessary for the national security interests of the United States; and

(2) notifies the congressional defense committees of such waiver.

SEC. 149. Limitation on availability of funds for T–1A Jayhawk aircraft.

Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for aircraft procurement, Air Force, for avionics modification to the T–1A Jayhawk aircraft, not more than 85 percent may be obligated or expended until a period of 30 days has elapsed following the date on which the Secretary of the Air Force submits to the congressional defense committees the report required under section 142 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291; 128 Stat. 3320).

SEC. 150. Notification of retirement of B–1, B–2, and B–52 bomber aircraft.

(a) Notification.—Except as provided by subsection (b), during the period preceding the date on which the long-range strike bomber aircraft achieves initial operational capability, the Secretary of the Air Force may not retire or prepare to retire covered aircraft during a fiscal year unless the Secretary includes in the defense budget materials for that fiscal year a notification of the proposed retirement, including the rationale for the retirement, the effects of the retirement, and how the Secretary will mitigate any risks relating to the retirement.

(b) Exception.—The notification requirement in subsection (a) shall not apply to individual covered aircraft that the Secretary determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be non-operational because of mishaps, other damage, or being uneconomical to repair.

(c) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) The term “covered aircraft” means B–1, B–2, and B–52 bomber aircraft.

(2) The term “defense budget materials” has the meaning given that term in section 231(f) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 151. Inventory requirement for fighter aircraft of the Air Force.

(a) Inventory requirement.—During the two-year period beginning on October 1, 2015, the Secretary of the Air Force shall maintain a total aircraft inventory of fighter aircraft of not less than 1,900 aircraft, and a total primary mission aircraft inventory (combat-coded) of not less than 1,100 fighter aircraft.

(b) Budget information regarding retirement of fighter aircraft.—

(1) REPORT.—If the Secretary proposes to retire fighter aircraft in a fiscal year, the Secretary shall include in the materials submitted in support of the budget of the President for that fiscal year (as submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) a report setting forth the following:

(A) The rationale and appropriate supporting analysis for the proposed retirement.

(B) An assessment of the implications of such retirement for the Air Force, the Air National Guard, and the Air Force Reserve for the force mix ratio of fighter aircraft.

(C) Such other matters relating to the proposed retirement as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply to individual fighter aircraft that the Secretary determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be non-operational because of mishaps, other damage, or being uneconomical to repair.

(c) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) The term “fighter aircraft” means an aircraft that is designated by a basic mission design series of A–10, F–15, F–16, F–22, or F–35.

(2) The term “primary mission aircraft inventory” means aircraft assigned to meet the primary aircraft authorization to a unit for the performance of its wartime mission.

SEC. 152. Sense of Congress regarding the OCONUS basing of F–35A aircraft.

(a) Finding.—Congress finds that the Department of Defense is continuing its process of permanently stationing the F–35 aircraft at installations in the continental United States and forward-basing such aircraft outside the continental United States.

(b) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the Air Force, in the strategic basing process for the F–35A aircraft, should continue to consider the benefits derived from sites that—

(1) are capable of hosting fighter-based bilateral and multilateral training opportunities with international partners;

(2) have sufficient airspace and range capabilities and capacity to meet the training requirements;

(3) have existing facilities to support personnel, operations, and logistics associated with the flying mission;

(4) have limited encroachment that would adversely impact training or operations; and

(5) minimize the overall construction and operational costs.

SEC. 161. Limitation on availability of funds for Joint Battle Command–Platform.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for joint battle command–platform equipment, not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until a period of 30 days has elapsed following the date on which the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics submits to the congressional defense committees the report under subsection (b).

(b) Report.—Not later than March 1, 2016, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that provides a detailed test and evaluation plan to address the effectiveness, suitability, and survivability shortfalls of the joint battle command–platform identified by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation in the fiscal year 2014 report of the Director submitted to Congress.

SEC. 162. Report on Army and Marine Corps modernization plan for small arms.

(a) Report required.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy shall jointly submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the plan of the Army and the Marine Corps to modernize small arms for the Army and the Marine Corps during the 15-year period beginning on the date of such plan, including the mechanisms to be used to promote competition among suppliers of small arms and small arms parts in achieving the plan.

(b) Small arms.—The small arms covered by the plan under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) Pistols.

(2) Carbines.

(3) Rifles and automatic rifles.

(4) Light machine guns.

(5) Such other small arms as the Secretaries consider appropriate for purposes of the report required by subsection (a).

(c) Non-standard small arms.—In addition to the arms specified in subsection (b), the plan under subsection (a) shall also address non-standard small arms not currently in the small arms inventory of the Army or the Marine Corps.

SEC. 163. Study on use of different types of enhanced 5.56mm ammunition by the Army and the Marine Corps.

(a) Use of different types of enhanced 5.56mm ammunition.—

(1) STUDY.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into a contract with a federally funded research and development center to conduct a study on the use of different types of enhanced 5.56mm ammunition by the Army and the Marine Corps.

