2027 Defense Bill: Troop Pay, Weapons Buys, and Pentagon Rules

What to know

• Troops get a 3.6 percent pay raise starting January 1, 2027, replacing the usual automatic formula.
• The bill sets troop caps, including up to 469,000 active-duty Army soldiers and 1,800 Air Force fighter jets.
• It funds new ships, F-35 and F-15EX jets, and bulk weapons buys, but locks in multi-year spending commitments.
• Dozens of sections restrict buying from China-linked suppliers, covering drones, circuit boards, fiber optics, and TVs.
• The bill expands PFAS chemical cleanup at bases and adds health benefits like TRICARE mental health and cancer screening.
• Congress added many reporting requirements and temporary spending freezes to pressure the Pentagon for information on topics from carrier overhauls to award records.

Heads up

19 buried provisions

Provisions we flagged do not match the bill's stated purpose, or repeat language from bills that did not pass on their own.

Section by section

1. Official name of the law

   This section gives the bill its official short name. It states that the law may be called the 'National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.' This name is used to refer to the law in other documents and laws. The full bill covers defense spending and military rules for the year 2027.

   Who this affects

   This section affects no one directly. It simply sets the official name that people use to cite the law.

   Tradeoff

   There is no tradeoff in a naming section; it only establishes a short title for reference purposes.

   Show the exact bill text

   This Act may be cited as the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 .

2. How the bill is organized

   This section explains how the bill is structured. It divides the bill into four main parts: Department of Defense Authorizations, Military Construction Authorizations, Department of Energy National Security Authorizations, and Funding Tables. It also provides a full table of contents listing every section in the bill. This lets readers quickly find specific topics, such as pay raises, weapons programs, or military justice rules.

   Who this affects

   Anyone reading or using the bill, including lawmakers, congressional staff, and the public. It does not create any new policy on its own.

   Tradeoff

   This is a structural section with no direct policy impact, so there is no tradeoff to weigh.

   Show the exact bill text

   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.

3. Definition of 'congressional defense committees'

   This section defines one term used throughout the bill. The term 'congressional defense committees' is not defined here in new words. Instead, the bill points to an existing definition already written in federal law (title 10, section 101(a)(16) of the U.S. Code). That existing law identifies the specific House and Senate committees that oversee defense matters. By referencing that definition, the bill keeps its own language consistent with other federal defense laws.

   Who this affects

   This section affects how the bill is read and applied. It tells readers which congressional committees have oversight roles under this bill.

   Tradeoff

   Using an existing legal definition keeps the bill consistent with other laws, but readers must look up a separate law to know exactly which committees are included.

   Show the exact bill text

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

4. Measuring the bill's budget impact

   This section says that when Congress measures how much this bill costs or saves, it must use a specific official statement. That statement is called the "Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation" document. The two Budget Committee chairmen must jointly submit it to the Congressional Record before the House votes on the final version of the bill. The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 requires Congress to track whether new laws add to the deficit. This section sets the official source for those numbers.

   Who this affects

   Congress and the federal budget process are directly affected. Taxpayers are indirectly affected because this rule shapes how the bill's cost is officially counted.

   Tradeoff

   Using one agreed-upon document keeps the cost estimate consistent, but it also means the estimate is only as accurate as that single jointly submitted statement.

   Show the exact bill text

   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

5. Authorization of military procurement funding

   This section says that money can be set aside for fiscal year 2027 to buy equipment and supplies for the military. It covers purchases for the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force, the Space Force, and other Defense-wide programs. The exact dollar amounts are not listed here. Instead, this section points readers to a separate funding table in section 4101 of the same bill.

   Who this affects

   All branches of the U.S. military and defense agencies that rely on procurement funding. Taxpayers fund these purchases.

   Tradeoff

   Authorizing procurement funds lets the military buy needed equipment, but the actual spending levels are set in a separate table, so the full cost is not visible in this section alone.

   Show the exact bill text

   Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2027 for procurement for the Army, the Navy and the Marine Corps, the Air Force and the Space Force, and Defense-wide activities, as specified in the funding table in section 4101.

6. Multi-year buying authority for Army Infantry Squad Vehicles

   This section lets the Army sign contracts lasting up to five years to buy Infantry Squad Vehicles (ISVs), which are light tactical vehicles that carry small infantry teams. Right now, the Army buys these vehicles one year at a time. Under this section, buying in bulk over multiple years must save money compared to annual purchasing. The contract must include terms that protect the government if the deal is canceled early. The Army can also order certain long-lead parts in larger batches upfront to lower costs further. All purchases must follow existing federal rules for multi-year military contracts.

   Who this affects

   The U.S. Army and the manufacturers who build Infantry Squad Vehicles and their parts are directly affected.

   Tradeoff

   Locking in a multi-year contract can lower the price per vehicle, but it also commits the government to a spending plan that is harder to change if needs or budgets shift.

   Show the exact bill text

   the Secretary of the Army may enter into one or more multiyear contracts, beginning with fiscal year 2027, for the procurement of Infantry Squad Vehicles (ISV), including associated components, spare parts, and support equipment.

7. Army National Guard role in Arctic military strategy

   This section requires the Army Secretary to bring the Army National Guard into the Army's Arctic plan. The Guard must be fully included in the current Arctic strategy and any future versions of it. The Secretary must identify Guard units that are close to the Arctic or already trained for cold weather. Those units would be formally labeled as Arctic-capable. The Army must also create a plan to get those units the right gear, such as cold-weather clothing, snow vehicles, and special radios. Guard units must join more Arctic training exercises with active-duty forces. By June 30, 2027, the Army Secretary must send a report to Congress listing what roles, missions, and resources the Guard needs for Arctic work.

   Who this affects

   Army National Guard soldiers and units, especially those in northern or cold-weather states. Active-duty Army forces that train and operate alongside Guard units in the Arctic are also affected.

   Tradeoff

   Expanding Guard participation in Arctic strategy could strengthen cold-weather defense, but it also requires new equipment purchases and training resources that carry added costs.

   Show the exact bill text

   Identify specific Army National Guard units with existing cold-weather capabilities or geographical proximity to the Arctic Circle to be designated as Arctic-capable or Arctic-focused.

8. Expanded buying authority for amphibious Navy ships

   This section changes the rules for buying certain amphibious ships used by the Navy and Marine Corps. It removes a cap that limited purchases to five ships. It also lets the Navy buy materials in bulk across multiple ship programs at once, and adds spare parts and major shore-based spares to the list of items that can be bought early or in large quantities to save money. Finally, it extends the deadline for using these buying authorities from September 30, 2026, to September 30, 2030, giving the Navy four more years to use them.

   Who this affects

   The U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and defense shipbuilding contractors are directly affected. Taxpayers fund the purchases.

   Tradeoff

   Buying more ships and parts earlier and in bulk can lower the cost per unit, but it also locks in spending commitments years in advance, reducing future budget flexibility.

   Show the exact bill text

   by striking September 30, 2026 and inserting September 30, 2030

9. Extended timeline for aircraft carrier refueling overhauls

   This section changes a deadline in a 2020 defense law. It gives the Navy more time to complete major refueling and overhaul work on two aircraft carriers, the U.S.S. John C. Stennis and the U.S.S. Harry S. Truman. The allowed timeframe grows from six years to eight years. Refueling and complex overhauls are large, expensive projects. They involve replacing nuclear fuel and rebuilding major ship systems. Adding two years gives the Navy and its contractors more time to finish the work.

   Who this affects

   The Navy, the shipyards doing the overhaul work, and the crews assigned to these two carriers are all affected. Taxpayers also have a stake because these overhauls are costly government contracts.

   Tradeoff

   More time may reduce schedule pressure and cost overruns, but it also means the carriers stay out of active service longer.

   Show the exact bill text

   amended by striking six years and inserting eight years

10. Cable laying and repair ship construction rules

    This section sets rules for how the Navy must buy cable laying and repair ships. The Navy must work through a vessel construction manager to arrange ship construction contracts. The ships must be based on existing commercial ship designs, not new custom military designs. Construction must also follow commercial building practices as much as possible.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Navy and the shipbuilding companies that compete for these contracts are affected.

    Tradeoff

    Using commercial designs and practices can lower costs and speed up delivery, but may limit how much the ships can be customized to meet unique military needs.

    Show the exact bill text

    use a design based on nondevelopmental vessels with commercial design standards; and (2) to the maximum extent practicable, are constructed using commercial construction practices.

11. Transfer of three F-14D Tomcat jets to Huntsville, Alabama museum

    This section lets the Navy give three surplus F-14D Tomcat fighter jets to the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama at no cost to the government. The jets have had all weapons systems removed and cannot be used in combat. The Navy does not have to fix the planes first, but must provide maintenance manuals and spare parts to make one jet flyable or ready for display. The Center must follow all FAA rules, cannot sell or transfer the planes without Navy approval, and must pay all costs for moving, maintaining, and operating the aircraft. If the Center breaks any of these conditions, ownership returns to the United States immediately. The Center may work with nonprofit groups to restore and show the planes at public events to honor naval aviation history.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama receives the aircraft and takes on all costs and responsibilities. Taxpayers are not required to fund the transfer, restoration, or upkeep.

    Tradeoff

    The government transfers valuable historic aircraft at no direct cost, but gives up ownership while limiting its own liability, placing all financial and legal responsibility on the receiving organization.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of the Navy...may convey, without consideration, to the U.S. Space and Rocket Center Commission in Huntsville, Alabama...all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to 3 surplus F–14D Tomcat aircraft...(g) Conveyance at no cost to the United States The conveyance of an aircraft under subsection (a) shall be made at no cost to the United States.

12. Protection of World War II-era Navy aircraft from destruction

    This section stops the Defense Department from destroying, scrapping, or permanently disabling any aircraft built before December 31, 1945, that the Navy currently holds. These planes and helicopters must either stay in the Navy's inventory, be given to a museum or other approved organization, or be transferred under a plan that ensures long-term preservation. The Defense Secretary can make exceptions, but only after Navy experts confirm the aircraft cannot be saved, after a one-year public notice period with no eligible group stepping forward, and after notifying Congress and waiting 30 days.

    Who this affects

    The Department of the Navy, which holds these historic aircraft, and museums or nonprofits that could receive them. Taxpayers and history enthusiasts also have an interest in how these aircraft are handled.

    Tradeoff

    Preserving rare WWII aircraft for the public record prevents the military from freely disposing of assets it may no longer have the space or budget to maintain.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense may not destroy, dismantle, scrap, cannibalize, or otherwise render permanently inoperable any aircraft that— (1) was manufactured prior to December 31, 1945; and (2) is in the custody or administrative control of the Department of the Navy as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

13. Bulk purchase authority for E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft

    This section lets the Navy buy at least 12 E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft in a single contract covering fiscal years 2027 through 2029. Buying in bulk this way is called a "block buy." Starting in 2027, the Navy can also sign separate contracts to order parts and materials in advance. Two limits apply to protect taxpayers. First, any payment the government makes depends on Congress actually approving the money. Second, if the contract is cancelled, the government only owes what it had already committed to pay at that point.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Navy and defense contractors that build E-2D aircraft and supply their parts. Taxpayers are affected because this commits future government spending.

    Tradeoff

    A block buy can lower the price per aircraft, but it locks the government into a multi-year purchase plan that is harder to change if budgets or priorities shift.

    Show the exact bill text

    the total liability of the Federal Government for termination of the contract shall be limited to the total amount of funding obligated to the contract at the time of termination.

14. Air Force fighter aircraft minimum inventory levels

    This section sets minimum numbers of fighter aircraft the Air Force must keep. Starting October 1, 2026, the Air Force must have at least 1,800 total fighter aircraft. By December 31, 2030, at least 1,369 of those must be "combat-coded," meaning they are assigned to fighting units and ready for action. The section also defines key terms. A "fighter aircraft" includes planes with an F- or A- designation flown by one or two crew members. Drone-like collaborative combat aircraft do not count toward these numbers. "Combat-coded" aircraft include primary mission planes, backup planes kept for maintenance coverage, and attrition reserves held to replace losses.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Air Force and the Secretary of the Air Force are directly affected. Taxpayers and defense planners are also affected, since meeting these floors may require buying or keeping more aircraft.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping a larger minimum fleet can improve combat readiness, but it may also increase costs for procurement, maintenance, and operations.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of the Air Force shall— (A) during the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on October 1, 2035, maintain a total aircraft inventory of fighter aircraft of not less than 1,800 aircraft; and (B) maintain a total aircraft inventory of combat-coded fighter aircraft of not less than 1,369 aircraft by December 31, 2030.

15. Multiyear purchase contracts for F-35 fighter jets

    This section lets the Defense Department sign multiyear contracts to buy F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C fighter jets. Normally, defense contracts go through a detailed approval process before multiyear deals are allowed. This section skips one of those steps and treats the contracts as already meeting several legal requirements. The Defense Department must still send Congress a report within 90 days. The report must explain the reasoning behind the deal. The section also allows the Pentagon to buy key parts in bulk ahead of time to get better prices. Any certification sent to Congress must list exactly which parts will be bought early.

    Who this affects

    The Defense Department, defense contractors (especially Lockheed Martin as F-35 maker), and U.S. taxpayers who fund defense spending.

    Tradeoff

    Multiyear bulk buying can lower the cost per jet, but it locks the government into a longer commitment and reduces flexibility to change plans if needs shift.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of Defense may enter into one or more multiyear contracts for the procurement of F–35A, F–35B, and F–35C aircraft.

16. Multiyear purchase contracts for F-15EX fighter jets

    This section lets the Defense Department sign multiyear contracts to buy F-15EX fighter jets. Normally, multiyear contracts must meet several findings requirements under federal law. This section says those requirements are automatically considered met, skipping some of the usual steps. The Secretary of Defense must still report to Congress within 90 days with preliminary findings. Before signing any multiyear deal, the Secretary must certify to Congress that the manufacturer can raise production enough to reach a goal of at least 268 F-15EX jets by 2035. The section also allows the department to buy key jet components ahead of time in bulk, which can lower costs. Any certification filed with Congress must list exactly which components will be bought early.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Air Force and the Defense Department are directly affected, as they would sign and manage these contracts. The aircraft manufacturer (Boeing) and its suppliers are affected, as they would need to prove and meet the production targets.

    Tradeoff

    Buying in bulk over multiple years can lower the cost per jet, but it commits the government to a long-term contract and requires trusting that the manufacturer can hit the 2035 production goal.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense may not exercise the authority provided by subsection (a) until the Secretary submits to Congress a certification that the contractor concerned has the ability to increase production to achieve the objective inventory goal of not less than 268 F–15EX aircraft by 2035.

17. MQ-9 drone fleet: retirement limits and future replacement study

    This section controls what the Air Force can do with its MQ-9 Reaper drones. The Air Force cannot reduce its MQ-9 fleet below the current number until September 30, 2031. There is one exception: losses from combat, accidents, or unexpected damage do not count as a violation. However, after such a loss, the Air Force must notify Congress within 30 days and try to restore the fleet. Starting October 1, 2028, the Air Force must keep at least 180 MQ-9 aircraft at all times. The section also requires the Air Force to study replacement options for a medium-altitude surveillance drone. That study must look at options that match or beat the MQ-9 in areas like endurance, sensors, and mission flexibility. A report and briefing on the study must go to Congress by December 1, 2027.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Air Force and its drone operations are directly affected. Congress, the National Guard, and military commanders who rely on surveillance missions are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping a large MQ-9 fleet maintains current surveillance capacity but limits the Air Force's ability to shift money or resources toward newer technologies before 2031.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Air Force may not divest, retire, or otherwise reduce the inventory of MQ–9 aircraft below the baseline inventory level until September 30, 2031.

18. Airborne warning and control aircraft fleet rules

    This section sets rules for the Air Force's radar surveillance planes. The Air Force may not retire, store, or reduce its E-3 AWACS planes below 16 total. There is one exception: if the Air Force buys enough newer E-7 Wedgetail planes to handle the required missions, it may then drop below 16 E-3s after those E-7s are delivered. The section also bars the Air Force from pausing, canceling, or ending the E-7 Wedgetail buying program.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Air Force and its leadership. It also affects defense contractors working on the E-7 Wedgetail program.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the E-3 fleet at or above 16 planes maintains surveillance capacity, but it limits the Air Force's flexibility to cut older aircraft costs until newer planes are ready.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Air Force may not retire, prepare to retire, or place in storage or in backup aircraft inventory any E–3 aircraft if such actions would reduce the total aircraft inventory for such aircraft below 16.

19. Funding hold until Air Force reports on airborne command post plans

    This section holds back money from the Air Force Secretary's travel budget until a report is delivered to Congress. Specifically, no more than 60 percent of the Air Force operation and maintenance funds set aside for the Secretary's office travel expenses can be spent. The hold lifts once the Air Force Secretary sends Congress the report required by a 2026 defense law. That report covers the Air Force's plan for acquiring a new Airborne Command Post, which is an aircraft used to command and control military forces.

    Who this affects

    The Secretary of the Air Force and the Air Force office that manages travel expenses are directly affected. Congressional defense committees receive the required report.

    Tradeoff

    Congress keeps pressure on the Air Force to submit a required report, but tying the hold to travel funds rather than program funds limits the financial pressure.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 60 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Air Force submits to the congressional defense committees the report required by section 154 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026

20. Long-range military mobility planning report

    This section tells the Secretary of the Air Force to write a detailed plan by January 1, 2027. The plan must cover how the military will move troops, fuel, and supplies through the year 2047. It must look at current weaknesses in air transport and refueling. It must identify what future cargo planes and refueling tankers should be able to do, including flying from damaged runways and hiding their location from public tracking. The plan must also look at using commercial airlines and new technologies like autonomous aircraft, artificial intelligence, and alternative fuels. The report goes to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees. Most of it must be public, but a secret section is allowed.

    Who this affects

    The Air Force, U.S. Transportation Command, and geographic combatant commands must do the work. Commercial aviation companies and airlines in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet may also be affected by future decisions the plan recommends.

    Tradeoff

    A thorough long-range plan could improve military readiness and spending efficiency, but producing it requires significant time and coordination across many military and civilian organizations.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with the Commander of the United States Transportation Command and in consultation with the commanders of the geographic combatant commands, shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report that includes a comprehensive and detailed strategic plan for the development, acquisition, modernization, and integration of total force mobility capabilities of the Department of Defense through fiscal year 2047.

21. Extension of C-130 aircraft inventory and National Guard requirements

    This section extends two existing rules about C-130 military cargo aircraft through 2028. The first rule requires the military to keep a minimum number of C-130s in its inventory. The second rule prohibits reducing the number of C-130s assigned to the National Guard. Both rules were previously set to expire in 2026. This section simply moves that deadline to 2028, keeping the same requirements in place for two more years.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard are affected, as they must maintain current C-130 aircraft levels. National Guard units across the country that rely on C-130s are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the C-130 fleet requirements in place protects National Guard airlift capacity, but it limits the military's flexibility to retire older aircraft or shift resources to newer systems.

    Show the exact bill text

    is further amended by striking 2026 and inserting 2028

22. Research and development funding authorization

    This section allows money to be spent in fiscal year 2027 on Defense Department research, development, testing, and evaluation programs. It does not set the dollar amount here. Instead, it points to a separate funding table in section 4201 of the same bill, where the specific amounts are listed.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense and the contractors, labs, and agencies that carry out its research and testing programs.

