Authorizing $768 Billion in Defense Spending for Fiscal Year 2022 (S. 1605)

What is S. 1605?

(Updated March 18, 2022)

This bill was enacted on December 27, 2021

This bill — the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2022 — would authorize a total of $768.2 billion in defense funding for fiscal year 2022, including $740 billion in discretionary defense spending, along with $28.2 billion for nuclear defense activities by the Dept. of Energy. It is purely an authorization bill that wouldn't provide actual funding, which would be approved through the regular appropriations process. A breakdown of how the various provisions in the NDAA would impact troops, military families, equipment, the Dept. of Defense, U.S. allies and partners, and other aspects of U.S. defense policy can be found below.

RESOURCES

Troops & Families: This section would fund an increase in military basic pay by 2.7%; authorize a basic needs allowance to qualified, low-income servicemembers; and increase allowable parental leave for primary and secondary caregivers. It would also require women to register for the Selective Service System; establish a National Guard branch for the Space Force. Additionally, it would: 

• Provide financial assistance for an expanded in-home childcare pilot program.

• Remove the commander from decisions related to the prosecution of Special Victim Offenses, such as sexual assault, sexual harassment, and all offenses against a child under age 18.

• Require improved reporting on the demographics of offenders and victims under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

• Require DOD to submit a report on including a criminal article in the UCMJ to address violent extremism; and direct the defense secretary to provide a briefing on all studies regarding efforts by extremist organizations to recruit members of the Armed Forces, along with a strategy to develop and implement training to prevent such recruitment efforts.

• Prohibit private funding from being used to fund any state’s National Guard deployment in another state, except for natural disaster emergencies.

Equipment & Construction: The acquisition and modernization of several key defense technologies would be continued to increased under this bill, including:

• Procurement of 85 F-35 aircraft for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps with funding prioritized to accelerate maintenance activities and mitigate sustainment costs.

• Additional funding for procurement of 5 additional Air Force F-15EX Eagle aircraft; 12 Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft; 9 National Guard UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters; 4 Air Force MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aircraft; and 4 additional CMV-22 Osprey for the Navy.

• Funding the modernization of the A-10 Warthog aircraft fleet and mandating a cost and schedule baseline for the B-52 re-engine program.

• Procurement of 92 Amphibious Combat Vehicles (ACV) to replace the less reliable and safe Assault Amphibious Vehicle (AAV).

• Full funding for the B-21 Raider program.

• Procurement of 13 battleforce ships including two Virginia-class submarines; three Arleigh Burke destroyers; one guided missile frigate; and other auxiliary ships. That includes construction of two additional Arleigh Burke class destroyers than in the president's budget.

• Require a report on cost savings associated with a new multi-year procurement contract for Arleigh Burke class destroyers.

STRATEGIC READINESS

Nuclear Deterrence: The Secretary of the Air Force would be directed to conduct an independent review of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program to ensure best practices are incorporated into the engineering and manufacturing development phase, including the use of digital engineering, and to assess options to reduce cost of the program and introduce competition for operations and sustainment.

The future award of a production contract for the Long-Range Standoff Weapon would be prohibited until additional cost analysis and justification is completed and requires a briefing on how any warhead development delays would impact the program.

Additionally, the Secretary of Defense would be required to conduct a “fail safe” review of nuclear weapons, command and control, and the Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment systems. Requested funding for nuclear clean-up activities would be authorized.

Space: This section would authorize additional funding for Space Command to procure commercial space situational awareness data and services, space power and collection technology, hybrid space architecture development, tactically responsive space launch, weather system follow-on, and National Security Space Launch engineering and manufacturing development efforts.

Phase two of the National Security Space Launch program would be supported by this bill. The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, would be required to provide a report on efforts to continue innovation and competition in launch, with particular focus on requirements for space access, mobility, and logistics.

ADDRESSING THREATS

Russia: This section would express the sense of Congress in strong support of the U.S. commitment to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) alliance and European partners. The European Deterrence Initiative (EDI) would be fully funded along with additional capabilities that support deterrence in the European Command area of operations. It would also:

• Require biennial reports on Russian influence operations and campaigns targeting U.S. military alliances and partnerships.

• Provide $300 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which supports and assists the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

• Provide $150 million for security cooperation with the Baltic countries.

• Require a report on the use of weapons in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict and express the sense of Congress that parties to the conflict must adhere to their duties under international law regarding the return of hostages and the use of force to settle any disputes. 