(2) SUBMISSION.—Not later than 90 days after the date on which the contract is entered into under paragraph (1), the federally funded research and development center conducting the study under such paragraph shall submit to the Secretary the study, including any findings and recommendations of the federally funded research and development center.

(b) Report.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary receives the study under subsection (a)(2), the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the study.

(2) MATTERS INCLUDED.—The report under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) The study, including any findings and recommendations of the federally funded research and development center that conducted the study.

(B) An explanation of the reasons for the Army and the Marine Corps to use in combat two different types of enhanced 5.56mm ammunition.

(C) An explanation of the appropriateness, effectiveness, and suitability issues that may arise from the use of such different types of ammunition.

(D) An explanation of any additional costs that have resulted from the use of such different types of ammunition.

(E) An explanation of any future plans of the Army or the Marine Corps to eventually transition to using in combat one standard type of enhanced 5.56mm ammunition.

(F) If there are no plans described in subparagraph (E), an analysis of the potential benefits of a transition described in such subparagraph, including the timeline for such a transition to occur.

(G) Any findings, recommendations, comments, or plans that the Secretary determines appropriate.

SEC. 201. Authorization of appropriations.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2016 for the use of the Department of Defense for research, development, test, and evaluation as specified in the funding table in section 4201.

SEC. 211. Centers for Science, Technology, and Engineering Partnership.

(a) In general.—Chapter 139 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 2367 the following new section:

“§ 2368. Centers for Science, Technology, and Engineering Partnership

“(a) Designation.— (1) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, shall designate each science and technology reinvention laboratory as a Center for Science, Technology, and Engineering Partnership (in this section referred to as ‘Centers’) in the recognized core competencies of the designee.

“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall establish a policy to encourage the Secretary of each military department to reengineer management and business processes and adopt best-business and personnel practices at the Centers of the Secretary concerned in connection with the capability requirements of the Centers, so as to serve as recognized leaders in such capabilities throughout the Department of Defense and in the national technology and industrial base.

“(3) The Secretary of Defense, acting through the directors of the Centers, may conduct one or more pilot programs, consistent with applicable requirements of law, to test any practices referred to in paragraph (2) that the Directors determine could—

“(A) improve the efficiency and effectiveness of operations at Centers;

“(B) improve the support provided by the Centers for the elements of the Department of Defense who use the services of the Centers; and

“(C) enhance capabilities by reducing the cost and improving the performance and efficiency of executing laboratory missions.

“(b) Public-private partnerships.— (1) To achieve one or more objectives set forth in paragraph (2), the Secretary may authorize and establish incentives for the Director of a Center to enter into public-private cooperative arrangements (in this section referred to as a ‘public-private partnership’) to provide for any of the following:

“(A) For employees of the Center, academia, private industry, State and local governments, or other entities outside the Department of Defense to perform (under contract, subcontract, or otherwise) work related to the capabilities of the Center, including any work that—

“(i) involves one or more capabilities of the Center; and

“(ii) may be applicable to both the Department and commercial entities.

“(B) For private industry or other entities outside the Department of Defense to use for either Government or commercial purposes any capabilities of the Center that are not fully used for Department of Defense activities for any period determined to be consistent with the needs of the Department of Defense.

“(2) The objectives for exercising the authority provided in paragraph (1) are as follows:

“(A) To maximize the use of the capacity of a Center.

“(B) To reduce or eliminate the cost of ownership of a Center by the Department of Defense.

“(C) To reduce the cost of science, technology, and engineering activities of the Department of Defense.

“(D) To leverage private sector investment in—

“(i) such efforts as research and equipment recapitalization for a Center; and

“(ii) the promotion of the undertaking of commercial business ventures based on the capabilities of a Center, as determined by the director of the Center.

“(E) To foster cooperation and technology transfer between the armed forces, academia, private industry, and State and local governments.

“(F) To increase access by a Center to a skilled technical workforce that can contribute to the effective and efficient execution of the missions of the Department of Defense.

“(G) To increase the ability of a Center to access and use non-Department of Defense methods to develop and innovate and access capabilities that contribute to the effective and efficient execution of the missions of the Department of Defense.

“(3) (A) Public-private partnerships entered into under paragraph (1) may be used for purposes relating to technology transfer and other authorities described in subparagraph (B).

“(B) The authorities described in this subparagraph are provisions of law that provide for cooperation and partnership by the Department of Defense with academia, private industry, and State and local governments, including the following:

“(i) Sections 3371 through 3375 of title 5.

“(ii) Sections 2194, 2358, 2371, 2511, 2539b, and 2563 of this title.

“(iii) Section 209 of title 35.

“(iv) Sections 8, 12, and 23 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3706, 3710a, and 3715).

“(c) Private sector use of excess capacity.—Any capability of a Center made available to the private sector may be used to perform research and testing activities in order to make more efficient and economical use of Government-owned capabilities and encourage the creation and preservation of jobs to ensure the availability of a workforce with the necessary research and technical skills to meet the needs of the armed forces.