    Tradeoff

    Authorizing these funds lets the military pursue new technology and weapons programs, but the actual spending is locked to the limits set in the separate funding table.

    Show the exact bill text

    Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2027 for the use of the Department of Defense for research, development, test, and evaluation, as specified in the funding table in section 4201.

23. Narrowing the alternative testing pathway for certain defense programs

    This section changes a rule about how some defense programs can be tested. A 2026 law allowed certain programs to use an alternative testing process if they related to 'software and covered hardware.' This section narrows that language. Now the alternative testing path applies only to programs that follow a specific software buying process defined in federal law (called Software Acquisition Pathways). Programs that involve hardware alone, or that use other buying paths, can no longer qualify for this alternative route.

    Who this affects

    Defense acquisition program managers and contractors whose programs seek to use an alternative testing and evaluation process. Programs that do not follow the Software Acquisition Pathways process lose access to this option.

    Tradeoff

    Narrowing the rule gives more consistency and oversight to the testing process, but it removes flexibility for some programs that previously could qualify for the easier alternative path.

    Show the exact bill text

    striking relating to software and covered hardware and inserting under the Software Acquisition Pathways pursuant to section 3603 of title 10, United States Code,

24. Low-cost alternative weapon systems development

    This section tells the Secretary of Defense to develop a set of cheaper weapon systems across eight categories. The categories include hypersonic missiles, cruise missiles, shoulder-launched missiles, and several types of air and missile defense interceptors. The weapons must cost less per unit than current systems. They must also be easier and faster to build in large numbers. The Pentagon must use modern methods like digital engineering and off-the-shelf parts to cut costs. Each program must reach a low-rate production stage by 2030. Cost and performance targets must be set through competition and testing.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense, defense contractors, and the military branches responsible for buying and using these weapons. U.S. taxpayers fund the development programs.

    Tradeoff

    Building cheaper weapons in greater quantities could stretch the defense budget further, but lowering unit cost may mean accepting less capability or higher performance risk compared to current systems.

    Show the exact bill text

    develop, test, evaluate, demonstrate, and transition to production a portfolio of alternative, affordable, low-cost weapon systems in each of the following categories: (1) Hypersonic strike systems. (2) Cruise missiles. (3) Shoulder-launched missiles. (4) Extended range munitions.

25. Updates to JASON scientific advisory group rules

    This section makes four changes to rules about JASON, a group of independent scientists who advise the Defense Department. First, it moves oversight of JASON from one Pentagon office (Acquisition and Sustainment) to another (Research and Engineering). Second, it clarifies that cost-sharing payments cover overhead and infrastructure needed to deliver JASON's technical reports, not just general overhead. Third, it updates the rule about other federal agencies sharing costs. Instead of vague language, it now says the Defense Department can arrange for other agencies that regularly use JASON to pay a fair share of those overhead and infrastructure costs. Fourth, it extends the program's authorization through December 31, 2035.

    Who this affects

    JASON advisory group scientists and their Pentagon sponsors. Federal agencies that use JASON's scientific assessments may also share costs.

    Tradeoff

    Extending JASON's authorization keeps independent scientific advice available to the government longer, but it also commits future budgets to funding the program's overhead costs.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Department of Defense may engage with another Federal agency that routinely uses JASON services to arrange for that agency to pay a proportional percentage of the total overhead and infrastructure costs needed to support delivery of JASON's technical assessments.

26. Faster process for science and technology agreements with other countries

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a new, faster process for making international agreements about science and technology cooperation. The new process must be in place within 30 days of the law passing. It must still follow all existing laws. It must push decision-making to lower levels when possible. It must cut unnecessary paperwork and duplicate reviews. It must also set clear time limits for coordination steps inside the Department of Defense.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense and foreign governments or organizations that enter into science and technology agreements with the U.S. military.

    Tradeoff

    Speeding up the agreement process could get research partnerships moving faster, but reducing reviews may mean less oversight of each agreement.

    Show the exact bill text

    eliminate duplicative reviews; and (5) impose reasonable timelines for intra-Department of Defense coordination.

27. Repeal of temporary hiring authority for students and university faculty

    This section removes a hiring rule that was created in 2021. That rule let the Department of Defense temporarily hire students and university faculty under special conditions. By repealing it, the Department loses that specific authority. Any hiring of students or faculty would then have to follow standard federal hiring rules.

    Who this affects

    Students and university faculty who might seek temporary work with the Department of Defense. Department of Defense hiring offices that used this authority.

    Tradeoff

    Removing this authority simplifies the hiring rulebook, but it may make it harder for the Department of Defense to quickly bring in students and academic experts for short-term work.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 249 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283; 10 U.S.C. 4001 note) is repealed.

28. Funding hold on containerized test equipment programs until Pentagon submits report

    This section limits how much money the Department of Defense can spend on certain naval test equipment programs in 2027. The programs in question package testing instruments inside shipping containers and deploy them on crewed ships. The Pentagon can only spend up to 75 percent of those funds until a senior defense official submits a report to Congress. The report must examine whether unmanned vessels could replace or reduce the use of those container-based systems. It must compare costs, operational benefits, and limitations of crewed, containerized, and unmanned approaches. It must also outline a plan for transitioning to unmanned systems as the main approach for future maritime test instrumentation, including identifying programs that could be cut or merged to pay for the transition.

    Who this affects

    The Test Resource Management Center and the military departments that rely on containerized maritime test instrumentation programs. Defense contractors and personnel supporting those programs may also be affected.

    Tradeoff

    Holding back 25 percent of funds creates pressure for the Pentagon to study unmanned alternatives, but it may slow spending on existing programs that are currently used for weapons testing.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering...submits to the congressional defense committees the report described in subsection (b).

29. Travel budget freeze tied to directed energy briefing

    This section limits how much travel money the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering can spend in fiscal year 2027. That office can use no more than 90 percent of its travel funds until a specific briefing happens. The Directed Energy Working Group must first give that briefing to the congressional defense committees. The briefing requirement comes from a 2017 defense law. Once the briefing is delivered, the remaining 10 percent of travel funds becomes available.

    Who this affects

    The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering is directly affected. Congressional defense committees must receive the briefing before the restriction lifts.

    Tradeoff

    Holding back travel funds pressures the Directed Energy Working Group to deliver a required briefing, but it also limits the office's ability to conduct normal travel until that condition is met.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 90 percent may be obligated or expended until the Directed Energy Working Group provides to the congressional defense committees a briefing as required by section 219(d)(6) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017

30. Navy combat systems funding hold pending tech demonstration

    This section limits how much money the Navy can spend on its Integrated Combat Systems program. The Navy can only use up to 75 percent of the funds until it completes a specific test. The test requires the Navy to install and run a working prototype of a new data system on one or more destroyers. That system must include an AI-powered engine that connects shipboard sensors, a shared computer platform that links combat and other ship systems, and a software testing pipeline that automates updates and checks. Once the test is done, the Navy Secretary must send Congress a formal certification confirming it was completed. Only then can the remaining 25 percent of funds be spent.

    Who this affects

    The Department of the Navy and its contractors working on combat systems. Destroyer crews may also be involved in hosting the prototype during testing.

    Tradeoff

    Holding back 25 percent of funds pushes the Navy to demonstrate new AI and software tools quickly, but it could slow spending on other combat system work if the prototype takes longer than expected.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees the certification required by subsection (c).

31. Travel budget cap for defense research office

    This section limits how much travel money the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering can spend. The office can use no more than 85 percent of its travel funds until the Secretary of Defense sends two documents to congressional defense committees. The first document is a strategy and plan required by a 2023 defense law. The second is a report on war gaming, exercises, modeling, and simulation related to competition with major powers. Once both documents are delivered, the remaining 15 percent of travel funds becomes available.

    Who this affects

    The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering is directly affected. Congressional defense committees receive the required documents.

    Tradeoff

    Holding back travel funds gives Congress a tool to push for overdue reports, but it also limits the office's ability to do its work until those reports are submitted.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 85 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of Defense provides each of the following to the congressional defense committees

32. Pentagon research security program at universities

    This section tells the Defense Department to create a formal program to protect military-funded research at colleges and universities. The program targets foreign threats such as talent recruitment programs run by rival countries. It requires building a list of risky foreign entities, especially those linked to China and Russia. Universities that knowingly work with those listed entities could lose Pentagon funding. Researchers must disclose any ties to those entities each year they hold a Pentagon grant. The Pentagon must also review a sample of its research grants every year to check for rule violations. Starting in 2027, the Defense Secretary must send Congress an annual report on how the program is working, including any waivers granted and any legal gaps that need fixing.

    Who this affects

    Colleges and universities that receive Pentagon research funding, and the individual researchers who work on those grants. Federal agencies that maintain security watch lists are also involved in building and updating the entity list.

    Tradeoff

    Tighter security rules may reduce the risk of technology theft, but they also add reporting burdens on researchers and universities and could limit some international scientific cooperation.

    Show the exact bill text

    to limit undue influence, including through foreign talent programs, by countries to exploit United States technology within the Department of Defense research, science and technology, and innovation enterprise

33. Ban on foreign-entity contracts at defense-funded universities

    Starting January 1, 2028, any college or university that receives Defense Department research money cannot sign a contract with a 'covered nation' (such as China or Russia) or a 'foreign entity of concern' (such as companies on U.S. export blacklists). The school can ask the Secretary of Defense for a one-year waiver up to 120 days before signing. The Secretary must notify Congress 15 days before granting one. A waiver can be renewed for up to four years if contract terms stay the same. Contracts already in place before that date must be reported to Congress within 90 days and may also seek a waiver. If a foreign partner gets newly added to a restricted list during an existing contract, the school must end that contract within 120 days or request a waiver right away. Each school seeking a waiver must name a compliance officer who certifies the accuracy of all filings. Study-abroad programs, short-term visiting professor agreements, and routine purchases of goods or services are carved out from the ban.

    Who this affects

    Colleges and universities that conduct Defense Department-funded research. Foreign companies and governments on U.S. restricted lists are also affected, as are their existing partnerships with those schools.

    Tradeoff

    The ban limits research partnerships that could risk national security, but it also restricts international collaborations that schools say benefit students and academic work.

    Show the exact bill text

    Beginning on January 1, 2028, a covered institution may not enter into a contract with a covered nation or a foreign entity of concern.

34. Department of Defense Science, Technology, and Innovation Board

    This section creates a formal advisory board inside the Department of Defense called the Science, Technology, and Innovation Board. The board can have up to 50 members. Members must be recognized experts in science, technology, or innovation. They serve without pay but can be reimbursed for travel. Members serve one to four year terms and cannot serve more than two consecutive terms without a waiver. The board advises senior defense officials on technology problems, new research, engineering, and manufacturing. It must meet at least four times a year. It can create smaller working groups, but those groups report only to the full board. The board must also keep a public charter describing what it does.

    Who this affects

    Senior Department of Defense officials receive the board's advice. Experts in science and technology who join the board serve without pay.

    Tradeoff

    Formalizing this board in law gives it a stable structure and public accountability, but members work without compensation, which may limit who can afford to serve.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Board shall be composed of not more than 50 members as full board members, who shall be eminent authorities in the fields of science, technology, innovation, and other matters germane to scientific, technological, and innovation topics of special interest to the Department of Defense.

35. Expanding air defense missile inventory

    This section tells the Pentagon's top acquisition official to find ways to build more air defense interceptor missiles. Four paths must be explored. First, cut costs on existing missiles through better engineering and supply chains. Second, share technical blueprints with more manufacturers, including private companies. Third, buy interceptors from allies or set up joint production lines with them. Fourth, search industry and military labs for key parts that could speed up a new or updated missile design. Within one year, the official must report to Congress on what was done under each path, what the cost and production gains could be, and what steps (including new laws or budget changes) are needed to move forward.

    Who this affects

    The Pentagon's acquisition office and military departments must do the work. Defense contractors, allied nations, and commercial manufacturers may get new opportunities. The changes could affect U.S. air defense readiness.

    Tradeoff

    Producing more missiles faster and at lower cost could increase readiness, but using new manufacturers or allied sources may raise questions about quality control and supply reliability.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments, shall explore, establish, and carry out efforts to increase the inventory of air defense interceptors by pursuing each of the following pathways

36. DARPA hiring flexibility for science and engineering experts

    This section changes the hiring rules for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). DARPA is allowed up to 140 special expert positions. Under this change, up to 40 of those 140 positions can be shared by two people at the same time, but only for up to 90 days. This overlap is meant to help DARPA manage hiring cycles and staff rotations. The two people sharing a slot still count as just one position toward the 140-person limit.

    Who this affects

    DARPA scientists, engineers, and other technical experts who are hired or rotating out of the agency. It also affects DARPA managers who handle recruitment.

    Tradeoff

    Allowing short overlaps makes staff transitions smoother, but it means two people can temporarily hold what is counted as one position, which could create ambiguity in staffing and compensation.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 40 of the 140 positions may be occupied concurrently by 2 individuals, for a period not to exceed 90 days, for the purposes of accommodating recruitment cycles and managing personnel rotations, and any such concurrent occupancy shall be counted as a single position against the total number of positions

37. Extended funding ban for certain foreign university research partnerships

    This section extends an existing rule that limits how the Department of Defense can spend money on research partnerships with certain academic institutions. The rule was first set in 2025 law and updated in 2026 law. This change adds fiscal year 2027 to the list of covered years. The limitation stays in place for one more year rather than expiring.

    Who this affects

    Defense Department researchers and universities that seek joint research funding. Academic institutions flagged under the existing restriction cannot receive these funds through fiscal year 2027.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the restriction in place for another year may protect national security interests, but it also continues to limit research collaboration opportunities for affected institutions.

    Show the exact bill text

    is amended by striking or fiscal year 2026 and inserting , fiscal year 2026, or fiscal year 2027 .

38. Quantum computing assessment framework for the Pentagon

    This section tells the Secretary of Defense to build a framework by June 2027. The framework will help the Pentagon decide whether to build or buy quantum computing systems, software, or services. It must draw on lessons from an existing program called the Quantum Benchmarking Initiative. The framework will judge three things: whether a quantum system can actually do useful military tasks, what the risks are and how to reduce them, and what timelines, training, and other needs are involved. By December 2027, the Secretary must also issue official guidance so that the whole Defense Department knows how to use this framework.

    Who this affects

    Defense Department program managers, technology developers, and contract evaluators who work on quantum computing. Taxpayers who fund military technology research and procurement.

    Tradeoff

    Creating this framework costs time and staff resources, but it may help the Pentagon avoid buying quantum systems that are not yet ready for real military use.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than June 15, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall...develop a framework for assessing the development or acquisition of future quantum computing systems, algorithms, or hybrid-quantum computing services informed by the practices developed under the Quantum Benchmarking Initiative.

39. Review of 3D-printed rocket fuel systems

    This section requires the Army Secretary to make a decision within 60 days. The decision is whether a technology called Additive Manufacturing for Rocket Propellant systems should become an official, funded Army program. Additive manufacturing means using 3D printing to build parts, in this case parts related to rocket propellant. The Secretary must also give Congress a briefing by April 15, 2027. That briefing must cover how the Army plans to buy and use this technology.

    Who this affects

    The Army and its leadership must act and report. Members of Congress on the Armed Services Committees receive the reports.

    Tradeoff

    Congress gets more oversight of a new technology, but the Army must spend time and resources on reviews and briefings.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a determination confirming whether the Additive Manufacturing for Rocket Propellant systems should be formally established as a program of record.

40. Report on emerging technology and cognitive warfare

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress within 270 days. The report must cover emerging technologies that could be used in cognitive warfare, which means efforts to influence how people think and make decisions. Specifically, it must look at tools like artificial intelligence, synthetic media (such as AI-generated images or video), and neuroscience-based influence methods. The report must assess how adversaries like China and Russia are using these technologies. It must also assess how U.S. allies, including NATO members, are using them. Finally, it must identify ways the U.S. military could work with private companies, universities, and allies to develop and deploy these technologies faster.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense and its research agencies must produce this report. Congress receives and reviews it. The findings could shape future military programs and budgets.

    Tradeoff

    Requiring this report gives Congress more visibility into a growing area of military competition, but the report itself does not direct any spending or policy action.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the implications of emerging technologies to support Department of Defense cognitive warfare.

41. Study on military electronics and semiconductor needs

    This section tells the Secretary of Defense to hire a qualified outside group to study what electronics the military needs now and in the future. The study must look at electronic warfare systems, semiconductor chips, and supply chain risks. It must also suggest ways to build more flexible, standardized electronics that can be upgraded over time. The outside group must finish the work within 180 days of the law passing. The Secretary must then send a report to Congress covering the findings, a plan to act on them, and a risk assessment. The report will be public, but can include a secret section if needed.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense and its contractors who build defense electronics. Semiconductor companies, including Intel, may be consulted during the study.

    Tradeoff

    The study could help the military plan better electronics purchases, but hiring an outside group and completing the work in 180 days may limit how deep the research can go.

    Show the exact bill text

    the organization shall carry out a comprehensive study analyzing current and future electronics requirements for defense systems, with particular emphasis on electronic warfare capabilities and semiconductor packaging solutions.

42. Operation and maintenance funding authorization

    This section allows Congress to set aside money for fiscal year 2027 to cover day-to-day running costs of the military. These costs are called 'operation and maintenance.' They include things like training, equipment upkeep, and base operations. The exact dollar amounts are listed in a separate funding table found in section 4301 of the same bill. This section does not spend the money itself. It simply gives legal permission for that spending to happen.

    Who this affects

    All branches of the U.S. Armed Forces and other agencies within the Department of Defense that rely on operation and maintenance funding.

    Tradeoff

    Authorizing this funding keeps military readiness and daily operations funded, but it also commits a large share of the defense budget to ongoing costs rather than new investments.

    Show the exact bill text

    Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2027 for the use of the Armed Forces and other activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for expenses, not otherwise provided for, for operation and maintenance, as specified in the funding table in section 4301.

43. Leadership swap in nuclear energy transition working group

    This section switches the roles of two Pentagon officials in a working group on advanced nuclear energy. Previously, the Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Deterrence led one part of the group, and the Assistant Secretary for Energy, Installations, and Environment led another. This section swaps those two assignments. The working group was created in the 2026 defense law to study how the military can use advanced nuclear power.

    Who this affects

    Two specific Pentagon assistant secretaries and the working group they oversee. It does not directly affect the general public.

    Tradeoff

    The change reassigns internal leadership duties but does not alter the working group's mission or funding.

    Show the exact bill text

    in subsection (b)(1), by striking The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment and inserting The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical, and Biological Defense Policy and Programs

44. Faster deployment of portable waste disposal systems to active burn pit sites

    This section tells the Secretary of Defense to make it a priority to send portable, field-ready solid waste disposal systems to military bases that still use open-air burn pits. Burn pits are areas where trash and waste are burned outdoors. The bill names Ar Riyan (Owen) in Yemen as one specific location. Other sites where troops face higher health risk from burn pit smoke, and where no other good waste disposal option exists, are also included.