China: This section would contain multiple provisions to address strategic challenges posed by the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), including:

• A statement of congressional support for the U.S. commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region, including the central role of close U.S. alliances and partnerships in deterring aggression and countering malign activity by the PRC.

• A statement of congressional support for the defense of Taiwan, including the development of capable, ready, and modern defense forces necessary for Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.

• A requirement that the DOD provide an annual report to Congress on military and security developments related to the PRC, including the PRC’s influence operations and campaigns targeting U.S. military alliances and partnerships.

• A prohibition on DOD procurement of products produced with forced labor from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the PRC.

• A report on the feasibility of establishing military-to-military crisis communications with certain strategic competitors.

Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI): This bill would provide at least $7.1 billion in funding for programs within the PDI and adjust funding levels for programs that aren’t being executed well.

Missile Defense: The Missile Defense Agency would be required to deliver the Homeland Defense Radar - Hawaii with deployment of the Next Generation Interceptor to increase protection and discrimination coverage to the state of Hawaii. This section would authorize additional funding for:

• A Guam Integrated Air and Missile Defense System, in addition to a requirement for the secretary of defense to identify an architecture and acquisition strategy to deliver the system in the mid-2020s timeframe.

• Directed energy technology for ballistic and hypersonic missile defense applications.

• Development of the Homeland Defense Radar - Hawaii.

• Army missile defense integration efforts.

• Increased regional THAAD and SM-3 Block IIA interceptor quantities.

Alliances & Partnerships: This section would:

• Continue U.S. military support to partners in Iraq and Syria to fight ISIS, and direct the DOD and State Dept. to submit security cooperation and security sector reform plans for U.S. military partners in Iraq, including a strategy to train and build lasting capability of military partners in Iraq.

• Express a sense of Congress in support of U.S. Armed Forces’ presence in South Korea.

Afghanistan: This section would express the sense of Congress about the importance of the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program and honoring commitments to those Afghan partners who support the U.S. mission in Afghanistan at great personal risk.

Funding would be authorized for costs associated with the termination of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel and termination of support to the Afghan government security forces, such as costs for returning equipment and other material into DOD stock.

The Secretary of Defense would be required to provide in-depth reports and briefings to Congress about the U.S. ability to counter terrorism, provide accountability on military equipment left in Afghanistan, and the plan to rescue American citizens and Afghan allies who remain in the country.

An Afghanistan War Commission would be established covering the entire 20 years of the U.S. and NATO presence in Afghanistan, in addition to the years of Taliban control prior to 2001, and would make recommendations about lessons learned in terms of strategic, diplomatic, and operational decisions made by the entirety of the U.S. government.

MISCELLANEOUS

This bill would also:

• Extend the prohibition on former military officers serving as Secretary of Defense from 7 to 10 years for officers of the rank O-6 and above.

• Not expand any statutory prohibitions on the transfer of detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and require a report to Congress on detainees’ medical care at Guantanamo.

Argument in favor

Congress’s foremost constitutional duty is to provide for the national defense. This bipartisan bill is a compromise that will provide budgetary resources needed to strengthen the military at a time when global threats are increasing.

Argument opposed

The U.S. government shouldn’t be spending $768 billion on national defense., given how much more America spends than its adversaries. Military spending should be reduced to reflect other domestic priorities for the federal budget.

Impact

Members of the U.S. military, their families, and retirees; foreign allies of the U.S. military; and the DOD or other affected agencies.

Cost of S. 1605

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: The bipartisan leaders of Congress’s armed services committees — Senate Chairman Jack Reed (D-RI) and Ranking Member Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and House Chairman Adam Smith (D-WA) and Ranking Member Mike Rogers (R-AL) — released a joint statement about their bicameral compromise on the FY2022 NDAA:

“We are pleased to announce we’ve come to a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on this year’s National Defense Authorization Act. This year’s agreement continues the Armed Services Committees’ 61-year tradition of working together to support our troops and strengthen national security. We urge Congress to pass the NDAA quickly and the President to sign it when it reaches his desk.”

This compromise version of the FY2022 NDAA is based on the House’s bill, H.R. 4350, which passed the Senate on a vote of 316-113 on September 23rd; and on the Senate’s bill, S. 2792, which was approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee on July 21st on a 23-3 vote.

Media:

• House & Senate Armed Services Committee Joint Press Release

• Senate Armed Services Committee Summary