“(d) Crediting of amounts for performance.—Amounts received by a Center for work performed under a public-private partnership may—

“(1) be credited to the appropriation or fund, including a working-capital or revolving fund, that incurs the cost of performing the work; or

“(2) be used by the Director of the Center as the Director considers appropriate and consistent with section 219 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 2358 note).

“(e) Availability of excess capacities to private-sector partners.—Capacities of a Center may be made available for use by a private-sector entity under this section only if—

“(1) the use of the capacities will not have a significant adverse effect on the performance of the Center or the ability of the Center to achieve the mission of the Center, as determined by the Director of the Center; and

“(2) the private-sector entity agrees—

“(A) to reimburse the Department of Defense when required in accordance with the guidance of the Department for the direct and indirect costs (including any rental costs) that are attributable to the use of the capabilities by the private-sector entity, as determined by the Secretary of the military departments; and

“(B) to hold harmless and indemnify the United States from—

“(i) any claim for damages or injury to any person or property arising out of the use of the capabilities, except under the circumstances described in section 2563(c)(3) of this title; and

“(ii) any liability or claim for damages or injury to any person or property arising out of a decision by the Secretary to suspend or terminate that use of capabilities during a war or national emergency.

“(f) Construction of provision.—Nothing in this section may be construed to authorize a change, otherwise prohibited by law, from the performance of work at a Center by personnel of the Department of Defense to performance by a contractor.

“(g) Definitions.—In this section:

“(1) The term ‘capabilities’, with respect to a Center for Science, Technology, and Engineering Partnership, means the facilities, equipment, personnel, intellectual property, and other assets that support the core competencies of the Center.

“(2) The term ‘national technology and industrial base’ has the meaning given that term in section 2500 of this title.

“(3) The term ‘science and technology reinvention laboratory’ means a science and technology reinvention laboratory designated under section 1105 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84; 10 U.S.C. 2358 note).”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 2367 the following new item:



“2368. Centers for Science, Technology, and Engineering Partnership.”.

SEC. 212. Expansion of eligibility for financial assistance under Department of Defense Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation Program to include citizens of countries participating in the Technical Cooperation Program.

Section 2192a of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in subsection (b)(1)(A), by inserting “or, subject to subsection (g), a country the government of which is a party to The Technical Cooperation Program (TTCP) memorandum of understanding of October 24, 1995” after “United States”;

(2) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and

(3) by inserting after section (f) the following new subsection (g): “(g) Limitation on participation.— (1) The Secretary may not award scholarships or fellowships under this section to more than five individuals described in paragraph (2) per year. “(2) An individual described in this paragraph is an individual who— “(A) has not previously been awarded a scholarship or fellowship under the program under this section; “(B) is not a citizen of the United States; and “(C) is a citizen of a country the government of which is a party to The Technical Cooperation Program (TTCP) memorandum of understanding of October 24, 1995.”.

SEC. 213. Expansion of education partnerships to support technology transfer and transition.

Section 2194 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in subsection (a), by inserting “business, law, technology transfer or transition” after “mathematics,”; and

(2) in subsection (b)—

(A) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (6) as paragraphs (5) through (7), respectively;

(B) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph (4):

“(4) providing in the defense laboratory sabbatical opportunities for faculty and internship opportunities for students;”; and

(C) in paragraphs (5) and (6), as redesignated by subparagraph (A), by striking “research projects” both places it appears and inserting “projects, including research and technology transfer or transition projects”.

SEC. 214. Improvement to coordination and communication of defense research activities.

(a) In general.—Section 2364 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following new subsection: “(a) Coordination of Department of Defense Research, Development, and Technological Data.—The Secretary of Defense shall promote, monitor, and evaluate programs for the communication and exchange of research, development, and technological data— “(1) among the Defense research facilities, combatant commands, and other organizations that are involved in developing for the Department of Defense the technological requirements for new items for use by combat forces;

“(2) among Defense research facilities and other offices, agencies, and bureaus in the Department that are engaged in related technological matters;

“(3) among other research facilities and other departments or agencies of the Federal Government that are engaged in research, development, and technological matters;

“(4) among private commercial, research institution, and university entities engaged in research, development, and technological matters potentially relevant to defense on a voluntary basis;

“(5) to the extent practicable, to achieve full awareness of scientific and technological advancement and innovation wherever it may occur, whether funded by the Department of Defense, another element of the Federal Government, or other entities; and

“(6) through development and distribution of clear technical communications to the public, military operators, acquisition organizations, and civilian and military decision-makers that conveys successes of research and engineering activities supported by the Department and the contributions of such activities to support national needs.”;

(2) in subsection (b)—

(A) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following new paragraph:

“(3) that the managers of such facilities have broad latitude to choose research and development projects based on awareness of activities throughout the technology domain, including within the Federal Government, the Department of Defense, public and private research institutions and universities, and the global commercial marketplace;”;

(B) in paragraph (4), by striking “; and” and inserting a semicolon;

(C) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and

(D) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(6) that, in light of Defense research facilities being funded by the public, Defense research facilities are broadly authorized and encouraged to support national technological development goals and support technological missions of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, when such support is determined by the Secretary of Defense to be in the best interests of the Federal Government.”.