    Who this affects

    U.S. military personnel stationed at contingency locations that still use open-air burn pits. The Secretary of Defense is responsible for carrying out the directive.

    Tradeoff

    Prioritizing these locations may speed up health protections for troops at high-risk sites, but directing resources to specific locations could slow deployment of equipment to other sites with different needs.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense shall prioritize deployment of expeditionary solid waste disposal systems to contingency locations where open air burn pits remain in use, including Ar Riyan (Owen), Yemen, and other locations where members of the Armed Forces face elevated exposure risk due to the absence of feasible waste disposal alternatives.

45. Sustainable aviation fuel purchases for the military

    This section changes existing law to let the Department of Defense buy sustainable aviation fuel for flights and training. Right now, the military must follow rules that limit paying more for cleaner fuels. This change removes that price barrier. The Defense Secretary can now pay more for sustainable aviation fuel than for regular jet fuel. The fuel can be used for real military operations or for training missions.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense and its aviation programs are directly affected. Taxpayers fund the military budget, so higher fuel costs would be paid with public money.

    Tradeoff

    Allowing the military to pay more for sustainable aviation fuel could reduce fossil fuel use, but it may also increase spending on aviation fuel.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense may procure sustainable aviation fuel for operational or training purposes at a cost that exceeds the cost of conventional petroleum-based aviation fuel.

46. Grid resiliency and energy redundancy for military bases

    This section adds a new item to an existing list of energy goals for the Department of Defense. The new item states that military bases should have backup energy sources. Specifically, bases should not rely on just one type of energy or one supplier. They should keep independent power generation running on their own. This way, if a commercial power grid or regional utility goes down, critical military operations can continue without interruption.

    Who this affects

    Military installations and the Department of Defense. Indirectly affects energy suppliers and contractors who provide power to bases.

    Tradeoff

    Building and maintaining independent backup power systems increases upfront and ongoing costs, but it reduces the risk of mission failure during a power outage.

    Show the exact bill text

    The value of establishing operational redundancy in both the primary procurement sourcing of energy and the specific physical categories of energy utilized to support critical mission infrastructure, ensuring the continuous availability of independent baseload generation capacities in the event of commercial or regional utility disruption.

47. Power grid review required for military land leases

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to include a formal power assessment in certain military land leases. These leases, called enhanced use leases, let outside parties use Defense Department property for things like new buildings or energy projects. Before signing, extending, or renewing such a lease, the Defense Department must study two things. First, it must look at how the lease could affect the nearby commercial electric grid, including voltage, congestion, and overall capacity. Second, it must calculate how much electricity all new buildings or equipment on the leased land will need to run.

    Who this affects

    The Defense Department must follow this rule. Companies or organizations that enter enhanced use leases with the military may face additional review steps.

    Tradeoff

    The assessment adds a planning step that could slow lease approvals, but it also gives local utilities and the military advance warning about new power demands.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that any enhanced use lease executed, extended, or renewed under section 2667 and 2662 of title 10, United States Code, for purposes of infrastructure, facility modernization, or energy production of the Department of Defense shall include a comprehensive, formalized assessment of localized grid impacts and infrastructure power demands.

48. Fuel storage expansion planning

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a master plan within 180 days. The plan must cover how the military will expand and protect its fuel storage around the world. It must set minimum fuel supply levels for each combat theater. It must also assess building tougher storage sites, such as underground or buried tanks, that can survive attacks and natural disasters. The plan must also lay out steps to move away from large, single fuel hubs toward smaller, spread-out storage networks. This reduces the risk of losing all fuel supply if one location is hit. The finished plan must be sent to Congress in an unclassified report, though a classified section may be added to protect sensitive details.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense, military departments, and the Defense Logistics Agency are directly tasked with this work. U.S. military forces worldwide could benefit from improved fuel access during conflicts or crises.

    Tradeoff

    Building more hardened and distributed fuel storage could improve military readiness, but it may cost significantly more than maintaining the current large, centralized fuel hubs.

    Show the exact bill text

    A strategy to transition from single, large-scale vulnerable bulk fuel hubs to decentralized and redundant storage networks within individual installation footprints to mitigate single points of failure.

49. Update rules on open-air burn pits not run by the military

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to update the military's rules on open-air burn pits within 180 days of this law passing. The update must follow the findings and recommendations from a July 2024 Inspector General report. That report looked at non-military groups burning solid waste at or near sites where U.S. troops are based. The goal is to bring the policy in line with what the Inspector General found and suggested.

    Who this affects

    U.S. military personnel stationed at or near sites where non-military burn pits operate. It also affects the Department of Defense in how it oversees waste burning near its bases.

    Tradeoff

    Updating the policy may better protect troops from burn pit exposure, but it could also add costs or restrict operations at sites where the military does not control the burning.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall revise the policy of the Department of Defense governing the use of open-air burn pits consistent with the findings and recommendations contained in the report by the Inspector General of the Department of Defense dated July 11, 2024

50. Review of energy supply for military bases and forces

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to deliver a detailed energy report to Congress within 120 days of the law taking effect. The report must cover where the military gets all its energy, including oil and other fuels, and how that energy travels through supply chains. It must identify any reliance on foreign energy sources, even indirect reliance. The report must also find weak points in those supply chains, such as bases that depend on a single power line or a company tied to a foreign government. It must list how much energy the military can store on-site and whether that storage is enough. Finally, it must assess what could happen to energy supplies during physical attacks or cyberattacks.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense, its military installations, and deployed forces are directly affected. Congress receives the report and can act on its findings.

    Tradeoff

    The review could reveal important energy vulnerabilities, but producing the report requires staff time and resources, and publishing findings may also expose sensitive information.

    Show the exact bill text

    A complete accounting of the geographic origin and supply chain pathways of all forms of energy, including hydrocarbons, purchased by the Department of Defense, explicitly identifying any direct or indirect reliance on foreign energy sources.

51. Required notices for PFAS cleanup dashboard updates

    This section changes a law about tracking cleanup of PFAS chemicals (a group of man-made chemicals) near military sites. It requires the Defense Secretary to notify several groups at least twice a year whenever the public tracking dashboard is updated. Those groups include regional EPA offices, state and local authorities, local advisory boards, and the Armed Services Committees in Congress. The section also swaps the word 'removal' for 'remedial' in two places, which is a technical wording fix.

    Who this affects

    Communities near military sites with PFAS contamination, state and local governments, EPA regional offices, and congressional oversight committees.

    Tradeoff

    More frequent, formal notices keep the public and officials informed, but they also create additional reporting work for the Defense Department.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not less frequently than semiannually, the Secretary shall provide prompt notice to regional offices of the Environmental Protection Agency, appropriate State and local authorities, restoration advisory boards established under section 2705(d) of title 10, United States Code, and the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives of updates to the dashboard under subsection (b).

52. Higher spending limit for public participation in base cleanup

    This section raises the cap on how much money the Defense Department can spend on technical assistance for community members who want to take part in environmental cleanup decisions at military bases. Right now, federal regulations set a lower limit. Under this change, the total spending on these purchase orders for any one base cannot exceed $1,000,000 overall. In any single year, the limit is the smaller of $100,000 or 1 percent of that base's total estimated cleanup cost. This lets communities get more outside expert help when reviewing cleanup plans at bases near them.

    Who this affects

    Communities and residents near military bases undergoing environmental cleanup. It also affects the Defense Department, which must update its regulations to reflect the new limits.

    Tradeoff

    Raising the cap gives local communities more resources to understand and engage in cleanup decisions, but it also increases the potential cost to the Defense Department for these assistance programs.

    Show the exact bill text

    increase the limitation on the combined sum of purchase orders for technical assistance for public participation in defense environmental restoration activities under that section for an installation of the Department of Defense to a combined sum of purchase orders not to exceed $1,000,000 or, during any one year, the lesser of $100,000 or 1 percent of the total projected environmental restoration cost-to-complete of the installation.

53. Study on military PFAS cleanup contracts

    This section directs the Comptroller General (head of the Government Accountability Office) to study how the Department of Defense handles cleanup of PFAS chemicals. PFAS stands for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These are man-made chemicals linked to health concerns. The study must look at five things: how well the military has mapped out where cleanup is needed, whether its contracting methods work, whether it uses up-to-date cleanup technology, whether it learns from past cleanup efforts, and where there are gaps or ways to improve speed and cost. Within one year, the Comptroller General must brief Congress on the findings. A written report will follow at a date both sides agree on.

    Who this affects

    Military installations where PFAS contamination exists and nearby communities that may be affected by that contamination. Contractors who do cleanup work for the Defense Department are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    The study adds oversight and may lead to better or cheaper cleanup, but it takes time and resources to complete before any changes can be made.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Comptroller General shall assess— (1) the extent to which the Department has identified and developed requirements for remediation of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances across military installations where cleanup may be needed by the Department, including any fragmentation of requirements across military installations

54. Cleanup of PFAS chemicals at military bases

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to start cleanup actions for PFAS chemicals (a group of man-made chemicals sometimes called 'forever chemicals') at military sites. Specifically, the Secretary must begin these interim cleanup steps at 50 or more sites within two years of the law's passage. The 50 sites must be chosen from a list of military bases where cleanup timelines have already slipped behind schedule compared to a December 2024 plan. If the Secretary cannot find 50 qualifying sites, fewer are allowed, but a report to Congress is required explaining why. The section also requires the Defense Department to finish cleanup work that is already underway at other military bases.

    Who this affects

    People who live near military bases with PFAS contamination may see faster cleanup action. The Department of Defense must carry out and pay for these cleanup steps.

    Tradeoff

    Faster cleanup protects nearby communities and water supplies, but it requires the Defense Department to direct resources and funds toward PFAS sites on a set timeline.

    Show the exact bill text

    not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall initiate interim remedial actions with respect to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances at not fewer than 50 covered sites.

55. Indo-Pacific military exercise improvements

    This section tells military leaders to respond to reports from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO found problems with how the military prepares for a possible conflict in the Indo-Pacific region. The problems include weapons maintenance, fuel supply, troop structure, and reserve readiness. Within 180 days, the Secretaries of Defense, Army, Air Force, and Navy must each submit a plan to Congress and the GAO. Each plan must list which GAO recommendations they will follow and give a schedule with milestones. If a Secretary skips a recommendation, the plan must explain why and describe what they will do instead. One year after submitting the plan, each Secretary must report back on what they actually did, covering maintenance goals for exercises, fuel supply training, multi-domain unit readiness, and reserve unit assessments.

    Who this affects

    The Secretaries of Defense, Army, Air Force, and Navy, along with the military branches they lead. Reserve component units of the Army and Air Force are also specifically covered.

    Tradeoff

    Requiring detailed plans and follow-up reports adds oversight and accountability, but it also takes time and staff resources away from other military priorities.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, each Secretary concerned shall submit to the congressional defense committees and the Comptroller General of the United States a plan to address the following recommendations made by the Comptroller General

56. Plan to use drones for Army base security

    This section tells the Secretary of the Army to create a written plan for using small drones to help guard Army bases inside the United States. The plan must pick one base to test the idea first, plus two more locations to expand the effort. It must show all costs, including setup, equipment, and ongoing upkeep. It must also judge whether the Army can afford to keep running the program over several years. The plan must list any new laws or money needed to make it work. The Army must send the finished plan to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees by September 1, 2027.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Army and its installations inside the United States are directly affected. Soldiers, civilian workers, and contractors who handle base security may see their roles or tools change.

    Tradeoff

    Drones could improve security coverage at lower cost than adding more guards, but setting up the technology, training staff, and solving policy barriers will require new spending and planning effort.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the heads of relevant organizations of the Department of Defense, shall develop a plan for integrating unmanned aerial systems into the Installation Physical Security Program to expand physical security monitoring capabilities for installations and facilities of the Department of the Army within the United States.

57. Army-owned factories and depots: new management rules

    This section requires the Secretary of the Army to write and publish new management rules within 180 days. The rules must explain how two Army offices will share decisions about resources and workload at Army-owned factories, ammunition plants, arsenals, and depots. The rules must also include a rolling three-year production plan for each site. That plan must account for Army needs, other military branches, and foreign partners. The rules must set a new cost model aimed at making these sites competitive with similar outside facilities. Leaders must also get an annual modernization plan showing how upgrade money is split across sites. Finally, if any decision cuts a site's workload by 10 percent or more, Congress must be told within 30 days, along with a plan to shift other work to that site.

    Who this affects

    Army arsenals, ammunition plants, and depots, along with their workforces. Congressional defense committees must also receive regular reports and notifications.

    Tradeoff

    More structured oversight and reporting could improve coordination and protect jobs at Army sites, but it also adds planning and reporting burdens on Army leadership.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 30 days after any decision that will decrease the workload of a site of the organic industrial base of the Army by 10 percent or more, notify the congressional defense committees of such decision, which shall include an explanation for the decrease and a plan to shift other work required by the Army to the site in order to maintain workforce capability.

58. Extended deadline for Navy ship maintenance roles

    This section pushes back a deadline in existing law. The original law required the Navy to formally assign who is responsible for maintaining and keeping certain surface ships ready for service. That assignment was due one year after the original law passed. This section changes that due date to January 31, 2028, giving the Navy more time to complete the designation.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Navy and the officials responsible for managing the readiness and upkeep of certain surface warships.

    Tradeoff

    The Navy gets more time to sort out maintenance responsibilities, but the delay also means clear accountability for ship readiness is not set until a later date.

    Show the exact bill text

    by striking the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this section and inserting January 31, 2028

59. Spare parts strategy for military aircraft with low readiness rates

    This section tells the Defense Department to create a plan for buying and managing spare parts for military aircraft that are frequently out of service. It covers any aircraft where fewer than half the fleet can fly full missions, or fewer than 40 percent of primary mission aircraft are fully ready. The plan must find parts that are hard to get, prioritize those parts for competitive buying, and plan ahead for parts that may become unavailable over time. To get parts faster and cheaper, the military can use reverse engineering, 3D printing, and advanced manufacturing instead of relying on a single supplier. Each year for three years, the Defense Department must report to Congress on which aircraft are covered, how often they can fly, what new vendors were added, how many contracts went to small businesses, and whether aircraft availability improved.

    Who this affects

    Military branches that operate aircraft with low readiness rates are directly affected. Defense contractors, small businesses, and parts suppliers are also affected because the plan pushes for more competition.

    Tradeoff

    Opening spare parts procurement to more suppliers and new manufacturing methods could lower costs and improve aircraft availability, but qualifying new vendors and developing technical data packages takes time and upfront investment.

    Show the exact bill text

    the term covered aircraft platform means any fixed-wing or rotary-wing aircraft operated by the Department of Defense with— (1) a fleet-wide full mission capable rate of 50 percent or less during the preceding fiscal year; or (2) a critical mission capable rate of 40 percent or less for primary mission aircraft inventory

60. Helicopter support for a remote Army test range in the Pacific

    This section requires the Army to place enough helicopters at Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands within 90 days of the law taking effect. The helicopters must be able to support missile test events, routine base maintenance, and emergency evacuations of personnel. The Army has three ways to meet this requirement: take older UH-1N Huey helicopters from the Air Force as the Air Force replaces them with newer aircraft; obtain UH-72 Lakota helicopters transitioning out of Army training fleets; or find another source, as long as the Army notifies Congress in writing at least 30 days before the 90-day deadline. Within 180 days, the Army must also send Congress a long-term plan covering helicopter availability for the next 5, 10, and 15 years, how it will buy any aircraft it does not already own, how it will maintain them over their full service life, and what the expected costs will be.

    Who this affects

    Army personnel stationed at Kwajalein Atoll and the Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range. It also involves Air Force Global Strike Command, which would transfer surplus helicopters.

    Tradeoff

    Ensuring reliable helicopter coverage at this remote Pacific test site adds cost and logistical burden, but without it the site may lack the ability to support tests or evacuate people in an emergency.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Army shall ensure that a sufficient quantity of rotary wing assets, including air and maintenance crews, spares and support equipment, and any other mission critical personnel or material, necessary to support all planned test events, installation maintenance requirements, and personnel movement or evacuation contingencies are located on Kwajalein Atoll

61. Accounting write-offs for military depots and arsenals

    This section lets the Secretary of Defense clear certain internal accounting charges at military depots and arsenals. Specifically, it covers charges like leftover depreciation or internal debt tied to equipment or facilities that no longer earn revenue because the federal government changed the mission at that site. Any write-off must be done so that money previously paid out of revolving funds is still recovered. This authority only applies to balances inside Defense Department accounts. It does not cancel any money owed to outside contractors. The Secretary can pass this authority down to the head of an individual military branch.

    Who this affects

    Military depots and arsenals that carry old accounting charges from mission changes. This affects internal Defense Department bookkeeping, not private contractors.

    Tradeoff

    Cleaning up these old accounting charges can simplify Defense Department books, but it removes internal cost records that once helped track spending at those facilities.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of Defense may write-off or eliminate any internal Department accounting charges, such as remaining depreciation or internal debt from an account of a military department or the Department associated with capital assets that do not generate revenue due to mission realignments directed by the Federal Government.

62. Rules for making weapons outside Army-owned factories

    This section updates the rules for when the Army can make weapons or munitions outside its own government-owned factories and plants. Right now, the law says the Army must use its own facilities when doing so is "economical." This section redefines "economical" to mean not just low cost, but also fast, efficient, and helpful to keeping the Army's own factories busy and healthy. If the Army chooses to produce weapons at a private or outside facility, a senior Army official must certify several things: that doing so will not weaken the Army's own factories, that preference was given to U.S.-based facilities, and that an Army facility was not skipped just because it does not currently make that item. If the Army cannot make that certification, it must explain to Congress and the Secretary of Defense why the outside choice is in the national security interest, and it must do so at least 30 days before the decision is final.

    Who this affects

    The Army and its government-owned arsenals, ammunition plants, and depots are directly affected. Private defense contractors who might otherwise win production contracts could face more scrutiny.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping more production in Army-owned facilities may protect those facilities and their workers, but it could also limit flexibility and potentially raise costs compared to using private contractors.

    Show the exact bill text

    If the Secretary of the Army chooses to make munitions or weapons systems outside the organic industrial base of the Army, the Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, or any successor official, shall certify that— (A) the choice will not undermine the capacity of sites of the organic industrial base of the Army within the continental United States to produce munitions or weapons systems to meet requirements of the Department of Defense and foreign allies or partner nations of the United States

63. Report on munitions storage facility upkeep and upgrades

    This section requires the Secretary of the Army to send Congress a report within 180 days. The report must cover how the military stores conventional weapons, both inside and outside the United States. It must describe the current condition of all storage facilities. It must note what share of facilities meet safety and storage standards. It must also note what share of storage space holds outdated munitions. The report must assess whether climate-controlled storage is sufficient for current and future needs. It must identify gaps in storage capacity by location. It must outline a plan to coordinate storage needs across all military branches. Finally, it must explain how storage will keep up with new munitions purchases approved by the Munitions Acceleration Council. The report can be unclassified but may include a classified section to protect sensitive information.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense, the Army, and combatant command leaders are directly affected. It also affects defense contractors and communities near military storage installations.

    Tradeoff

    Producing this report requires time and resources from the Army, but it may help Congress and military planners find and fix gaps in weapons storage before they become safety or readiness problems.

    Show the exact bill text

    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 on the strategy of the Department of Defense to maintain and upgrade conventional munitions storage facilities (both in the continental United States and outside the continental United States) in order to ensure the safe, effective, and long-term storage of current and future conventional munitions inventories.

64. Review and update of military air traffic control systems

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to study all military air traffic control systems operating in U.S. airspace. The study must look at the condition of buildings and equipment, find any problems, and estimate the cost and time to fix them. It must also check how well modernization efforts are going and what barriers exist. The study must check whether military systems line up with the FAA's own modernization plans. A full report and a modernization plan must be sent to Congress within 180 days of the bill becoming law. After that, the Secretary must send an update report every year.

    Who this affects

    The Department of Defense and all branches of the military that run air traffic control systems inside the United States. Congress receives the reports.

    Tradeoff

    The review could lead to better and safer military air traffic systems, but producing the study and carrying out upgrades will cost government money and staff time.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a risk assessment to evaluate the air traffic control systems owned and operated by any entity of the Department of Defense and operated within the airspace of the United States and develop a modernization plan to update those systems.

65. Minimum capital investment required at three Army depots

    This section adds three Army depots to a list in federal law. The depots added are Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky, Sierra Army Depot in California, and Hawthorne Army Depot in Nevada. Being on this list means the government must spend a minimum amount of money each year on capital improvements at each depot. That requirement already applied to other depots. Now it applies to these three as well.

    Who this affects

    Workers and operations at Blue Grass, Sierra, and Hawthorne Army Depots are affected. The Department of Defense must now meet minimum annual investment rules at these three facilities.

    Tradeoff

    Requiring minimum capital investment keeps these depots in better condition, but it commits defense spending to these specific locations each year regardless of other budget priorities.

    Show the exact bill text

    (J) Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky. (K) Sierra Army Depot, California. (L) Hawthorne Army Depot, Nevada.

66. Military working dog welfare improvements

    This section requires the Secretary of the Air Force to act on recommendations from a 2026 Inspector General report about military working dog welfare. The report, numbered DODIG-2026-057, reviewed how the military manages the health and care of its working dogs. The Secretary has one year from the law's passage to carry out each recommendation. If the Secretary decides not to follow a recommendation, the Secretary must send a written explanation to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees within that same one-year period.

    Who this affects

    The Air Force, which oversees the military working dog program, is directly affected. Military working dogs and the personnel who care for them are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Requiring action on the Inspector General's findings may improve animal welfare, but it also places new administrative and operational demands on the Air Force.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and except as provided in subsection (b), the Secretary of the Air Force shall implement each recommendation of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense contained in the report dated February 17, 2026, and entitled, Evaluation of the DoD Military Working Dog Program's Management of Canine Welfare (DODIG–2026–057).

67. Ban on certain connected vehicles at military bases

    This section bans some internet-connected vehicles from entering military bases and other Defense Department property. The ban happens in two steps. Starting July 1, 2027, vehicles already banned under existing federal rules (15 CFR part 791) are prohibited. Starting January 1, 2029, a broader ban adds vehicles linked to foreign entities of concern that pose security or sabotage risks. The Defense Secretary must build a public list of banned vehicles and review it every year. Before any ban takes effect, the Secretary must certify to Congress that the military has the staff and tools to enforce it. If not ready, the Secretary must explain why and give a timeline. Owners of newly banned vehicles get at least 180 days' notice before losing access. The Secretary can grant waivers for operational or security reasons and must tell Congress within 30 days of doing so.

    Who this affects

    Anyone who drives a connected vehicle onto a military base, including service members, military families, retirees, and civilian employees. Vehicle manufacturers and suppliers with ties to foreign entities of concern are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    The ban may improve security against foreign surveillance and sabotage, but it could limit base access for military families and employees who own affected vehicles.

    Show the exact bill text

    After July 1, 2027, no connected vehicle designated under paragraph (2) may be operated on a military installation or on any other property of the Department of Defense.

68. Travel budget freeze for the Office of the Secretary of Defense

    This section blocks 75 percent of the Office of the Secretary of Defense's travel money for fiscal year 2027 until the Secretary of Defense completes seven specific actions. Those actions include: following earlier reporting rules about service member quality of life, sending Congress the procedures used to notify it about sensitive military activities, certifying that certain oversight rules have been put in place, handing over an unredacted investigation ordered by the head of Special Operations Command, submitting unredacted civilian harm reports for several specific strikes in Yemen and Iran, sending a report on allied support to Ukraine, and providing unedited video of strikes against terrorist groups in the Southern Command's area. Until all seven are done, only 25 percent of travel funds can be spent. Starting 30 days after the bill becomes law, the Defense Department's top budget official must report every 30 days on how much of the travel money has been spent, until all required items are delivered.

    Who this affects

    The Office of the Secretary of Defense is directly affected by the spending freeze. Members of Congress on the Armed Services and Intelligence committees receive the required documents.

    Tradeoff

    The freeze gives Congress leverage to receive oversight documents, but it also limits routine travel spending for defense officials until all seven conditions are met.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 25 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense carries out the following

69. Travel funds withheld until Air Force briefs Congress on MIT Lincoln Laboratory project

    This section holds back 15 percent of the Air Force Secretary's office travel budget for fiscal year 2027. The money stays frozen until the Secretary gives Congress an unclassified briefing about the West Lab Project at MIT's Lincoln Laboratory. The briefing must cover the project's current status, construction timelines, and costs by phase and year. It must also explain any delays, including what caused them and how they affect cost and schedule. Finally, the Secretary must present a plan to award a construction contract by June 2027 and finish construction by June 2029.

    Who this affects

    The Secretary of the Air Force and staff who use travel funds from that office. It also affects work at MIT's Lincoln Laboratory that the Department of Defense funds.

    Tradeoff

    Congress gets more oversight of a delayed construction project, but the Air Force Secretary's office loses access to 15 percent of its travel budget until the briefing is delivered.

    Show the exact bill text

    not more than 85 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of the Air Force provides to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives an unclassified briefing on— (1) the status of the West Lab Project at the Lincoln Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

70. Renaming of military bases and assets in Virginia

    This section tells the Secretary of Defense to rename certain military assets in Virginia. The names must match what a special commission already recommended. The commission was created by a 2021 defense law. The Secretary has 30 days after this bill becomes law to carry out the name changes. Once the new names are set, the Secretary cannot change them to anything else.

    Who this affects

    Military bases, installations, and other Defense Department assets located in Virginia. Anyone who lives near, works at, or has ties to those assets is affected.

    Tradeoff

    The name changes follow an established process, but the Secretary of Defense loses the ability to choose different names in the future.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act the Secretary of Defense shall implement the naming recommendations for assets of the Department of Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia that were adopted by the Commission.

71. Deadlines for military airspace review of development projects

    This section sets strict time limits on how long the Pentagon can take to review projects that may affect military air operations or base readiness. The review office, called the Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Clearinghouse, handles these reviews. If a project might harm military operations, the Pentagon must finish its review and issue a final decision within 180 days of receiving the application. If the project poses no likely harm, the Pentagon must decide within five days of completing its early review. The Pentagon cannot pause or restart these clocks just because it wants more information or because talks about reducing harm are still ongoing. If a deadline is missed, the delay is automatically considered unreasonable. For projects already in the review process before this law passes, the Pentagon has 90 days from the law's enactment, or 180 days from when it first received the application, whichever is later.

    Who this affects

    Developers or applicants seeking federal approval for projects near military air installations, and the Department of Defense office that reviews those projects.

    Tradeoff

    Faster, predictable review timelines help applicants plan projects sooner, but strict deadlines could pressure reviewers to rush complex national security assessments.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary may not extend, restart, or otherwise delay a deadline established under this subsection based on requests for additional information, recharacterization of previously identified issues, ongoing mitigation discussions, or the absence of an executed mitigation agreement.

72. Active duty military personnel limits for 2027

    This section sets the maximum number of active duty troops allowed in each military branch as of September 30, 2027. The Army may have up to 469,000 troops. The Navy may have up to 356,600. The Marine Corps may have up to 173,700. The Air Force may have up to 330,400. The Space Force may have up to 13,200. These numbers are called "end strengths" and act as a cap on how many people can be on active duty at the end of the fiscal year.

    Who this affects

    Active duty service members in all five branches of the U.S. military. Military recruiters and commanders must stay within these limits when managing troop levels.

    Tradeoff

    Setting firm caps keeps military spending predictable, but it also limits commanders' ability to quickly grow the force if needs change before the next authorization.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for active duty personnel as of September 30, 2027, as follows: (1) The Army, 469,000. (2) The Navy, 356,600. (3) The Marine Corps, 173,700. (4) The Air Force, 330,400. (5) The Space Force, 13,200.

73. Reserve force size limits for fiscal year 2027

    This section sets the maximum number of part-time reserve troops allowed in each branch as of September 30, 2027. The Army National Guard can have up to 331,300 members. The Army Reserve can have up to 172,000. The Navy Reserve is capped at 56,500. The Marine Corps Reserve limit is 34,700. The Air National Guard can have up to 107,400. The Air Force Reserve is capped at 67,400. The Coast Guard Reserve limit is 8,500. The section also includes two automatic adjustments. If some reservists are called to active duty at year end, the cap for that branch goes down by that number. If reservists are released from active duty during the year, the cap goes back up by the same number.

    Who this affects

    Members of the seven military reserve components and the National Guard. It also affects military planners who manage staffing levels across branches.

    Tradeoff

    Setting firm troop ceilings helps control personnel costs, but it limits flexibility to grow reserve forces quickly if needs change.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as of September 30, 2027, as follows: (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 331,300. (2) The Army Reserve, 172,000. (3) The Navy Reserve, 56,500. (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 34,700. (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 107,400. (6) The Air Force Reserve, 67,400. (7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 8,500.

74. Full-time reserve support staff limits for fiscal year 2027

    This section sets the maximum number of reserve members allowed to serve on full-time duty as of September 30, 2027. These reservists do not serve in combat roles. Instead, they handle organizing, recruiting, training, and administering their reserve units. The allowed numbers are: 31,154 for the Army National Guard, 16,511 for the Army Reserve, 10,649 for the Navy Reserve, 2,400 for the Marine Corps Reserve, 25,533 for the Air National Guard, and 6,278 for the Air Force Reserve. The Department of Defense must honor any agreements already made with states about staffing levels. It may also use existing flexibility rules to meet these numbers if needed.

    Who this affects

    Reserve members who work full-time in support and administrative roles within their reserve units. It also affects states that have existing agreements with the Pentagon about how many of these full-time slots they receive.

    Tradeoff

    Setting firm caps keeps personnel costs predictable, but it limits flexibility if a reserve component needs more full-time staff than the cap allows.

    Show the exact bill text

    the reserve components of the Armed Forces are authorized, as of September 30, 2027, the following number of Reserves to be serving on full-time active duty or full-time duty, in the case of members of the National Guard, for the purpose of organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components

75. Minimum staffing levels for military technicians in reserve units

    This section sets the minimum number of military technicians (dual status) that must be employed in four reserve components at the end of fiscal year 2027. These are civilian employees who also hold a military rank in the same unit they work for. The required minimums are: 20,037 for the Army National Guard, 5,870 for the Army Reserve, 10,824 for the Air National Guard, and 6,450 for the Air Force Reserve. No more than 25 percent of those positions may be filled on a temporary basis. The section also protects these workers from being pressured by a state to change their status or convert to a different military role. If a technician refuses such a change, no action may be taken against them or their position.

    Who this affects

    Military technicians (dual status) serving in Army and Air Force reserve components, and the states that oversee National Guard units.

    Tradeoff

    Setting minimum staffing floors keeps reserve unit readiness stable, but it limits flexibility for states and the military to reorganize or reduce these positions.

    Show the exact bill text

    Under no circumstances may a military technician (dual status) employed under the authority of this section be coerced by a State into accepting an offer of realignment or conversion to any other military status, including as a member of the Active, Guard, and Reserve component.

76. Limits on reserve troops called to active duty for operations

    This section sets the maximum number of reserve troops allowed on full-time operational active duty at any one time during 2027. Each reserve branch has its own cap. The Army National Guard cap is 17,000. The Army Reserve cap is 13,000. The Navy Reserve cap is 6,200. The Marine Corps Reserve cap is 3,000. The Air National Guard cap is 16,000. The Air Force Reserve cap is 14,000. These limits apply to operational support duty, which is when reserve members are called up to help with ongoing military missions.

    Who this affects

    Members of the six reserve and National Guard components who could be called to full-time operational active duty. It also affects military planners who must stay within these caps.

    Tradeoff

    The caps give Congress control over how many reservists are used for active missions, but they could limit the military's flexibility if demand for personnel rises unexpectedly.

    Show the exact bill text

    the maximum number of members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who may be serving at any time on full-time operational support duty under section 115(b) of title 10, United States Code, is the following: (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 17,000. (2) The Army Reserve, 13,000. (3) The Navy Reserve, 6,200. (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 3,000. (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 16,000. (6) The Air Force Reserve, 14,000.

77. Military personnel funding authorization

    This section sets aside money for military personnel costs in fiscal year 2027. The exact dollar amount is listed in a separate funding table (section 4401) in the bill. The section also states that this authorization replaces any other authorization for the same purpose in 2027, whether that authorization was for a fixed amount or an open-ended amount. In short, this section is the single official source of spending authority for military personnel that year.

    Who this affects

    Active-duty service members, reservists, and other military personnel whose pay and benefits are funded by this authorization. It also affects the Department of Defense agencies that manage those funds.

    Tradeoff

    Consolidating all military personnel funding into one authorization makes the budget clearer, but it also means any other funding source for this purpose in 2027 is canceled, leaving no backup if the amount turns out to be too low.

    Show the exact bill text

    The authorization of appropriations in the subsection (a) supersedes any other authorization of appropriations (definite or indefinite) for such purpose for fiscal year 2027.

78. Congress must be told when an officer's promotion is delayed

    This section changes the law about delayed military promotions. Right now, the Secretary of Defense can delay an officer's promotion without quickly telling Congress why. Under this change, the Secretary must notify the congressional defense committees within 30 days of delaying any promotion. The notice must explain the reason for the delay, including any concerns or adverse information. It must also state how long the delay is expected to last and the status of any review or investigation. A second change removes language that let the military skip giving written notice to the officer before the promotion's effective date.

    Who this affects

    Military officers whose promotions are delayed, and the congressional defense committees who will now receive timely reports on those delays.

    Tradeoff

    Congress gains faster oversight of delayed promotions, but the Secretary of Defense must now disclose sensitive investigation details within a fixed 30-day window.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense committees of such delay not later than 30 days after the date on which the delay is imposed. Such notification shall include— (A) the reason for the delay, including a description of any adverse information or basis for concern; (B) the anticipated duration of the delay; (C) the status of any review or investigation associated with the delay

79. Temporary pause on officer promotions

    This section gives the Secretary of Defense the power to pause an officer's promotion or nomination for up to 30 days. After 30 days, the Secretary must do one of three things: move the promotion forward, permanently remove the officer from consideration due to confirmed misconduct, or explain in writing why the pause should continue. If the pause goes beyond 30 days, Congress must be notified in writing with a detailed explanation. The section also makes clear that it does not take away the President's existing power to remove an officer from a promotion list.

    Who this affects

    Military officers who are being nominated or considered for promotion. The Secretary of Defense and relevant military branch secretaries are also directly involved.

    Tradeoff

    The pause gives leadership time to review misconduct concerns before a promotion goes through, but it also means an officer's career can be delayed or blocked before any final finding is made.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary may temporarily withhold the forwarding or processing of an officer nomination or promotion recommendation for not more than 30 days.

80. Extended authority for early military discharges

    This section updates a law that allows the military to discharge enlisted members early. The old law covered a window from October 1, 2015 to October 1, 2019. This section moves that window to October 1, 2025 through October 1, 2030. That gives military branch leaders the option to let some service members leave before their contracts end during that five-year period.

    Who this affects

    Enlisted military service members who may be eligible for early discharge. Military branch leaders who decide when and whether to use this authority.

    Tradeoff

    Early discharge authority gives the military more flexibility to manage its force size, but it may also mean some service members leave before completing their full term of service.

    Show the exact bill text

    striking October 1, 2015, and ending on October 1, 2019 and inserting October 1, 2025, and ending on October 1, 2030

81. Rules for deciding if a military officer's service was satisfactory at retirement

    This section changes the rules for how the military decides whether an officer's service was 'satisfactory' when setting retirement pay grade. Under current law, the Secretary of Defense or a branch secretary can judge service as unsatisfactory for various reasons. This section adds a new rule: that judgment can only be made if there is 'credible adverse information' against the officer. That information must come from an official investigation. It must be resolved and backed by a preponderance of the evidence (meaning more likely true than not). It must also involve clearly bad conduct, poor integrity, or poor judgment. The section also expands when an officer's retirement can be held pending review, adding 'other administrative actions' to the existing categories of investigations and misconduct. These rules apply to regular officers, reserve officers eligible for retirement pay, and members of the Selected Reserve.

    Who this affects

    Military officers retiring from active service, reserve service, or the Selected Reserve. It also affects the secretaries of the military branches and the Secretary of Defense, who make these retirement grade decisions.

    Tradeoff

    The new standard gives officers more protection against having retirement pay reduced without clear evidence, but it may limit the military's flexibility to act on concerns that do not yet meet the formal evidence threshold.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary concerned, or the Secretary of Defense, as the case may be, may not make a determination that an officer has not performed satisfactory service for purposes of this section unless the officer is the subject of credible adverse information.

82. Retirement rules for certain Navy and Marine Corps warrant officers

    This section changes the retirement rules for certain warrant officers in the Navy and Marine Corps. First, it raises the required years of service before mandatory retirement from 33 years to 35 years for the affected group. Second, it adds a new rule specifically for chief warrant officers at the W-4 grade. Those officers must retire 60 days after they reach 32 years of total active service.

    Who this affects

    Regular Navy warrant officers and Marine Corps Marine Gunner warrant officers, especially those at the W-4 (chief warrant officer) grade.

    Tradeoff

    Raising the general retirement limit lets some warrant officers serve longer, but the new W-4 rule sets an earlier fixed retirement point at 32 years for that specific grade.

    Show the exact bill text

    in paragraph (3), by striking 33 years and inserting 35 years ; and (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: (4) In the case of a regular Navy warrant officer in the grade of chief warrant officer, W–4, or a Marine Corps Marine Gunner warrant officer in such grade, the officer shall be retired 60 days after the date on which the officer completes 32 years of total active service.

83. Permanent professors at the Army War College: ranks and benefits

    This section creates new rules for permanent military professors at the U.S. Army War College. It says these professors must be appointed by the President, with Senate approval. A professor who has served more than six years earns the rank of colonel. A professor from the Regular Army can reach colonel rank earlier, if they would have been promoted sooner through the normal promotion process. Professors with fewer than six years of service hold the rank of lieutenant colonel. The section also lets the Commandant of the Army War College grant unpaid-leave-free breaks to professors and instructors during academic off-periods, meaning they keep their full pay and benefits during those breaks.

    Who this affects

    Permanent military professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and instructors at the U.S. Army War College. It also involves the President and Senate, who gain a formal role in appointing these professors.