(3) in the section heading, by inserting “and technology domain awareness” after “activities”.

(b) Clerical amendment.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 139 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 2364 and inserting the following:



“2364. Coordination and communication of defense research activities and technology domain awareness.”.

SEC. 215. Reauthorization of Global Research Watch program.

Section 2365 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b), by inserting “and private sector persons” after “foreign nations” both places it appears; and

(2) in subsection (f), by striking “September 30, 2015” and inserting “September 30, 2025”.

SEC. 216. Reauthorization of defense research and development rapid innovation program.

(a) Extension of program.—Section 1073 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 10 U.S.C. 2359a note) is amended—

(1) in subsection (d), by striking “2015” and inserting “2023”; and

(2) in subsection (g), by striking “September 30, 2015” and inserting “September 30, 2023”.

(b) Modification of guidelines for operation of program.—Subsection (b) of such section is amended—

(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:

“(1) The issuance of an annual broad agency announcement or the use of any other competitive or merit-based processes by the Department of Defense for candidate proposals in support of defense acquisition programs as described in subsection (a).”;

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking the second sentence;

(3) in paragraph (4)—

(A) in the first sentence, by striking “be funded under the program for more than two years” and inserting “receive more than a total of two years of funding under the program”; and

(B) by striking the second sentence; and

(4) by adding at the end, the following new paragraphs:

“(5) Mechanisms to facilitate transition of follow-on or current projects carried out under the program into defense acquisition programs, through the use of the authorities of section 819 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note) or such other authorities as may be appropriate to conduct further testing, low rate production, or full rate production of technologies developed under the program.

“(6) Projects are selected using merit-based selection procedures and the selection of projects is not subject to undue influence by Congress or other Federal agencies.”.

(c) Repeal of report requirement.—Such section is further amended—

(1) by striking subsection (f); and

(2) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (f).

SEC. 217. Science and technology activities to support business systems information technology acquisition programs.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, the Deputy Chief Management Officer, and the Chief Information Officer, shall establish a set of science, technology, and innovation activities to improve the acquisition outcomes of major automated information systems through improved performance and reduced developmental and life cycle costs.

(b) Execution of activities.—The activities established under subsection (a) shall be carried out by such military departments and Defense Agencies as the Under Secretary and the Deputy Chief Management Officer consider appropriate.

(c) Activities.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The set of activities established under subsection (a) may include the following:

(A) Development of capabilities in Department of Defense laboratories, test centers, and federally funded research and development centers to provide technical support for acquisition program management and business process re-engineering activities.

(B) Funding of intramural and extramural research and development activities as described in subsection (e).

(2) CURRENT ACTIVITIES.—The Secretary shall identify the current activities described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) that are being carried out as of the date of the enactment of this Act. The Secretary shall consider such current activities in determining the set of activities to establish pursuant to subsection (a).

(d) Gap analysis.—In establishing the set of activities under subsection (a), not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments and the heads of the Defense Agencies, shall conduct a gap analysis to identify activities that are not, as of such date, being pursued in the current science and technology program of the Department. The Secretary shall use such analysis in determining—

(1) the set of activities to establish pursuant to subsection (a) that carry out the purposes specified in subsection (c)(1); and

(2) the proposed funding requirements and timelines.

(e) Funding of intramural and extramural research and development.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the set of activities required by subsection (a), the Secretary may award grants or contracts to eligible entities to carry out intramural or extramural research and development in areas of interest described in paragraph (3).

(2) ELIGIBLE ENTITIES.—For purposes of this subsection, an eligible entity includes the following:

(A) Entities in the defense industry.

(B) Institutions of higher education.

(C) Small businesses.

(D) Nontraditional defense contractors (as defined in section 2302 of title 10, United States Code).

(E) Federally funded research and development centers, primarily for the purpose of improving technical expertise to support acquisition efforts.

(F) Nonprofit research institutions.

(G) Government laboratories and test centers, primarily for the purpose of improving technical expertise to support acquisition efforts.

(3) AREAS OF INTEREST.—The areas of interest described in this paragraph are the following:

(A) Management innovation, including personnel and financial management policy innovation.

(B) Business process re-engineering.

(C) Systems engineering of information technology business systems.

(D) Cloud computing to support business systems and business processes.

(E) Software development, including systems and techniques to limit unique interfaces and simplify processes to customize commercial software to meet the needs of the Department of Defense.

(F) Hardware development, including systems and techniques to limit unique interfaces and simplify processes to customize commercial hardware to meet the needs of the Department of Defense.