    Tradeoff

    Professors gain clearer promotion paths and paid academic breaks, which may improve retention, but the formal Senate confirmation requirement adds a step to the hiring process.

    Show the exact bill text

    A permanent military professor of the United States Army War College, who has served as such a professor for more than six years, has the grade of colonel.

84. Congress must be told when top military officers leave early

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to notify Congress when a top military officer leaves a job before expected. 'Top officers' means four-star and three-star generals and admirals in key positions. The Secretary must send written notice within 5 days of the departure. A more detailed report must follow within 30 days. The report must say why the officer left, who started the action, and whether it involved any investigation. It must also state whether the departure was retaliation for the officer giving honest military assessments. The notice rules apply whether the officer was fired, reassigned, or chose to resign or retire early. Some details can be kept classified if making them public would harm national security. The section does not reduce the President's or Secretary's power to remove officers.

    Who this affects

    Four-star and three-star generals and admirals in important positions are directly affected. The Secretary of Defense and congressional Armed Services committees are also involved.

    Tradeoff

    Congress gains faster information about high-level military departures, but the executive branch keeps full legal authority to remove officers without congressional approval.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 5 days after the relief, removal, reassignment, resignation, retirement, request for retirement, or other separation from position of a covered officer before the expected completion of service in that position, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives written notice of such action.

85. Clarification on counting years of service for Reserve officers in advanced education

    This section updates a law about how the military counts an officer's total years of service. It applies to Reserve officers who delay active duty to attend an approved graduate or professional degree program. The law already excluded that education time from certain service calculations. This section clears up confusing language and adds a clear definition. The new definition explains what a 'service-approved program' means: a military-approved delay of duty for a pre-commissioning graduate (such as an ROTC graduate) to earn a professional degree required for a specialty role in that branch of service.

    Who this affects

    Reserve officers who completed a pre-commissioning program (like ROTC) and were approved to delay military service to earn a professional degree. This includes officers entering fields like medicine, law, or chaplaincy.

    Tradeoff

    The change makes the rules clearer, but officers in programs that do not meet the new definition may find their education time counted differently toward service totals.

    Show the exact bill text

    the term service-approved program means a service-approved educational delay of active duty, active guard and reserve, or selected reserve service for a graduate of a pre-commissioning program, including a Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps program, in order attend an advanced education program to obtain a professional degree that would be required for appointment, designation, or assignment to a professional specialty in such military service.

86. Limits on senior Navy and Marine Corps Reserve members in full-time roles

    This section updates the tables in federal law that set caps on how many full-time reservists can hold senior ranks. It covers Navy Reserve officers at the ranks of Lieutenant Commander, Commander, and Captain. It also covers senior enlisted members in both the Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve. The tables link the total number of full-time reservists to the maximum allowed in each senior grade. As the total grows, the caps rise too, but not at the same rate. For example, if 10,000 Navy Reserve members serve full-time, up to 917 may be Lieutenant Commanders, 467 Commanders, and 151 Captains. The new tables replace the old ones in Title 10 of the U.S. Code.

    Who this affects

    Full-time reservists in the Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve, especially those at or seeking senior officer and enlisted ranks.

    Tradeoff

    Setting firm caps keeps rank structure controlled, but it can also limit how many experienced reservists can be promoted or serve full-time.

    Show the exact bill text

    Total number of members of Navy Reserve serving on full-time reserve component duty: Number of officers who may be serving in the grade of: Lieutenant Command Command Captain 10,000 917 467 151

87. National Guard dual-status technician phase-out

    This section phases out a specific type of National Guard employee called a "military technician (dual status)." These are workers who must hold a military rank to keep their civilian job. The Secretary of Defense can convert their positions to regular federal civilian jobs or to full-time Active Guard and Reserve duty. A state can also receive federal funding to shift a position to a state-level job, with the governor's agreement. No current employee can be converted without giving written consent. Starting October 1, 2028, no new people can be hired into these dual-status roles. The program ends entirely on October 1, 2038, though states can keep some positions if needed for disaster response. Workers within three years of earning a full federal retirement benefit keep their protections after the end date. After October 1, 2048, no Defense Department money can pay any remaining dual-status technician wages.

    Who this affects

    Current National Guard military technicians (dual status) and future applicants for those roles. State governors, the National Guard Bureau, and the Department of Defense are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Ending dual-status technician positions simplifies the workforce structure and saves federal payroll costs, but it removes a long-standing employment path that linked military service with civilian federal jobs in the National Guard.

    Show the exact bill text

    Beginning on October 1, 2028, no individual may be newly hired or employed, or rehired or reemployed, as a National Guard military technician (dual status) under section 709 of title 32, United States Code.

88. Study on expanding Navy Reserve ship maintenance capacity

    This section directs the Secretary of the Navy to study whether existing Navy Reserve maintenance programs can be expanded to handle more ship repair and production work. The two programs under review are the Navy Reserve Engineering Duty Officer Program 29 and the SurgeMain program. Within one year, the Navy must report to Congress on several topics. These include how many extra Reserve personnel would be needed, how to bring advanced industrial skills into the Reserve workforce, and how to use existing training funds. The report must also look at partnerships with trade and vocational schools. A key question is whether Reserve personnel could legally work at private shipyards that hold Defense Department contracts, without taking jobs from civilian workers or disrupting labor agreements.

    Who this affects

    Navy Reserve personnel who do maintenance and repair work. Private shipyard workers and shipyards with Defense Department contracts are also involved.

    Tradeoff

    Using Reserve personnel to fill shipyard backlogs could speed up ship repairs, but it risks displacing skilled civilian workers or disrupting existing labor agreements.

    Show the exact bill text

    An assessment of a legal and operational framework to allow Navy Reserve personnel to support production and maintenance backlogs at private shipyards holding Department of Defense contracts, including an assessment of labor relations, collective bargaining considerations, potential impacts on civilian overtime, recruitment, and retention, and requirements to ensure Reserve personnel supplement rather than displace skilled private-sector workers.

89. Remote check-in and check-out for military moves and separations

    This section tells each military department to build systems so troops and civilian employees can handle paperwork online when they move to a new base, leave the military, or retire. People would fill out forms and sign documents digitally instead of doing it all in person. The goal is to cut down the hours spent on that paperwork. Commanders and employees would also get online access to their records. Starting by September 30, 2027, and each year through 2030, each military department must brief Congress on how the rollout is going, how long the process took before and after the change, any problems they ran into, and any plans to improve the system.

    Who this affects

    Active-duty service members and civilian employees of the Army, Navy, and Air Force (including the Marine Corps and Space Force) who are moving to a new duty station, separating from the military, or retiring.

    Tradeoff

    Online processing could save time for service members and staff, but building and maintaining new digital systems requires money and effort, and some tasks may not transfer easily to a remote format.

    Show the exact bill text

    permit covered personnel to complete in-processing and out-processing requirements remotely, including through the use of electronic forms and digital signatures; reduce the number of hours required for in-processing and out-processing associated with a permanent change of station, separation, or retirement

90. Permanent extension of non-medical counseling for military families

    This section removes the expiration date on a program that provides non-medical counseling to military families. Before this change, the authority for that counseling program was set to end on a specific date. By striking the paragraph that contained that end date, the program is made permanent. Military families can continue to receive counseling services without Congress needing to renew the program again.

    Who this affects

    Military service members and their families who use non-medical counseling services provided by the Department of Defense.

    Tradeoff

    Families keep access to counseling without interruption, but the program now continues without a built-in review date that would prompt Congress to evaluate its effectiveness.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 1781(d) of title 10, United States Code, is amended— (1) by striking paragraph (4); and (2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4).

91. Privacy rules for announcing military promotions and assignments

    This section requires the Secretary of Defense to issue new or updated rules by March 1, 2027. The rules cover when personal information about service members can be shared publicly. This includes announcements about promotions, command selections, and board results. The rules must create safeguards to reduce security and counterintelligence risks. They must pay special attention to members in sensitive or high-risk units, such as special operations forces. The rules must also set review steps before information is released, and apply the same standards across all military branches. The Secretary still keeps the final say over what gets released under existing law.

    Who this affects

    Active-duty service members, especially those in special operations or other sensitive units. Military public affairs offices that handle official announcements are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Stronger privacy protections may reduce security risks for service members, but could also limit the public's ability to see information about military promotions and leadership changes.

    Show the exact bill text

    establish appropriate safeguards to mitigate security and counterintelligence risks associated with the public disclosure of personally identifiable information

92. Freeze on staffing cuts at military personnel review agencies

    This section extends a rule that stops the military from cutting staff at service review agencies. These agencies handle things like correcting military records and reviewing personnel decisions. The current rule was set to expire on December 31, 2025. This bill moves that expiration date to December 31, 2031. It also resets the staffing baseline to January 1, 2026, meaning agencies must keep at least as many people as they had on that date. Finally, it adds the Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards to the list of covered agencies.

    Who this affects

    Military members and veterans who use service review agencies to appeal personnel decisions or correct their records. It also affects the civilian and military staff who work at those agencies.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping staffing levels stable protects the capacity to process reviews, but it limits the military's flexibility to reassign or reduce personnel at these offices for six more years.

    Show the exact bill text

    in subsection (a), by striking December 31, 2025 and inserting December 31, 2031

93. Extension of military recruitment incentive authority

    This section extends a program that lets the military offer extra incentives to attract new recruits. The program was set to expire on December 31, 2025. This change moves that expiration date to December 31, 2028. The extension gives the military three more years to use these special recruiting tools.

    Who this affects

    Military branches seeking to meet recruiting goals, and potential recruits who may be eligible for extra incentives.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the authority keeps recruiting tools available longer, but also extends the period during which the government may spend money on those added incentives.

    Show the exact bill text

    amended by striking December 31, 2025 and inserting December 31, 2028

94. Discharge review relief for veterans with PTSD, brain injury, or military sexual trauma

    This section updates the law that governs military discharge review boards. It spells out what a board can do when a veteran asks for relief based on post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, or military sexual trauma. The board can upgrade how a discharge is labeled. It can also fix the written reason for separation, the separation code, or the re-enlistment code. If the board denies part of a request, it must first give the evidence a 'liberal consideration,' meaning it leans toward helping the veteran. If a veteran also asks to be reclassified as disabled under the military disability system, the board must use the same standards the military uses today for active-duty members going through the Disability Evaluation System. Veterans who ask for several types of relief at once can still get the non-disability parts reviewed under the more favorable liberal consideration standard.

    Who this affects

    Veterans who were discharged and believe their PTSD, traumatic brain injury, or military sexual trauma was not properly considered. It also affects the military boards that review discharge records.

    Tradeoff

    Veterans get clearer paths to correct their records, but disability retirement requests face a stricter review standard than other types of relief.

    Show the exact bill text

    a board established under subsection (a)(1) may— (A) grant a claimant's request to upgrade the characterization of a discharge or dismissal; (B) grant a claimant's request to correct the following for a discharge or dismissal: the narrative reason for separation, the separation code, and the re-enlistment code; and (C) deny any part of the claimant's application for relief after liberal consideration of the evidence of record.

95. Stronger whistleblower protections for military members

    This section updates existing law to protect military whistleblowers in two new ways. First, it adds retaliatory security clearance reviews to the list of forbidden actions. Second, it adds retaliatory psychiatric or mental health exams to that same list. In other words, a commander cannot order a security clearance review or a mental health exam just to punish someone for reporting wrongdoing. The section also says that nondisclosure agreements cannot be used to take away these protections. A service member who signed such an agreement can still report concerns without losing their legal protections.

    Who this affects

    Military service members who report wrongdoing. It also affects commanders and officials who oversee security clearances and medical evaluations.

    Tradeoff

    Broader whistleblower protections may limit commanders' flexibility to order security or medical reviews, even when those reviews might be pursued for legitimate reasons.

    Show the exact bill text

    (vi) The conducting of, or a threat to order, a retaliatory security clearance review. (vii) The conducting of, or a threat to order, a retaliatory psychiatric examination, mental health evaluation, psychological assessment, or other medical testing or examination.

96. Military recruiting data collection from prospective recruits

    This section lets military branches collect personal data from people who might join the armed forces. The person must be at least 17 years old. A 17-year-old also needs a parent's consent. Before collecting data, the military must explain why it is collecting the data and how it will be used. The person can set preferences about what they share. Data can be collected through military recruiting websites using cookies or similar tools. The data collected can include names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, birth dates, fitness activity, IP addresses, and social media handles. The military cannot keep this data for more than 3 years. This authority ends on December 31, 2031.

    Who this affects

    People age 17 and older who interact with military recruiting websites or platforms. Parents of 17-year-olds are also affected, since their consent is required.

    Tradeoff

    The military gains a formal, consent-based way to track and target potential recruits online, but individuals must share personal and digital data that is stored for up to 3 years.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary concerned may collect Prospective Recruit Information with respect to prospective recruits for the Armed Forces who are at least 17 years of age for the purpose of enhancing marketing, advertising, and outreach to possible prospective recruits for recruitment for service in the Armed Forces.

97. Professional athlete service options for military academy graduates

    Right now, graduates of the Army, Navy, and Air Force academies must complete an active-duty service obligation before playing professional sports. This section changes that rule. Graduates must still wait two years after graduating before becoming professional athletes. After that wait, each academy's Secretary can allow up to 10 graduates per year to skip active duty and play professional sports early. Those graduates must join the Reserve component instead of active duty. They must serve in the Selected Reserve for up to 10 years. They must also help with military recruiting, public affairs, or other activities. The Secretary can waive the 10-person cap if it is in the national interest and brings clear benefit to the military. If a graduate finishes their sports career early, the Secretary can require active-duty service, but total combined service cannot go beyond 10 years. If a graduate fails to meet their obligations and cannot continue serving, the Secretary can require them to pay back some or all of the cost of their academy education.

    Who this affects

    Graduates of the U.S. Military Academy (West Point), U.S. Naval Academy, and U.S. Air Force Academy who have the opportunity to become professional athletes. It also affects the military branches that recruit from these academies.

    Tradeoff

    This gives talented athletes a path to play professionally while still serving in the Reserve, but it means fewer academy graduates will serve on active duty during their early careers.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary may authorize not more than 10 cadets during any academic year to obtain employment as a professional athlete before completing the active-duty service obligation otherwise required under this subsection.

98. Merit-only standard for military personnel decisions

    This section says that promotions, assignments, command selections, and school selections in the military must be based only on individual merit, fitness, capability, and performance. It bans the use of a person's sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin in those decisions. There is one narrow exception: a commander can consider race, ethnicity, or national origin when picking personnel for specific unconventional missions in foreign countries, if the local population environment makes that relevant to mission success. Any such exception must be approved by the relevant combatant commander. Within 60 days, the Secretary of Defense must report the mission details, staffing, demographics used, and rationale to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees.

    Who this affects

    All active military personnel being considered for promotions, assignments, command roles, or school selection. Combatant commanders and the Secretary of Defense have new approval and reporting duties for the narrow exception.

    Tradeoff

    The rule removes demographic factors from most personnel decisions, but retains a limited opening for commanders to use those factors in special foreign missions, which requires oversight reporting to Congress.

    Show the exact bill text

    Any Department of Defense military personnel action related to promotions, nominative assignments, command selection, and military and civil schooling selection shall be based exclusively on individual merit, fitness, capability, and performance.

99. Sex-based rules for sports and privacy spaces at military academies and DoD schools

    This section directs the Secretary of Defense to set two types of rules at the military service academies (Army, Navy, and Air Force) and all Department of Defense K-12 schools. First, it bars students who are biologically male from competing in sports or activities designated for women or girls. Males may still train or practice with women's teams, but only if no female student loses a roster spot, playing time, scholarship, or other benefit. Second, it requires all multi-person restrooms and changing rooms to be labeled for either males or females, with steps taken to keep people out of the opposite sex's space. Single-occupancy restrooms and changing rooms are still allowed. Sleeping quarters must be offered by sex, though temporary mixed arrangements are allowed during training exercises or deployments. Exceptions also cover maintenance staff, medical workers, childcare providers, emergency responders, and coaches entering changing rooms when no one is undressed.

    Who this affects

    Students at West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy, plus students and staff at all Department of Defense K-12 schools worldwide. Transgender and intersex students are most directly affected by these rules.

    Tradeoff

    The rules aim to preserve sex-separated spaces and competition for female students, but they restrict how transgender male students may participate in school life.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force Academy, and all primary and secondary schools under the control of the Department of Defense, including the Department of Defense Education Activity Schools, do not permit a person enrolled at such an Academy or school whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity that is designated for women or girls.

100. Changes to diversity, equity, and inclusion rules in the military

     This section makes three changes to existing military law. First, it removes sentences that required promotion selection boards to include diverse members. Second, it repeals a law about pronoun use policy in the military. Third, it changes what topics must be covered in military human relations training. The current law requires that training include certain topics related to diversity. This section replaces that list with four values: honor, excellence, courage, and commitment.

     Who this affects

     Military officers who serve on promotion boards, service members subject to pronoun policies, and all military personnel who receive human relations training.

     Tradeoff

     Supporters say the changes focus the military on shared values and remove policies they view as unnecessary, while critics may argue the changes reduce efforts to ensure fair representation and inclusive practices.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 986 of title 10, United States Code, is repealed.

101. Sex-neutral military job performance standards

     This section updates a 1994 law about military job standards. It replaces the word 'gender' with 'sex' throughout the law. It adds a new rule: any service member who meets the job standards must be eligible for that job, assignment, and continued service. Differential standards based on sex are not allowed. The section also expands what job standards must cover. Before, the law focused only on physical requirements. Now it also covers technical, tactical, and cognitive abilities. A new clause states that the military may still update job standards, as long as the new standards are based on real mission needs and applied equally regardless of sex.

     Who this affects

     All current and future military service members who seek qualification or assignment in any occupational career field.

     Tradeoff

     The change locks in equal standards for all service members, which limits the military's flexibility to set different requirements by sex, but adds a clause allowing standard revisions if they are mission-based and applied equally.

     Show the exact bill text

     shall ensure that any member of the Armed Forces who meets the occupational standards for such occupational career field shall be eligible for qualification, assignment, and continuance in that occupational career field without differential standards or evaluation on the basis of sex

102. Review of military 'revenge porn' law

     This section directs the Secretary of Defense to study a possible change to military law. Right now, sharing someone's intimate images without consent is a crime under military law only if the act has a clear connection to a military mission or military environment. This section asks whether that requirement should be removed. The Secretary must submit a report to Congress by December 31, 2027, with findings and any recommendations.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who share or receive intimate images without consent. Victims of such sharing under military jurisdiction are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Removing the military-connection requirement could make it easier to prosecute offenders, but it may also expand military court jurisdiction into conduct that happens entirely off-duty and away from any military setting.

     Show the exact bill text

     analyze the feasibility and advisability of amending section 917a(a) of title 10, United States Code, (article 117a(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) to remove paragraph (4) (relating to requiring as an element of the offense, conduct [that has] a reasonably direct and palpable connection to a military mission or military environment )

103. Expanded court access for military crime victims

     This section gives crime victims in military cases a new right to appeal. Right now, victims can petition a Court of Criminal Appeals about how their case is handled. This section adds a higher step. Victims can now ask the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to review those lower court decisions. The higher court can only look at legal questions, not factual ones. A victim has 21 days to file that appeal. The clock starts when the victim is notified of the lower court's decision, or when a certified mail copy is sent to their address. These appeals get priority on the higher court's schedule.

     Who this affects

     Victims of crimes tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It also affects military courts and defense counsel in those cases.

     Tradeoff

     Giving victims a new appeal right adds a layer of review that can protect victims, but it may also extend the time it takes to finish a military court case.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may review all decisions or dispositions taken by a Court of Criminal Appeals pursuant to a petition filed by the victim of an offense under this chapter under subsection (e) and on good cause shown.

104. Clarifying when military appeals are fully complete

     This section rewrites a part of military law that defines when a service member's criminal conviction is considered final after appeals. Right now the law is unclear about the steps needed to finish the appeal process. The new text lists specific situations that count as 'done.' A case is finished if the deadline to appeal passes and no appeal is filed. It is also finished if the accused withdraws their appeal. It is also finished if the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces denies or completes the review, and then either no Supreme Court petition is filed in time, the Supreme Court rejects or receives a withdrawn petition, or the Supreme Court finishes its own review. This is a technical fix to make the steps clearer and more precise.

     Who this affects

     Service members who have been convicted under military law and are going through the appeals process. Military courts and legal officials who apply these rules.

     Tradeoff

     Clearer rules make the process more predictable, but the added detail could create new legal arguments about whether a case truly meets one of the listed conditions.

     Show the exact bill text

     The review and time requirements referred to in paragraph (1)(B) are satisfied if any of the following applies: (A) The time for the accused to file a petition for review by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has expired and the accused has not filed a petition for such review in a timely manner and the case is not otherwise under review by that Court.

105. Simplifying review of military court records

     This section changes how military courts-martial records are reviewed when a service member does not appeal their conviction. Under the old rule, a reviewing judge had to write conclusions on several legal matters. This section narrows that list to three specific questions: Did the court have legal authority over the accused and the offense? Did the charge properly describe a crime? Was the sentence within the legal limits? It also fixes a cross-reference error in a related law, pointing to the correct section number.

     Who this affects

     Service members who are convicted at a court-martial and choose not to appeal, and the military judges and legal offices that review those records.

     Tradeoff

     Narrowing the required review makes the process faster and simpler, but it means fewer legal questions are automatically checked when a conviction goes uncontested.

     Show the exact bill text

     in subparagraph (B), by striking conclusions and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting "a conclusion on each of the following matters: (i) Whether the court had jurisdiction over the accused and the offense. (ii) Whether the charge and specification stated an offense. (iii) Whether the sentence was within the limits prescribed as a matter of law."

106. Pretrial agreements for older military justice cases

     This section changes military law to let a special trial counsel make pretrial agreements in cases involving offenses that happened before January 1, 2019. That date is when major military justice reforms took effect. Before this change, the special trial counsel's power to make such deals was less clear for older cases. Under the new rule, if a special trial counsel takes charge of one of these older cases, they can negotiate a pretrial agreement with the accused. The agreement must follow rules set by the President. Once a military judge accepts the deal, it is binding on both sides and on the convening authority, the officer who called the court-martial.

     Who this affects

     Military service members accused of offenses committed before January 1, 2019, and the special trial counsel and military judges handling those cases.

     Tradeoff

     This gives the special trial counsel a clearer path to resolve old cases through agreements, but it also means the convening authority loses some discretion once a judge accepts a deal.

     Show the exact bill text

     If a special trial counsel exercises authority pursuant to subsection (d) over an offense committed before January 1, 2019, the special trial counsel may enter into a pretrial agreement with the accused in accordance with regulations prescribed by the President.

107. Limits on military appeals court review of prison sentences

     This section changes how military appeals courts can review prison sentences handed down by courts-martial. Under current law, a military Court of Criminal Appeals can reduce a sentence if it thinks the confinement portion is too harsh. This section adds a limit: if the president has set a recommended sentencing range for that offense, the appeals court cannot call the prison term too harsh as long as it falls at or below the top of that range. The section also clarifies that only the confinement part of a sentence, not the whole sentence, falls under this review rule.

     Who this affects

     Military service members who are convicted at court-martial and are appealing their prison sentences. It also affects the judges on military Courts of Criminal Appeals.

     Tradeoff

     The change gives sentencing ranges more binding weight on appeal, which adds consistency, but it limits the appeals court's ability to reduce a prison term it might otherwise find too severe.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Court may not consider such portion inappropriately severe if such portion is at or below the upper range of such sentencing parameter

108. Expanded subpoena power for military investigations

     This section updates the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It adds subpoenas as a tool military investigators can use to get electronic communications records. Before this change, investigators could only use warrants or court orders for that purpose. Now they can also use investigative subpoenas. A subpoena is generally easier and faster to obtain than a warrant or court order. The change applies both before a case is formally referred for trial and during the investigation phase.

     Who this affects

     Military investigators and prosecutors who seek electronic communications records. People under military investigation whose digital records may be sought.

     Tradeoff

     Giving investigators a faster path to electronic records may speed up military cases, but it also makes it easier to access a person's private communications with less judicial oversight than a warrant requires.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking may issue warrants or court orders and inserting may issue warrants, court orders, or investigative subpoenas

109. Legal help for domestic violence victims in the military

     This section expands a military legal program called Special Victims' Counsel. Right now, that program gives free legal help to military members who are victims of sex-related offenses. This section adds domestic violence victims to that same program. The change takes effect two years after the law passes. Within one year of passage, the Defense Secretary must brief Congress on how the military plans to carry out these changes. The section also updates the official job title 'domestic abuse advocate' to 'domestic abuse victim advocate' and adds that role to a list of people who can work with the program.

     Who this affects

     Military service members and their families who are victims of domestic violence. It also affects domestic abuse victim advocates working within the military.

     Tradeoff

     More victims get free legal help, but expanding the program will require more funding and trained attorneys.

     Show the exact bill text

     in the section heading, by inserting domestic violence and before sex-related offenses

110. Study on making hazing a military crime

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to study whether hazing should be added to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the military's legal code. The study must look at three options: making hazing a factor that increases a sentence for other crimes, making it a lesser charge under the existing cruelty and maltreatment article, or creating a brand-new standalone hazing crime. The study must also propose a clear definition of hazing. Within 270 days of the law passing, the Secretary must send a report to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees. If the study recommends against adding hazing as its own crime, the report must explain why.

     Who this affects

     Military service members who commit or experience hazing. It also involves the Secretary of Defense and military legal officials who would carry out the study.

     Tradeoff

     Adding hazing to the UCMJ could give commanders clearer legal tools to punish it, but defining and codifying hazing takes time and may complicate existing military justice rules.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice, shall analyze the feasibility and advisability of, and develop recommendations with respect to, modifying chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice) to provide for one or more of the following changes

111. Notify victims when military protective orders are issued or ended

     This section changes an existing law about military protective orders. Right now, when the military issues or ends a protective order, only civilian law enforcement is notified. This section adds a new requirement. In cases involving domestic abuse or sexual assault, the military must also notify the victim or the person who asked for the order. The change applies both when an order is issued and when it is terminated.

     Who this affects

     Military members involved in domestic abuse or sexual assault cases, and their victims or the individuals who requested protective orders.

     Tradeoff

     Victims gain direct notice of protective order changes, but the military takes on additional notification duties that require tracking and contacting victims.

     Show the exact bill text

     in subsection (a), by inserting and, in a case involving domestic abuse or sexual assault, the victim or requesting individual, after appropriate civilian authorities

112. Military domestic violence emergency housing policy

     This section directs the Secretary of Defense to create a policy for handling domestic violence reports on military bases. Under the policy, commanders must first decide whether a report or complaint seems credible. If it does, and after consulting with the victim, the commander should issue a military protective order. The commander should also move the victim and the accused into separate housing when possible. Within 90 days of the law passing, the Department of Defense must brief Congress on any extra authorities needed to carry out this policy. The briefing must also cover a plan to keep housing benefits available to domestic violence victims for up to 180 days.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty military members who are victims or accused in domestic violence cases. Commanders on military installations are directly responsible for carrying out the policy.

     Tradeoff

     The policy gives victims faster access to housing separation and protection, but it also places the initial credibility judgment in the hands of a unit commander rather than a trained investigator.

     Show the exact bill text

     If the report is deemed credible, in consultation with the victim, the commander should— (1) impose military protective orders; and (2) whenever practicable, separate the victim and the alleged offender into separate housing

113. Annual report on the military legal system review

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to send Congress a yearly report each December from 2027 through 2031. The report must cover a review of the military legal system that began in May 2026. It must include what a special review panel found and recommended. It must also describe any changes made based on those recommendations. Specific topics include how changes affect the independence of military prosecutors, how military and civilian legal jobs are being split, and how the military legal system compares to the Justice Department and state courts. The report must be unclassified, though a classified section can be added if needed. The Secretary must also brief Congress within 30 days of making any changes based on the review.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense, military lawyers (Judge Advocates General), and military prosecutors called special trial counsel are most directly affected. Congress receives the reports and briefings.

     Tradeoff

     More oversight and transparency about legal system changes could help Congress spot problems, but it also adds reporting work for the Department each year.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than December 1, 2027, and annually thereafter by December 1 through 2031, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive report on the findings, recommendations, and implementation status of the Department-wide review of the military legal system.

114. Clarifying military court authority over certain reserve-duty offenses

     This section updates two parts of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). First, it clarifies that reserve and National Guard members can be ordered to active duty to face military justice for offenses that happened during specific travel or duty periods connected to inactive-duty training, not just during the training itself. Second, it extends military court jurisdiction to cover those same specific periods. In short, it fills a gap so that service members cannot avoid military charges simply because an offense happened during a closely related period that was not the training session itself.

     Who this affects

     Reserve component and National Guard members who commit offenses during periods connected to inactive-duty training. Military prosecutors and defense attorneys are also affected by the change in jurisdiction.

     Tradeoff

     Broader military court jurisdiction means more reserve members can be held accountable under military law, but it also means more service members may face military proceedings rather than civilian courts for conduct during those periods.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 802(d)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code (article 2(d)(2)(B) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by inserting or during a period specified in subsection (a)(3)(B) after on inactive-duty training .

115. Political speech protections for retired military members

     This section changes who the military justice system can punish for certain kinds of speech. Right now, retired military members can still face military court rules, called the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). This section says that retired members who are not on active duty and not in uniform cannot be punished under the UCMJ for political speech. That includes statements about government officials, their actions, their character, or their qualifications. It also covers statements about what the law says. Two groups stay under full UCMJ rules: retired members who are called back to active duty, and any retired member who is wearing a military uniform at the time of the speech.

     Who this affects

     Retired military members who remain subject to the UCMJ. It does not change rules for active-duty service members.

     Tradeoff

     Retired members gain protection from military prosecution for political speech, but they lose that protection the moment they put on a uniform.

     Show the exact bill text

     the provisions of subchapter X shall not be applicable to any— (A) conduct of such members which constitutes or pertains to political speech; (B) expressions pertaining to the actions, character, motivations, qualifications, or other attributes of government officials; or (C) statements of the law.

116. Limits on reorganizing college ROTC units

     This section places rules on how the Army, Navy, and Air Force can change their college ROTC units. Before closing, merging, or restructuring a unit, the military branch must brief Congress and wait 90 days. That briefing must cover which positions will be cut, the effect on officer recruitment, expected costs or savings, how many students are affected, and any changes to their scholarships. The section also requires that students already receiving ROTC scholarships can finish their officer training without having to transfer to a different college.

     Who this affects

     College students currently enrolled in ROTC programs who receive scholarships or financial assistance. It also affects the Army, Navy, and Air Force when they plan changes to their ROTC units.

     Tradeoff

     Students get protection from being forced to transfer mid-program, but the military must wait at least 90 days after briefing Congress before making any ROTC unit changes.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Air Force may not reorganize a unit of the program of their respective military service until the date that is 90 days after the date on which the Secretary provides to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a briefing with respect to the reorganization of such unit

117. Discharge of Naval Academy midshipmen for bad conduct or poor fit

     This section changes who has the power to dismiss a midshipman from the U.S. Naval Academy for unsatisfactory conduct or inaptitude. Currently, the Superintendent of the Naval Academy and the Academic Board hold that authority. This section moves that authority to the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary can then choose to hand that power down to the Superintendent. So the change moves formal decision-making up one level, from the Academy leadership to a cabinet-level official, while still allowing the Superintendent to act if the Secretary delegates the role.

     Who this affects

     Midshipmen at the U.S. Naval Academy who face dismissal for conduct or fitness issues. It also affects the Superintendent and the Secretary of the Navy in terms of their administrative roles.

     Tradeoff

     Placing dismissal authority with the Secretary of the Navy adds a higher level of oversight, but it also moves the decision farther from the Academy officials who know each case directly.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking Superintendent of the Naval Academy and all that follows through report of the facts— and inserting Secretary of the Navy may discharge a midshipman from the Naval Academy and from the naval service—

118. Fix to a law about veterans moving into public service jobs

     This section corrects a drafting error in a 2019 defense law. That law changed rules about a program that helps military members find public or community service jobs after leaving the military. A small piece of the 2019 law used the wrong phrase, referring only to 'the repeal' instead of 'the amendments.' This section replaces that phrase with the correct one. The fix is written to apply as if it had been part of the original 2019 law from the start.

     Who this affects

     Military servicemembers who are leaving or have left service and may use programs that connect them to public or community service jobs. It also affects how the 2019 law is read and applied.

     Tradeoff

     This is a technical correction with no known policy cost, but applying it retroactively means the 2019 law is treated as always having used the corrected language.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 553(c)(2) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 132 Stat. 1773) is amended by striking The repeal made under paragraph (1) and inserting The amendments made by this section .

119. Waiver of service requirement for military academy graduates attending law school

     Current law lets the military send officers and enlisted members to law school as full-time students. This section makes two changes. First, it raises the cap on how many can attend from 25 to 35 per military branch. Second, it lets the Army, Navy, and Air Force waive the normal two-year minimum service requirement for up to five graduates from each of the three service academies (West Point, the Air Force Academy, and the Naval Academy). This means a recent academy graduate could be sent to law school sooner than the current rules allow.

     Who this affects

     Military officers who are recent graduates of the three U.S. service academies and wish to attend law school while on active duty. It also affects the military departments that manage these programs.

     Tradeoff

     More officers can attend law school sooner, but those officers spend time in school rather than in operational military roles during their early service years.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretaries of the military departments are authorized to waive the time in service minimum of two years in subsection (b)(1)(A)(i) for up to five officers who are graduates of the United States Military Academy established under section 7431 of title 10, United States Code, up to five officers who are graduates of the Air Force Academy established under section 9431 of title 10, United States Code, and up to five officers who are graduates of the Naval Academy established under section 8451 of title 10, United States Code, respectively.

120. Ending automatic re-tests for failing cadets at military academies

     This section removes a rule that gave cadets at the U.S. Military Academy (West Point) and the U.S. Air Force Academy an automatic right to retake a course exam after failing it. Under current law, a cadet who fails an exam must be given another chance to pass. This section deletes that automatic guarantee. Academy officials would still have the power to allow a cadet to retake an exam, but it would no longer be required by law. The change takes effect starting with the first full academic year after the law is signed.

     Who this affects

     Cadets at West Point and the U.S. Air Force Academy who fail a course examination. Academy administrators who set academic policies at both schools.

     Tradeoff

     Academies gain more control over academic standards, but cadets lose a guaranteed second chance to pass a failed exam.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking subsection (b); (2) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b)

121. Longer decision window for expedited transfers at military academies

     This section changes a deadline in federal law for all three military service academies: West Point, the Naval Academy, and the Air Force Academy. Right now, certain transfer decisions must be made within 72 hours. This section changes that window to five calendar days. The change applies to expedited transfer processes, which are often used in cases involving student misconduct or safety concerns.

     Who this affects

     Cadets and midshipmen at the three federal service academies who are involved in expedited transfer proceedings. Academy officials who make those transfer decisions are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     A longer decision window gives officials more time to review cases carefully, but it also means affected students wait longer for a final decision.

     Show the exact bill text

     amended by striking 72 hours each place it appears and inserting five calendar days

122. Foreign student participation in college military training programs

     This section requires the Defense Department to create a program by January 1, 2028. The program would bring foreign students into the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) at U.S. colleges. The goal is to build stronger military ties between the U.S. and partner countries. It also aims to give future U.S. military officers more experience working with foreign peers. The Defense Department must submit a strategy to Congress by September 30, 2027, and file annual reports starting in 2028. The program cannot pay for foreign students' tuition, room, or board. The program ends on December 31, 2032.

     Who this affects

     Foreign students from partner countries who join U.S. college ROTC programs. U.S. college ROTC participants and the universities that host ROTC programs are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The program could strengthen military relationships with partner countries, but it adds new coordination duties for the Defense Department while barring use of funds for student housing or tuition costs.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may not use the authority provided under this section to pay for tuition or room and board for foreign students who participate in the Program.

123. New senior official for military-to-civilian transition

     This section adds a new job inside the Department of Defense. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness must pick a senior official to lead all programs that help service members move from active duty to civilian life or the reserves. That official must have a background in military personnel policy, transition assistance, or veterans' affairs. The role includes advising the Under Secretary, reviewing all existing transition programs, and working with other federal agencies (Veterans Affairs, Labor, and Education), state and local governments, and nonprofits. The official must also check that all transition programs follow the law and propose changes when they do not.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members leaving the military and their families. It also involves staff at the Department of Defense who run transition programs.

     Tradeoff

     Adding this oversight role could make transition programs more consistent and easier to use, but it also adds a new layer of bureaucracy and coordination within the Department of Defense.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall designate a senior official of the Department of Defense to oversee policy and programs related to the transition of members of the armed forces from active duty to civilian life or reserve components.

124. Military tuition assistance update and reporting

     This section makes two changes to military tuition assistance. First, it adds 'institution fees' to the list of costs the military can pay for service members taking off-duty classes. Before this change, only tuition and expenses were covered. Second, it allows the Secretary of Defense to raise the cap on tuition assistance from its current level to up to $350 per semester credit hour. The section also requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress each year. That report must cover how the tuition assistance money was spent, how many service members used it, and whether the program helped with things like graduation rates, recruiting, keeping soldiers in service, and preparation for civilian life.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who use military tuition assistance for off-duty college or vocational courses. It also affects colleges and universities that charge institution fees to military students.

     Tradeoff

     Raising the per-semester-hour cap and covering institution fees could help more service members afford college, but it would also increase spending from the military education budget.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may prescribe regulations increasing the per-semester-hour cap for tuition assistance offered by the military services to not more than $350 per semester-hour.

125. Helping military medics move into civilian health care jobs

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to work with several federal agencies and states to find ways to help military medics get civilian health care jobs after leaving the service. The Secretary must identify barriers that slow this process. Those barriers include unclear credential translations, lack of standardized military health care credentials, and limited access to bridge or accelerated training programs. The section also asks the Secretary to look at the SkillBridge program, which lets service members train with civilian employers before separation. Within 180 days of the law passing, the Secretary must send Congress a report with specific recommendations and a plan to carry them out.

     Who this affects

     Military medics leaving the armed forces are directly affected. Civilian health care employers and state licensing boards are also involved, since the recommendations may change how credentials are recognized.