(G) Development of methodologies and tools to support development and operational test of large and complex business systems.

(H) Analysis tools to allow decision-makers to make tradeoffs between requirements, costs, technical risks, and schedule in major automated information system acquisition programs.

(I) Information security in major automated information system systems.

(J) Innovative acquisition policies and practices to streamline acquisition of information technology systems.

(K) Such other areas as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(f) Priorities.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the set of activities required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall give priority to—

(A) projects that—

(i) address the innovation and technology needs of the Department of Defense; and

(ii) support activities of initiatives, programs, and offices identified by the Under Secretary and Deputy Chief Management Officer; and

(B) the projects and programs identified in paragraph (2).

(2) PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS IDENTIFIED.—The projects and programs identified in this paragraph are the following:

(A) Major automated information system programs.

(B) Projects and programs under the oversight of the Deputy Chief Management Officer.

(C) Projects and programs relating to defense procurement acquisition policy.

(D) Projects and programs of the agencies and field activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense that support business missions such as finance, human resources, security, management, logistics, and contract management.

(E) Military and civilian personnel policy development for information technology workforce.

SEC. 218. Department of Defense technology offset program to build and maintain the military technological superiority of the United States.

(a) Program established.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a technology offset program to build and maintain the military technological superiority of the United States by—

(A) accelerating the fielding of offset technologies that would help counter technological advantages of potential adversaries of the United States, including directed energy, low-cost, high-speed munitions, autonomous systems, undersea warfare, cyber technology, and intelligence data analytics, developed using research funding of the Department of Defense and accelerating the commercialization of such technologies; and

(B) developing and implementing new policies and acquisition and business practices.

(2) GUIDELINES.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidelines for the operation of the program established under paragraph (1), including—

(A) criteria for an application for funding by a military department, Defense Agency, or a combatant command;

(B) the purposes for which such a department, agency, or command may apply for funds and appropriate requirements for technology development or commercialization to be supported using program funds;

(C) the priorities, if any, to be provided to field or commercialize offset technologies developed by certain types of research funding of the Department; and

(D) 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.

(b) Applications for funding.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—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.

(2) TREATMENT PURSUANT TO CERTAIN CONGRESSIONAL RULES.—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.

(c) Funding.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability of appropriations for such purpose, of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-wide, not more than $400,000,000 may be used for each such fiscal year for the program established under subsection (a)(1).

(2) AMOUNT FOR DIRECTED ENERGY.—Of the funds specified in paragraph (1) for any of fiscal years 2016 through 2020, not more than $200,000,000 may be used for each such fiscal year for activities in the field of directed energy.

(d) Transfer authority.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—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.

(2) SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT.—The transfer authority provided in paragraph (1) is in addition to any other transfer authority available to the Secretary of Defense.

(e) Termination.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The authority to carry out the program under subsection (a)(1) shall terminate on September 30, 2020.

(2) TRANSFER AFTER TERMINATION.—Any amounts made available for the program that remain available for obligation on the date on which the program terminates may be transferred under subsection (d) during the 180-day period beginning on the date of the termination of the program.

SEC. 219. Limitation on availability of funds for F–15 infrared search and track capability development.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Air Force, for F–15 infrared search and track capability, not more than 50 percent may be obligated or expended until a period of 30 days has elapsed following the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees the report under subsection (b).

(b) Report.—Not later than March 1, 2016, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the requirements and cost estimates for the development and procurement of infrared search and track capability for F/A–18 and F–15 aircraft of the Navy and the Air Force. The report shall include the following:

(1) A comparison of the requirements between the F/A–18 and F–15 aircraft infrared search and track development efforts of the Navy and the Air Force.

(2) An explanation of any differences between the F/A–18 and F–15 aircraft infrared search and track capability development efforts of the Navy and the Air Force.

(3) A summary of the schedules and required funding to develop and field such capability.

(4) An explanation of any need for the Navy and the Air Force to field different F/A–18 and F–15 aircraft infrared search and track systems.

(5) Any other matters the Secretary determines appropriate.

SEC. 220. Limitation on availability of funds for development of the shallow water combat submersible.

(a) Limitation.—Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for the development of the shallow water combat submersible of the United States Special Operations Command, not more than 50 percent may be obligated or expended until a period of 15 days elapses following the later of the date on which—

(1) the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics designates a civilian official to be responsible for oversight of and assistance to the United States Special Operations Command for all undersea mobility programs; and

(2) the Under Secretary, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict and the Commander of the United States Special Operations Command, submits to the congressional defense committees the report described in subsection (b).

(b) Report described.—The report described in this subsection is a report on the shallow water combat submersible program that includes the following:

(1) An analysis of the reasons for cost and schedule overruns associated with the program, including with respect to the performance of contractors and subcontractors.

(2) A revised timeline for initial and full operational capability of the shallow water combat submersible.

(3) A description of the challenges associated with the integration with dry deck shelter and other diving technologies.

(4) The projected cost to meet the total unit acquisition objective.

(5) A plan to prevent, identify, and mitigate any additional cost and schedule overruns.

(6) A description of any opportunities to recover cost or schedule overruns.

(7) A description of any lessons that the Under Secretary may have learned from the shallow water combat submersible program that could be applied to future undersea mobility acquisition programs.

(8) Any other matters that the Under Secretary considers appropriate.

SEC. 221. Limitation on availability of funds for the advanced development and manufacturing facility under the medical countermeasure program.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-wide, for the advanced development and manufacturing facility, and the associated activities performed at such facility, under the medical countermeasure program of the chemical and biological defense program, not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until a period of 45 days elapses following the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees the report under subsection (b).

(b) Report.—The Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the advanced development and manufacturing facility under the medical countermeasure program that includes the following:

(1) An overall description of the advanced development and manufacturing facility, including validated Department of Defense requirements.

(2) Program goals, proposed metrics of performance, and anticipated procurement and operations and maintenance costs during the period covered by the current future years defense program under section 221 of title 10, United States Code.

(3) The results of any analysis of alternatives and efficiency reviews conducted by the Secretary that justifies the manufacturing and privately financed construction of an advanced manufacturing and development facility rather than using other programs and facilities of the Federal Government or industry facilities for advanced development and manufacturing of medical countermeasures.

(4) An independent cost-benefit analysis that justifies the manufacturing and privately financed construction of an advanced manufacturing and development facility described in paragraph (3).

(5) If no independent cost-benefit analysis makes the justification described in paragraph (4), an explanation for why such manufacturing and privately financed construction cannot be so justified.

(6) Any other matters the Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.

(c) Comptroller General review.—Not later than 60 days after the date on which the Secretary submits the report under subsection (b), the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the congressional defense committees a review of such report.

SEC. 222. Limitation on availability of funds for distributed common ground system of the Army.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Army, for the distributed common ground system of the Army, not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Army—

(1) conducts a review of the program planning for the distributed common ground system of the Army; and

(2) submits to the appropriate congressional committees the report required by subsection (b)(1).

(b) Report.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the review of the distributed common ground system of the Army conducted under subsection (a)(1).

(2) MATTERS INCLUDED.—The report under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) A review of the segmentation of Increment 2 of the distributed common ground system program of the Army into discrete software components with the associated requirements of each component.

(B) Identification of each component of Increment 2 of the distributed common ground system of the Army for which commercial software exists that is capable of fulfilling most or all of the system requirements for each such component.

(C) A cost analysis of each such commercial software that compares performance with projected cost.

(D) Determination of the degree to which commercial software solutions are compliant with the standards required by the framework and guidance for the Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise, the Defense Intelligence Information Enterprise, and the Joint Information Environment.

(E) Identification of each component of Increment 2 of the distributed common ground system of the Army that the Secretary determines may be acquired through competitive means.

(F) An acquisition plan for Increment 2 of the distributed common ground system of the Army that prioritizes the acquisition of commercial software components, including a data integration layer, in time to meet the projected deployment schedule for Increment 2.

(G) A review of the timetable for the distributed common ground system program of the Army in order to determine whether there is a practical, executable acquisition strategy, including the use of operational capability demonstrations, that could lead to an initial operating capability of Increment 2 of the distributed common ground system of the Army prior to fiscal year 2017.

(c) Appropriate congressional committees defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(1) the congressional defense committees; and

(2) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 223. Limitation on availability of funds for distributed common ground system of the United States Special Operations Command.

(a) Limitation.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-wide, for the United States Special Operations Command for the distributed common ground system, not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the Commander of the United States Special Operations Command submits to the congressional defense committees the report required by subsection (b).

(b) Report required.—The Commander shall submit to the congressional defense committees and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives a report on the distributed common ground system. Such report shall include the following:

(1) A review of the segmentation of the distributed common ground system special operations forces program into discrete software components with the associated requirements of each component.

(2) Identification of each component of the distributed common ground system special operations forces program for which commercial software exists that is capable of fulfilling most or all of the system requirements for each such component.

(3) A cost analysis of each such commercial software that compares performance with projected cost.

(4) A determination of the degree to which commercial software solutions are compliant with the standards required by the framework and guidance for the Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise, the Defense Intelligence Information Enterprise, and the Joint Information Environment.

(5) Identification of each component of the distributed common ground system special operations forces program that the Commander determines may be acquired through competitive means.

(6) An assessment of the extent to which elements of the distributed common ground system special operations forces program could be modified to increase commercial acquisition opportunities.

(7) An acquisition plan that leads to full operational capability prior to fiscal year 2019.

SEC. 224. Limitation on availability of funds for Integrated Personnel and Pay System of the Army.

Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for research, development, test, and evaluation, Army, for the integrated personnel and pay system of the Army, not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of the Army submits to the congressional defense committees a report that includes the following:

(1) Updated and validated information regarding the performance of the current legacy personnel and pay system of the Army for each high-level objective and business outcome described in the business case for IPPS–A Increment II, dated December 2014, including justifications for threshold and objective values for the integrated personnel and pay system of the Army.