     Tradeoff

     Creating clearer credential pathways could make it faster and easier for veterans to enter health care jobs, but developing recommendations and aligning military and civilian credentialing systems across many states takes time and coordination.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall develop recommendations to improve the transition of medics serving in the Armed Forces into the civilian workforce in health care occupations, including as certified nurse aides, licensed practical nurses, or medical assistants.

126. Rules for colleges that want to offer education programs to service members

     This section sets rules for when the Defense Department can block service members from using military education benefits at a college. As a general rule, the Defense Department cannot ban a service member from attending an accredited school or cut off their tuition help just because of which school they picked. Exceptions are allowed for specific reasons: the school broke a contract with the Defense Department, there is a specific national security risk, federal law requires it, or the school was found guilty of arms-export or economic-espionage violations. Any restriction must be as narrow as possible. Students already enrolled must generally be allowed to finish their courses. Before cutting off a school, the Defense Department must give 90 days' written notice to Congress and the school. The school then has 30 days to fix the problem. The rules also say the Defense Department cannot penalize a school for its religious identity or for protecting free speech on campus. For-profit schools are not covered by these protections.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who use military tuition assistance or other Defense Department education benefits. Accredited, nonprofit colleges and universities that enroll those service members.

     Tradeoff

     Service members gain more freedom to choose their school without risking their benefits, but the Defense Department loses some flexibility to restrict schools for policy reasons outside the listed exceptions.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense may not, by any policy or other action— (1) prohibit or otherwise restrict the Department of Defense or the military departments from permitting servicemembers to participate in an eligible program at an eligible institution of higher education... regardless of the source of funds used by the member to pay tuition, fees, or related expenses

127. Copyright protection for Defense Security Cooperation University materials

     This section changes federal copyright law. Normally, works made by the U.S. government cannot be copyrighted. This section creates an exception for the Defense Security Cooperation University (DSCU). It adds DSCU to a list of federal entities that can hold copyrights on works they produce. That means DSCU could control how its training materials, publications, and other works are copied and used.

     Who this affects

     The Defense Security Cooperation University and anyone who wants to copy or use materials it creates, such as partner nations, researchers, or other government agencies.

     Tradeoff

     Allowing copyright protection gives DSCU more control over its materials, but it also limits free public access to works made with government funding.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 105(d)(2) of title 17, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: (P) Defense Security Cooperation University.

128. Standardized testing options at military academies and Defense Department schools

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to make sure each military service academy accepts scores from at least three nationally recognized college readiness tests. The tests must cover math, reading, grammar, writing, and analytical reasoning at minimum. They may also cover critical thinking and reading of literary or historical texts. Separately, the director of Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools must offer 11th-grade students the chance to take at least three of those same tests.

     Who this affects

     Applicants to military service academies and 11th-grade students at DoDEA schools, which serve military families overseas and in some U.S. locations.

     Tradeoff

     Giving students more test choices may improve access and fairness, but managing multiple accepted tests adds administrative work for academies and schools.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that each of the Service Academies...may satisfy any standardized testing requirement through scores from any of not fewer than three nationally recognized standardized assessments that are designed to evaluate college readiness and that measure, at a minimum, mathematics, reading, grammar and writing, and analytical reasoning skills.

129. Department of Defense hate symbol ban and training requirement

     This section orders the Secretary of Defense to create a military-wide rule within 180 days. The rule bans displaying hate symbols on the job. This covers tattoos, patches, uniforms, personal gear, government property, and digital work platforms. The ban applies to both troops and civilian Defense Department workers. The section defines a hate symbol as any image or sign that a reasonable person would see as promoting hatred, violent extremism, or discrimination against a protected group. It carves out exceptions for religious, cultural, historical, educational, and law enforcement purposes. The Secretary must create guidance materials to help commanders and supervisors identify banned symbols. Those materials must be reviewed at least every three years. Hate symbol training must be added to existing programs. Each military branch and defense agency must certify compliance within 180 days. The Secretary must brief Congress on progress within one year.

     Who this affects

     All active military members and civilian employees of the Department of Defense are affected. Commanders, supervisors, and human resources staff must also learn and apply the new identification guidance.

     Tradeoff

     The policy aims to reduce extremist symbols in the military workplace, but decisions about what counts as a hate symbol require judgment calls that could affect service members' free expression or religious accommodations.

     Show the exact bill text

     prohibits the display, possession for display, or use of hate symbols in the workplace or in connection with official duties, including on the body, uniform, civilian work attire, personal equipment, government property, or digital work platforms, including through tattoos, brands, insignia, patches, apparel, or electronic imagery

130. School funding for military families' children

     This section sets aside two pools of Defense Department money for local school districts that serve military families. First, $50 million goes to districts with large numbers of military-connected students. Second, $30 million total goes to districts that educate military children with severe disabilities: $10 million through an existing federal program, and an extra $20 million that the Defense Secretary can direct to districts with especially high concentrations of those students. The Secretary must brief Congress by September 30, 2027, on how those extra disability-aid dollars were distributed and why.

     Who this affects

     Local school districts near military bases that educate children of active-duty service members or Defense Department civilian workers, especially districts with higher numbers of students who have severe disabilities.

     Tradeoff

     These funds help offset costs that military-heavy school districts face, but the money comes from the Defense Department's operation and maintenance budget, reducing funds available for other military uses.

     Show the exact bill text

     $50,000,000 shall be available only for the purpose of providing assistance to local educational agencies under subsection (a) of section 572 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006

131. Technology staff at Defense Department schools

     This section requires the Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA), which runs schools for military families, to have at least one technology staff member in each of its school districts. That person must make sure classroom technology meets policy rules and student needs. They also help teachers and administrators use technology well in classrooms. By February 1, 2028, the DODEA director must brief Congress on how the new requirement is working and suggest any changes needed to rules or laws.

     Who this affects

     Military families whose children attend DODEA schools, and the teachers and administrators at those schools. DODEA employs about 8,500 educators across roughly 160 schools worldwide.

     Tradeoff

     Adding dedicated technology staff to each school district could improve classroom technology use, but it requires new spending or redirecting existing DODEA staff and budget.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Director of the Department of Defense Education Activity shall ensure that each school district of such Activity has, at a minimum, one staff member dedicated to facilitating educational technology and related matters.

132. Expanding child care worker eligibility for military child care centers

     This section makes two changes to how the Department of Defense staffs its child care centers on military bases. First, it removes a prior service requirement that limited who could work at these centers. Second, it allows the Defense Department to partner with other federal agencies to place national service volunteers, including senior volunteers, at military child care centers. To qualify, a volunteer must be trained in education services and meet hiring requirements for military child care centers. Volunteers who are placed keep all the benefits they normally receive under national service laws.

     Who this affects

     Military families who use on-base child care centers and national service volunteers trained in education. Military child care centers may gain more eligible workers.

     Tradeoff

     Expanding the pool of eligible workers could help fill staffing gaps, but some may have concerns about whether removing the prior service requirement affects staff experience levels.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may seek to enter into an interagency partnership with a Federal agency with the ability to place individuals described in paragraph (2) in military child development centers in accordance with national service laws and with all the benefits accorded to such individuals under those laws.

133. Standardized military child care data reporting

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to collect and report child care data the same way across all military branches and bases. The data must cover how many child care spots exist and are being used, how many staff positions are open or turning over, and how long waitlists are. Waitlist data must be broken down by what kind of care each child currently receives, including care at home, with relatives, at another military center, or through community programs. The Secretary must also check waitlists for duplicate entries and note whether an entry shows a real unmet need or just a preference for a specific program. Within 90 days of the law passing, the Secretary must brief Congress on current data systems and their limits. Then, starting December 31, 2027, the Secretary must give Congress annual updates for three years on trends, gaps, and any recommended fixes.

     Who this affects

     Military families who need child care, and child care staff working at military installations. Congress and the Department of Defense are also affected through new reporting duties.

     Tradeoff

     Better data could help identify and fix child care gaps for military families, but it adds new tracking and reporting work for the Department of Defense.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall standardize the collection and reporting of data related to child care capacity, workforce readiness, and waitlists across the Armed Forces and military installations.

134. Pay and staffing update for military child care programs

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to update the pay rules for workers in military child care and youth programs by January 1, 2027. These programs are run by nonappropriated fund instrumentalities, which are military-affiliated organizations funded outside the normal federal budget. The update must add new staff positions to help run classrooms and to support children with special needs. It must also change the pay structure to attract and keep more workers in these programs. The changes take effect as soon as possible, but only if Congress provides the money.

     Who this affects

     Workers in military child care and youth programs, and military families who use those programs. Children with special needs on military installations are also directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     Better pay and more staff could improve child care quality and access for military families, but the changes depend on Congress approving the funding.

     Show the exact bill text

     modify the pay band structure and compensation rates to improve recruitment and retention of employees of child and youth programs described in subsection (a)

135. Fellowship program for military spouses at the Department of Defense

     This section creates a new fellowship program for military spouses inside the Department of Defense (DoD). The Secretary of Defense must set it up by April 1, 2028. Each fellowship lasts 12 to 24 months and can be full-time or part-time, in person or remote. Fellows are paid at standard federal pay scale rates. The DoD must fund at least 500 full-time equivalent fellowships each year across different career fields and grade levels. Participating DoD offices must offer mentorship and professional development. At the end of the fellowship, the office must try to convert the fellow into a permanent job, but only if the fellow performs well, a position is open, and funding is available. To qualify, a person must be married to an active-duty service member on the first day they start the fellowship.

     Who this affects

     Military spouses who are married to active-duty service members. DoD offices that are selected to host fellows.

     Tradeoff

     The program could help military spouses build careers despite frequent moves, but it requires DoD funding and staffing resources each year, and permanent job placement is not guaranteed.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary shall ensure that the Program has the funding and other resources to provide for not less than 500 full-time equivalent fellowships each year.

136. Keeping military-civilian married couples at the same duty location

     This section requires the Defense Department to set up a policy by March 1, 2028. The policy applies when an active-duty service member is married to a Defense Department civilian employee. When that service member gets a new duty station assignment, the military must treat the couple's ability to stay together as a secondary goal. The primary goal is still filling mission needs with qualified personnel. The policy must also update civilian hiring rules to help keep the civilian spouse employed at the same pay grade and job type. Remote work, transfers, and alternate work sites are all tools the policy can use. The Defense Department must also give training and resources to human resources managers to help retain these civilian employees during moves.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who are married to Defense Department civilian employees. Defense Department human resources managers are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Couples may have a better chance of staying together during military moves, but mission needs and member qualifications still come first, so colocation is not guaranteed.

     Show the exact bill text

     the primary considerations are the member's current qualifications and ability to fill a valid mission requirement; and (B) colocation is a secondary consideration, to maximize the opportunities for continued employment of the civilian employee of the Department of Defense through all flexibilities available

137. Review of military program for families with special needs

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to review the Exceptional Family Member Program by April 1, 2027. That program helps military families who have a member with special medical, behavioral health, or educational needs. The review must look at whether military families can actually get the services they need at their assigned locations. It must also check if the assignment process works well for these families and whether kids lose access to special education services after a move. By April 30, 2028, the Secretary must send Congress a report. The report must include a plan to fix problems found in the review, such as improving how the military screens assignments, being more open about available services at bases, and better coordinating health care between military and civilian providers.

     Who this affects

     Military service members who have a family member enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member Program, including families with children who have individualized education programs or other special needs plans.

     Tradeoff

     The review and report require Defense Department time and resources, but they could lead to better services and fewer disruptions for military families with special needs members.

     Show the exact bill text

     identify military installations where families with an individual in the Program face unavailable, limited, or difficult-to-access services

138. Foster care information and support for military families

     This section requires the Defense Department to improve foster care support for military families in three ways. First, counselors at Family Advocacy and Military and Family Life programs on U.S. bases must be trained in the foster care rules and resources of their state. Trained counselors would be called 'foster care liaisons.' Second, the Military OneSource website must add a tool where military families can look up foster care information for any state. Third, the Defense Department may work with the Administration for Children and Families, a federal agency, to get training materials and other resources.

     Who this affects

     Military families interested in foster care and counselors working at family support programs on U.S. military bases.

     Tradeoff

     Families gain easier access to foster care information, but the Defense Department takes on new training and website update requirements that carry administrative costs.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall require all counselors assigned to a Family Advocacy Program or Military and Family Life program at a military installation in the United States to be trained in the requirements and resources relating to foster care of the State in which the installation is located.

139. Reporting on staffing gaps in nuclear site security forces

     This section updates a 2022 law about security at the military's highest-security sites, called Protection Level One (PL-1) locations. These are places that guard nuclear weapons and other critical assets. The update does two things. First, it extends the required annual reports from 2027 through 2032, so Congress gets five more years of data. Second, it adds a new item to each report. The new item must describe any gaps between the number of senior enlisted security personnel and junior enlisted security personnel at each PL-1 site. It must also describe what actions are needed to fix those gaps. The goal is to make sure leadership and oversight at these high-security locations are not weakened by staffing imbalances.

     Who this affects

     Military security forces stationed at Protection Level One sites, which guard nuclear weapons and other top-priority assets. Department of Defense leadership and Congress also receive the reports.

     Tradeoff

     Extending the reporting requirement gives Congress more oversight but also adds ongoing administrative work for the military units that must compile and submit the reports.

     Show the exact bill text

     A description of gaps between senior and junior enlisted security forces personnel that could hinder effective oversight and leadership at each PL-1 location and actions needed to remedy such gaps.

140. Review of Junior ROTC instructor pay and hiring

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to update official rules for the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) program by January 1, 2027. The update must reflect current laws on the minimum number of JROTC units. It must also create a plan to measure how a standardized instructor pay scale affects hiring and keeping instructors. The plan must track specific data points, such as vacancy rates, how long instructors stay, geographic differences in hiring, bonus use, and why job offers are declined. Starting one year after the updated rules are issued, the Secretary must send Congress a report on the findings. Two more annual reports must follow. The reports must assess whether the pay scale and bonus program are working, and must recommend any changes needed.

     Who this affects

     JROTC instructors and the military branches that hire them are directly affected. High schools with JROTC programs and students in those programs may be indirectly affected if instructor shortages change.

     Tradeoff

     Tracking and reporting this data will take staff time and resources, but it gives Congress clearer information on whether JROTC instructor pay is working.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report that includes— (1) a description of the updated guidance and implementation status; (2) baseline data and metrics collected using the metrics developed under subsection (a); (3) an assessment of the effects of the pay scale on recruitment and retention

141. Junior ROTC units required in Defense-run high schools

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to set up a Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (Junior ROTC) unit in every eligible high school run by the Department of Defense Education Activity by October 1, 2027. These schools already serve military families overseas and on bases. The Secretary can skip this requirement at a specific school if that school would not have enough students to keep the program running over time.

     Who this affects

     Students and staff at high schools operated by the Department of Defense Education Activity, which mostly serve children of military families. Schools that cannot meet minimum enrollment numbers may be exempt.

     Tradeoff

     Adding Junior ROTC programs gives more students access to military training and leadership courses, but it also requires schools and the Defense Department to staff and fund new units by a set deadline.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that, by not later than October 1, 2027, each secondary school operated by the Department of Defense Education Activity that meets the eligibility requirements for establishment and maintenance of a Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps unit under section 2031 of title 10, United States Code, establishes and maintains such a unit.

142. Correction to Distinguished-Service Cross award for Isaac Ike Camacho

     This section makes a small correction to a law passed in 2025. That earlier law authorized the Distinguished-Service Cross for Isaac Ike Camacho, a veteran who served in Vietnam. The original law used the word 'posthumous' in its section heading, suggesting Camacho was deceased. This section removes that word from the heading, correcting the record.

     Who this affects

     Isaac Ike Camacho, a Vietnam War veteran set to receive the Distinguished-Service Cross.

     Tradeoff

     This is a technical correction with no known cost or policy impact.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 592 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (Public Law 119–60; 139 Stat. 899) is amended by striking posthumous in the section heading.

143. Distinguished-Service Cross award for Joseph P. Lynch

     This section allows the Army to award the Distinguished-Service Cross to Joseph P. Lynch. He served in Vietnam and showed valor on April 17, 1968, near Khe Sanh. He already received the Silver Star for those actions. Normally, there are time limits on awarding military medals. This section waives those time limits so Lynch can receive the higher honor.

     Who this affects

     Joseph P. Lynch, a U.S. Army veteran who served in the Republic of Vietnam. The Army Secretary is also affected, as he gains the legal authority to make this award.

     Tradeoff

     Waiving the time limit allows a deserving veteran to receive a higher honor, but it sets a precedent for bypassing standard medal award deadlines on a case-by-case basis.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of the Army may award the Distinguished-Service Cross under section 7272 of such title to Joseph P. Lynch for the acts of valor in the Republic of Vietnam

144. Congressional review before waiving military award deadlines

     Each military branch has rules that set time limits for awarding certain medals or honors. Sometimes those deadlines are waived so a service member can still receive an award. This section says that before the Army, Navy, or Air Force can waive such a deadline, the relevant Secretary must first send Congress a full, unredacted package of information. That package must include all details the Secretary reviewed, including any reconsideration of the award. The Senate and House Armed Services Committees both receive this information before any waiver takes effect.

     Who this affects

     Service members seeking late military award consideration are affected, as are the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Members of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees also gain a new oversight role.

     Tradeoff

     Congress gains more visibility into late award decisions, but the added requirement may slow or complicate the process for service members waiting on a waiver.

     Show the exact bill text

     A time limitation under this section may not be waived unless the Secretary of the Army first submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the unredacted package of information considered by the Secretary, including all relevant information relating to any reconsideration of an award.

145. Medal of Honor review and upgrade procedures for the Army

     This section adds new rules for how the Army reviews Medal of Honor nominations. When the Army sends a nomination to the Secretary of Defense, it must include a review from an independent board, a recommendation from the Army Secretary, a recommendation from the Army Chief of Staff, and clear proof the service member met the legal standard. The Secretary of Defense must then get advice from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The section also sets strict limits on when a past nomination can be looked at again or when a lesser award can be upgraded to the Medal of Honor. A second look is only allowed if there is new, important evidence that was not available before, or if there was a real error or wrongdoing in how the original case was handled. That wrongdoing can include lost documents, wrong use of policy, or proven discrimination based on race, sex, or religion. Simply adding more detail to facts already in the record does not qualify. The Secretary of Defense handles errors from cases decided at the Defense level, and the Army Secretary handles errors from Army-level cases. Neither can give that authority to someone else.

     Who this affects

     Current and former Army service members who have received or been nominated for a Medal of Honor, and their families seeking reconsideration of past decisions.

     Tradeoff

     The stricter standards make it harder to reopen old cases, which adds consistency but may block some families from getting a second review.