(2) An explanation how the integrated personnel and pay system of the Army will enable significant change throughout the entire human resources enterprise.

(3) A description for how the implementation of the capabilities in the integrated personnel and pay system of the Army will result in changes to the capabilities and services to be provided by the Defense Finance and Accounting Services, including an estimate of cost savings and manpower savings resulting from elimination of duplicative functions.

(4) A description of alternative program approaches that could reduce the overall cost of development and deployment for the integrated personnel and pay system of the Army without delaying the current program schedule by more than six months.

SEC. 231. Streamlining the Joint Federated Assurance Center.

Section 937(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note) is amended—

(1) in subparagraph (C), by striking “, in coordination with the Center for Assured Software of the National Security Agency,”; and

(2) in subparagraph (E), by striking “, in coordination with the Defense Microelectronics Activity,”.

SEC. 232. Demonstration of Persistent Close Air Support capabilities.

(a) Joint demonstration required.—Subject to the availability of funds, the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Army, and the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency may jointly conduct a demonstration of the persistent close air support capability during fiscal year 2016.

(b) Parameters of demonstration.—

(1) SELECTION AND EQUIPMENT OF AIRCRAFT.—If the demonstration under subsection (a) is conducted, the Secretary of the Air Force shall select and equip at least two aircraft for use in the demonstration that the Secretary otherwise intends to use for close air support.

(2) CLOSE AIR SUPPORT OPERATIONS.—If the demonstration under subsection (a) is conducted, the demonstration shall include close air support operations that involve the following:

(A) Multiple tactical radio networks representing diverse ground force user communities.

(B) Two-way digital exchanges of situational awareness data, video, and calls for fire between aircraft and ground users without modification to aircraft operational flight profiles.

(C) Real-time sharing of blue force, aircraft, and target location data to reduce risks of fratricide.

(D) Lightweight digital tools based on commercial-off-the-shelf technology for pilots and joint tactical air controllers.

(E) Operations in simple and complex operating environments.

(c) Assessment.—If the demonstration under subsection (a) is conducted, the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Army, and the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency shall jointly—

(1) assess the effect of the capabilities demonstrated as part of the demonstration required by subsection (a) on—

(A) the time required to conduct close air support operations;

(B) the effectiveness of blue force in achieving tactical objectives; and

(C) the risk of fratricide and collateral damage;

(2) estimate the costs that would be incurred in transitioning the technology used in the persistent close air support capability to the Army and the Air Force; and

(3) provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing on the results of the demonstration, the assessment under paragraph (1), and the cost estimates under paragraph (2) by December 1, 2016.

SEC. 233. Strategies for engagement with Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority-serving Institutions of Higher Education.

(a) Basic research entities.—

(1) STRATEGY.—The heads of each basic research entity shall each develop a strategy for how to engage with and support the development of scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematics capabilities of covered educational institutions in carrying out section 2362 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) ELEMENTS.—Each strategy under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) Goals and vision for maintaining a credible and sustainable program relating to the engagement and support under the strategy.

(B) Metrics to enhance scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematics capabilities at covered educational institutions, including with respect to measuring progress toward increasing the success of such institutions to compete for broader research funding sources other than set-aside funds.

(C) Promotion of mentoring opportunities between covered educational institutions and other research institutions.

(D) Regular assessment of activities that are used to develop, maintain, and grow scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematics capabilities.

(E) Inclusion of faculty of covered educational institutions into program reviews, peer reviews, and other similar activities.

(F) Targeting of undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate students at covered educational institutions for inclusion into research or internship opportunities within the military department.

(b) Office of the Secretary.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a strategy for how to engage with and support the development of scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematics capabilities of covered educational institutions pursuant to the strategies developed under subsection (a).

(c) Submission.—

(1) BASIC RESEARCH ENTITIES.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the heads of each basic research entity shall each submit to the congressional defense committees the strategy developed by the head under subsection (a)(1).

(2) OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees the strategy developed under subsection (b).

(d) Covered institution defined.—In this section:

(1) The term “basic research entity” means an entity of the Department of Defense that executes research, development, test, and evaluation budget activity 1 funding, as described in the Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation.

(2) The term “covered educational institution” has the meaning given that term in section 2362(e) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 234. Report on commercial-off-the-shelf wide-area surveillance systems for Army tactical unmanned aerial systems.

(a) Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that contains the findings of a market survey and assessment of commercial-off-the-shelf wide-area surveillance sensors operationally suitable for insertion into the tactical unmanned aerial systems of the Army.

(b) Elements.—The market survey and assessment contained in the report under subsection (a) shall include—

(1) specific details regarding the capabilities of current and commercial-off-the-shelf wide-area surveillance sensors that are, or could be, used on tactical unmanned aerial systems of the Army, including—

(A) daytime and nighttime monitoring coverage;

(B) video resolution outputs;

(C) bandwidth requirements;

(D) activity-based intelligence and forensic capabilities;

(E) simultaneous region of interest monitoring capability;

(F) interoperability with other sensors and subsystems currently used on such tactical unmanned aerial systems;

(G) sensor weight;

(H) sensor cost;

(I) frame rates;

(J) on-board processing capabilities; and

(K) any other factors the Secretary considers relevant;

(2) an assessment of the effect on such tactical unmanned aerial systems due to the insertion of commercial-off-the-shelf wide-area surveillance sensors; and

(3) recommendations on the advisability and feasibility to upgrade or enhance wide-area surveillance sensors of such tactical unmanned aerial systems, as considered appropriate by the Secretary.

(c) Form.—The report under subsection (a) may contain a classified annex.

SEC. 235. Report on Tactical Combat Training System Increment II.

(a) Report.—Not later than January 29, 2016, the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the baseline and alternatives to the Tactical Air Combat Training System (TCTS) Increment II of the Navy.

(b) Contents.—The report under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) An explanation of the rationale for a new start TCTS II program as compared to an incremental upgrade to the existing TCTS system.

(2) An estimate of total cost to develop, procure, and replace the existing Department of the Navy TCTS architecture with an encrypted TCTS II compared to upgrades to existing TCTS.

(3) A cost estimate and schedule comparison of achieving encryption requirements into the existing TCTS program as compared to TCTS II.

(4) A review of joint Department of the Air Force and the Department of the Navy investment in live-virtual-constructive advanced air combat training and planned timeline for inclusion into TCTS II architecture.

(5) A cost estimate to integrate F–35 aircraft with TCTS II and achieve interoperability between the Department of the Navy and Department of the Air Force.

(6) A cost estimate for coalition partners to achieve TCTS II interoperability within the Department of Defense.

(7) An assessment of risks posed by non-interoperable TCTS systems within the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air Force.

(8) An explanation of the acquisition strategy for the TCTS program.

(9) An explanation of key performance parameters for the TCTS II program.

(10) Any other information the Secretary of the Navy and Secretary of the Air Force determine is appropriate to include.

SEC. 236. Report on technology readiness levels of the technologies and capabilities critical to the long-range strike bomber aircraft.

(a) Report required.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the technology readiness levels of the technologies and capabilities critical to the long-range strike bomber aircraft.

(b) Review by Comptroller General of the United States.—Not later than 60 days after the report of the Secretary is submitted under subsection (a), the Comptroller General of the United States shall review the report and submit to the congressional defense committees an assessment of the matters contained in the report.

SEC. 237. Assessment of air-land mobile tactical communications and data network requirements and capabilities.

(a) Assessment required.—The Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation shall seek to enter into a contract with a federally funded research and development center to conduct a comprehensive assessment of current and future requirements and capabilities of the Army with respect to air-land ad hoc, mobile tactical communications and data networks, including the technological feasibility, suitability, and survivability of such networks.

(b) Elements.—The assessment under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) Concepts, capabilities, and capacities of current or future communications and data network systems to meet the requirements of current or future tactical operations effectively, efficiently, and affordably.

(2) Software requirements and capabilities, particularly with respect to communications and data network waveforms.

(3) Hardware requirements and capabilities, particularly with respect to receiver and transmission technology, tactical communications, and data radios at all levels and on all platforms, all associated technologies, and their integration, compatibility, and interoperability.

(4) Any other matters relevant or necessary for a comprehensive assessment of tactical networks or networking in the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (Increments 1 and 2).

(c) Independent entity.—The Director shall select a federally funded research and development center with direct, long-standing, and demonstrated experience and expertise in program test and evaluation of concepts, requirements, and technologies for joint tactical communications and data networking to perform the assessment under subsection (a).

(d) Report required.—Not later than April 30, 2016, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense commitments a report including the findings and recommendations of the assessment conducted under subsection (a), together with the separate comments of the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army.

SEC. 238. Study of field failures involving counterfeit electronic parts.

(a) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a hardware assurance study to assess the presence, scope, and effect on Department of Defense operations of counterfeit electronic parts that have passed through the supply chain of the Department and into fielded systems.

(b) Matters included.—The study under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) The technical analysis conducted under paragraph (1) of subsection (c).

(2) The report on the technical assessment submitted under paragraph (3)(B) of subsection (c).

(3) Recommendations for such legislative and administrative action, including budget requirements, as the Secretary considers necessary to conduct sampling and technical hardware analyses of counterfeit parts in identified areas of high concern.

(c) Execution and technical analysis.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall direct the executive agent for printed circuit board technology designated under section 256(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 2501 note) to coordinate the execution of the study under subsection (a) using capabilities of the Department in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act to conduct a technical analysis on a sample of failed electronic parts in fielded systems.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The technical analysis required by paragraph (1) shall include the following