     Show the exact bill text

     reconsideration of a previously reviewed Medal of Honor nomination, or upgrade of a previously approved award to the Medal of Honor, may be initiated only upon a showing of— (A) new, substantive, and material evidence that was not available at the time of the original recommendation and that was not previously considered by the awarding authority; or (B) material error or impropriety in the processing or adjudication of the original recommendation

146. Medal of Honor review and reconsideration rules

     This section sets rules for how the Navy reviews Medal of Honor nominations. Each nomination sent to the Secretary of Defense must include an independent board review, the Navy Secretary's recommendation, the Chief of Staff's recommendation, and clear proof the service member met the legal standard. The Secretary of Defense then gets advice from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs before sending a recommendation to the President. The section also limits when a past Medal of Honor decision can be reopened. A reconsideration is allowed only if there is new, substantial evidence that was not available before, or if there was a clear error or bias based on race, sex, or religion in how the original case was handled. Simply adding more detail to facts already reviewed does not count as new evidence. The Secretary of Defense personally decides cases involving errors at the Defense level, and the Navy Secretary personally decides cases involving errors at the Navy level. Neither can pass that authority to someone else.

     Who this affects

     Active and former military members who have received or been nominated for the Medal of Honor. It also affects family members or advocates seeking to reopen past decisions.

     Tradeoff

     The stricter reconsideration rules protect the award's integrity, but they make it harder to revisit past decisions even when supporters believe an injustice occurred.

     Show the exact bill text

     reconsideration of a previously reviewed Medal of Honor nomination, or upgrade of a previously approved award to the Medal of Honor, may be initiated only upon a showing of— (A) new, substantive, and material evidence that was not available at the time of the original recommendation and that was not previously considered by the awarding authority; or (B) material error or impropriety in the processing or adjudication of the original recommendation

147. Medal of Honor review and upgrade procedures for Air Force

     This section sets rules for how the Air Force reviews Medal of Honor nominations. Any recommendation sent to the Secretary of Defense must come with a review from an independent board, the Air Force Chief of Staff, and the Secretary of the Air Force. The Secretary of Defense then gets advice from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs before sending a recommendation to the President. The section also sets strict limits on when a past Medal of Honor decision can be reconsidered or upgraded. A review can only be reopened if there is new, important evidence that was not available before, or if there was a clear error or unfair treatment in the original process. Simply adding more detail to facts already considered does not count as new evidence. The Secretary of Defense handles errors from decisions made at the Defense level, and the Secretary of the Air Force handles errors from decisions made at the Air Force level. Neither official can hand off this authority to someone else.

     Who this affects

     Current and past Air Force service members who have received or been nominated for the Medal of Honor. It also affects surviving family members seeking a reconsideration of a past nomination.

     Tradeoff

     Strict rules make the process more consistent and harder to manipulate, but they also make it harder to reopen cases where the full record may not have survived.

     Show the exact bill text

     reconsideration of a previously reviewed Medal of Honor nomination, or upgrade of a previously approved award to the Medal of Honor, may be initiated only upon a showing of— (A) new, substantive, and material evidence that was not available at the time of the original recommendation and that was not previously considered by the awarding authority; or (B) material error or impropriety in the processing or adjudication of the original recommendation

148. Military decoration time limit exceptions

     This section changes the rules about when a military decoration can still be recommended. Right now, there are deadlines for submitting award proposals. This section adds two new rules. First, proposals must have started before the military branch set up an online awards review system. Second, if a decoration could not be processed because the details were classified, the deadline is extended. In that case, a recommendation can be submitted within three years after the needed information is declassified. Declassification includes automatic release under a federal executive order (at 10, 25, 50, or 75-year marks), release through a Mandatory Declassification Review, or release through a Freedom of Information Act request. The section also removes a subsection from a related law on board-of-correction review.

     Who this affects

     Service members and veterans whose award recommendations were blocked or delayed because the details of their service were classified.

     Tradeoff

     More service members may receive long-delayed recognition, but the process could reopen older cases and require additional government review time and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     An exception to the time limitations under this section shall be granted for a member or former member of the armed forces whose recommendation for a decoration could not be processed due to the classification of the details of the act, achievement, or service.

149. Military decoration award records review

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to send Congress full, unredacted records for all military decorations awarded between January 1, 2025 and December 31, 2026. The records must include all supporting documents, recommendations from review boards and the chain of command, written justifications from approving officials, and the legal basis for each award. The Secretary must also give Congress a briefing by March 1, 2027, explaining whether any legal errors occurred in awarding those decorations. If errors are found, the Secretary must propose a fix. To enforce compliance, the bill blocks 10 percent of certain Office of the Secretary of Defense travel funds until all required records are delivered.

     Who this affects

     The Secretary of Defense and military department secretaries must produce the records. Service members who received certain decorations in 2025 and 2026 have their award files reviewed by Congress.

     Tradeoff

     Congress gains oversight of how military decorations were awarded, but producing full, unredacted award files for all qualifying decorations could be a large administrative task for the Defense Department.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than March 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives the following information on all decorations awarded... Unredacted copies of all supporting documentation, material matters, and information considered by boards of review, the chain of command, and any party employed by the Department of Defense

150. Travel reimbursement for reserve training duty

     This section changes the distance rule for when reserve military members can get travel costs covered for inactive-duty training or muster duty. Right now, the rule kicks in when a member travels more than 50 miles. This section raises that threshold to more than 100 miles, one way, to a permanent duty assignment location. The change takes effect January 1, 2028. Before then, the Defense Department must report to Congress on the estimated cost, how many service members would be affected, and any recommendations for improvement.

     Who this affects

     Reserve component members of the U.S. Armed Forces and Coast Guard who travel to training or muster duty locations. Members who travel between 50 and 100 miles one way would lose reimbursement eligibility under the new rule.

     Tradeoff

     Raising the threshold saves government money on travel reimbursements, but reserve members who travel between 51 and 100 miles would no longer qualify for those payments.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 452(j)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking more than 50 miles and inserting to a permanent duty assignment location requiring one-way travel of more than 100 miles.

151. Military basic pay raise for 2027

     This section sets the military pay raise for 2027. Normally, a law called section 1009 of title 37 automatically sets the size of the pay raise each year. This section turns off that automatic formula for 2027. Instead, it sets a fixed 3.6 percent increase in monthly basic pay. The raise takes effect on January 1, 2027. All members of the uniformed services receive this increase.

     Who this affects

     All active and reserve members of the U.S. uniformed services, including the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Space Force, Coast Guard, and others who receive military basic pay.

     Tradeoff

     Service members get a guaranteed 3.6 percent raise, but Congress overrides the automatic formula, which could have produced a different amount depending on economic conditions.

     Show the exact bill text

     Effective on January 1, 2027, the rates of monthly basic pay for members of the uniformed services are increased by 3.6 percent.

152. Commute cost reimbursement for troops at remote bases

     This section lets military branch secretaries repay service members who commute long distances from remote or isolated bases. To qualify, a member must be stationed at a remote base, live more than 30 miles away or have a commute longer than one hour, and be unable to live closer because of a lack of affordable housing or basic services nearby. Reimbursable costs include average fuel expenses for the commute distance. They also include a portion of vehicle wear-and-tear costs, set by the Secretary of Defense. If public transit is available, that cost can be covered instead. The Secretary of Defense must create rules for how members apply and how the military verifies commute distance and housing conditions.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members stationed at remote or isolated military installations who live far from base due to a lack of nearby affordable housing.

     Tradeoff

     This gives financial relief to troops facing long commutes, but it adds a new administrative burden and ongoing cost to the Defense Department.

     Show the exact bill text

     A member is described in this paragraph if— (A) the duty station of the member is a remote or isolated installation (as defined in section 4705 of title 10); (B) the member lives more than 30 miles, or has a commute of longer than one hour, from the member's residence to the member's duty station; and (C) the member is unable to live closer to that duty station because of a lack of affordable housing and essential services near the duty station.

153. One-year extension of military bonuses and special pay programs

     This section extends several military pay programs for one more year, moving their expiration date from December 31, 2026 to December 31, 2027. The programs include enlistment and officer bonuses, aviation incentive pay, hazardous duty pay, health care professional bonuses, student loan repayment for reserve health workers, and a nurse officer training program. It also extends the ability to temporarily raise housing allowances in disaster areas or where actual housing costs are more than 20 percent above standard rates.

     Who this affects

     Active duty military members, reserve component members, health care professionals in the military, nuclear officers, and military members living in high-cost or disaster-affected housing areas.

     Tradeoff

     Extending these programs keeps pay incentives in place for hard-to-fill roles, but it also continues the federal spending that comes with those payments for another year.

     Show the exact bill text

     struck December 31, 2026 and inserting December 31, 2027

154. Higher cap on aviation bonuses for military pilots

     This section raises the maximum yearly aviation bonus that can be paid to military aviators. The current cap is $50,000 per year. This section changes that cap to $60,000 per year. The change applies to the law that governs special pay for aviation service (Title 37 of the U.S. Code, Section 334). The new cap does not guarantee anyone receives $60,000. It simply allows the military to offer up to that amount.

     Who this affects

     Military aviators who qualify for aviation special pay under current law. Military branches that set and negotiate aviation bonus amounts.

     Tradeoff

     A higher bonus cap may help the military retain pilots, but it also increases the potential cost to the federal government if more aviators are offered the maximum amount.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 334(c)(1)(B) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking $50,000 and inserting $60,000 .

155. Expanded incentive pay for military veterinary officers with PhD degrees

     This section changes who can receive board certification incentive pay in the military. Right now, only veterinary comparative medicine officers who are board certified can get this extra pay. This section adds officers who hold a comparable Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree as another way to qualify. The branch secretary decides whether a PhD counts as comparable.

     Who this affects

     Military veterinary comparative medicine officers who hold a PhD but are not board certified. Their branch secretary determines if their degree qualifies.

     Tradeoff

     More officers become eligible for incentive pay, which could increase costs, but it may help the military recruit and keep PhD-level veterinary science experts.

     Show the exact bill text

     is amended by inserting or holds a comparable qualifying Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree, as determined by the Secretary concerned, after is board certified

156. Higher bonus for ROTC cadets and midshipmen

     This section changes two things about bonuses paid to Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) cadets and midshipmen. First, it raises the maximum bonus from $5,000 to $15,000. Second, it broadens which training qualifies a cadet or midshipman to earn the bonus. Right now, the bonus is tied to one specific type of training named in law. After this change, any training required by the relevant military Secretary would qualify.

     Who this affects

     College students enrolled in ROTC programs who are on the path to becoming military officers. Military branch secretaries who set ROTC training requirements also gain more flexibility.

     Tradeoff

     More students may be encouraged to join or stay in ROTC, but the higher bonus and broader eligibility could increase federal spending on the program.

     Show the exact bill text

     in subsection (b), by striking $5,000 and inserting $15,000

157. Higher pay for troops in dangerous areas

     This section raises the maximum monthly pay for service members who face hostile fire or imminent danger. The top rate for hostile fire pay goes from $450 to $600 per month. The top rate for imminent danger pay goes from $275 to $400 per month. These are the maximum amounts the military can pay, not a guaranteed amount for every service member in a danger zone.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty military members who serve in areas designated as hostile fire or imminent danger zones. The change raises the ceiling on what they can be paid, but actual amounts depend on where and how they serve.

     Tradeoff

     Service members in dangerous areas can receive more money, but the higher payments increase the overall cost to the federal government.

     Show the exact bill text

     in paragraph (1), by striking $450 and inserting $600 ; and (2) in paragraph (2), by striking $275 and inserting $400 .

158. Expanding who can recertify catastrophic injury claims for special pay

     This section updates a law about special compensation for severely injured service members. Right now, a service member must be certified as needing personal care assistance. This change adds a recertification step. It also expands who can sign off on that recertification. Before, only certain providers could certify the condition. Now, a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant can all perform the recertification. The original certification language is also updated to say 'initially certified' to distinguish it from the new recertification step.

     Who this affects

     Active duty service members with catastrophic injuries or illnesses who receive special compensation for personal care needs. It also affects nurse practitioners and physician assistants, who gain the authority to recertify these conditions.

     Tradeoff

     Allowing more types of providers to recertify may make the process easier for service members, but it also broadens the group of medical professionals with authority over a significant compensation determination.

     Show the exact bill text

     has been recertified (if required), by a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant, as in need of such assistance;

159. Who can shop at military commissaries and exchange stores

     This section creates a single, clear list of people allowed to shop at military commissary grocery stores and military exchange retail stores. The main groups are active-duty service members, National Guard and reserve members, military retirees, honorably discharged veterans (in limited cases), and their dependents. Certain Department of Defense civilian employees stationed overseas or in U.S. territories are also included. Workers for other federal agencies or private contractors serving overseas under Defense Department contracts may shop too, but the Pentagon can charge them fees to cover costs. Honorably discharged veterans can shop at the online exchange store but not at physical stores. The Secretary of Defense cannot add new groups on their own. Any expansion beyond what the law lists requires an act of Congress. The Secretary can grant temporary access, for up to one year at a time, to other groups already allowed on military bases, but must notify Congress each time.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty troops, reservists, retirees, veterans, their families, and certain civilian employees are affected. Other federal workers, overseas contractors, and nonprofit workers serving with the military are also affected in limited ways.

     Tradeoff

     Codifying the list in law gives service members and veterans a clear, stable benefit, but it removes the Pentagon's flexibility to extend shopping access to new groups without going back to Congress.

     Show the exact bill text

     Except as expressly authorized by an Act of Congress, the Secretary of Defense, and any other official or employee of the Department of Defense, may not expand eligibility for access to commissary stores to any additional individual or category of individuals by regulation, policy, memorandum, or other administrative action.

160. Commissary store construction and repair funding

     This section changes the rules for how military commissary stores can spend their operating funds. Right now, commissary operating budgets cover things like staffing and supplies. This section adds a new allowed use: paying for construction, repair, improvement, and maintenance of physical buildings and infrastructure. However, any money spent on construction must follow the existing rules that apply to small military construction projects under section 2805 of federal law. Those rules set spending limits and approval requirements for minor construction work.

     Who this affects

     Military service members and their families who shop at commissaries. It also affects commissary store managers and military installation commanders who oversee construction projects.

     Tradeoff

     Commissaries gain more flexibility to fix and improve their facilities using operating funds, but those spending decisions must stay within the limits set for minor military construction.

     Show the exact bill text

     Amounts used for construction under subsection (b)(8) shall be subject to the requirements and limitations under section 2805 of this title.

161. Test program to let some civilian Defense workers shop at military commissaries

     This section lets the Defense Department run a short test program. The program would allow full-time civilian Defense workers to shop at up to 16 military commissary stores in the continental United States. Right now, commissaries are mainly for active-duty troops, retirees, and their families. The Secretary can pick stores that represent different regions and types of bases. To keep the program from costing extra taxpayer money, the Secretary can charge civilian shoppers a fee or surcharge. The program must end by January 1, 2028. After it ends, the Defense Department must send Congress a detailed report. That report must cover sales numbers, costs, wait times for military members, and whether making the change permanent makes financial sense.

     Who this affects

     Full-time civilian Defense Department employees and certain nonappropriated fund workers near participating bases. Military members, retirees, and their families are also affected because the program could change wait times and store conditions.

     Tradeoff

     Civilian workers would gain access to lower-cost grocery stores, but military members and their families could face longer wait times or crowded stores if the added shoppers strain capacity.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary may provide access to a commissary store selected for participation in the pilot program under subsection (c) to full-time civilian employees of the Department of Defense and nonappropriated fund instrumentality employees... who are assigned to a location within the vicinity of the military installation where the store is located.

162. Shipping more than one personal vehicle during a military move

     This section changes federal law to let military departments ship or store more than one personally owned vehicle for a service member who is moving to a new duty station. Right now, the rules limit how many vehicles the government will move. Under this change, a military department secretary can approve extra vehicles on a case-by-case basis. Two conditions apply: funding must be available, and the approval does not have to wait for the entire Department of Defense to create a new shared policy first.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who own more than one vehicle and are ordered to move between duty stations. Military department secretaries gain new approval authority.

     Tradeoff

     Service members with multiple vehicles get more flexibility during moves, but the benefit depends on available funding and each department's own decisions, so not all members may receive it.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of the military department concerned may authorize the shipment or storage of more than one privately owned vehicle for a member of the armed forces in connection with a temporary or permanent move between authorized locations.

163. Reimbursement for guardianship costs after military relocations

     This section lets the military reimburse service members for costs tied to legal guardianship when they move to a new location. When a member moves due to orders, a permanent station change, a Reserve transfer, or placement on a disability retirement list, and their dependents are also authorized to move at government expense, the member may get reimbursed. The reimbursement covers paperwork, travel, court fees, legal fees, and other administrative costs. These costs must come from the member or spouse needing to re-establish a guardianship in a new state or area. The cap is $1,000 per move. This benefit is only available for costs paid through December 31, 2029.

     Who this affects

     Service members who are legal guardians of a minor child or an adult who needs a guardian. Their spouses are also covered if the spouse holds the guardianship.

     Tradeoff

     The benefit gives financial relief for a real legal burden tied to military moves, but it is capped at $1,000 per move and expires at the end of 2029.

     Show the exact bill text

     Reimbursement provided to a member under this subsection for qualified guardianship costs may not exceed $1,000 in connection with each relocation described in paragraph (1).

164. Housing counseling for military members

     This section updates a law about financial counseling for military members. It lets the military branch secretaries hire outside individuals or organizations to give housing counseling. Those organizations can include ones certified by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The section also expands the topics that counseling must cover. Before, counseling covered mortgages. Now it must also cover other financial products tied to buying or renting a home, plus fees connected to those products.

     Who this affects

     Active duty military members who receive pre-transaction financial counseling. Outside housing counseling organizations, including HUD-certified nonprofits, may now be hired to provide that counseling.

     Tradeoff

     Military members get broader counseling on home-buying costs, but the government will need to spend money on contracts with outside counseling providers.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary concerned may, subject to the applicable requirements of this section, enter into contracts to provide counseling under this paragraph with individuals and organizations that provide counseling with respect to housing, including organizations that are certified under section 106(e) of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968

165. Priority travel program for personnel at Guantanamo Bay

     This section changes the travel benefit rules for military and eligible personnel stationed at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Right now, a space-available rule limits who can use the government travel program. This section lets people stationed at Guantanamo Bay buy seats at competitive commercial prices, skipping that space-available limit. They also get the same travel priority as other official government travelers. Any money collected from these ticket sales goes back into the agency's travel budget and can be spent for the same purposes as that budget.

     Who this affects

     Military personnel and other eligible individuals stationed at U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It also affects the government agencies that contract for transportation to and from Guantanamo Bay.

     Tradeoff

     Personnel at Guantanamo Bay get more reliable access to flights home, but they must pay commercially competitive prices rather than traveling for free on a space-available basis.

     Show the exact bill text

     An individual eligible pursuant to subsection (c) for the travel program who is stationed at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, may purchase transportation, at commercially competitive rates (as determined by the agency contracting for the transportation), for travel to and from Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without regard to subsection (b).

166. Help for service members getting a driver's license

     This section lets the Department of Defense help active-duty service members pay for the cost of getting a personal driver's license from a state or U.S. territory. The help is optional, not required. The Secretary of Defense decides whether to offer it. The section covers all 50 states, Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty members of the U.S. armed forces who want to get a personal driver's license while serving.

     Tradeoff

     Service members could get financial help for a license, but the program costs money and the Secretary of Defense is not required to offer it.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may provide assistance to a member of the armed forces for expenses of obtaining, while serving in the armed forces, a personal driver's license under the laws of a State.

167. Higher student loan repayment for Selected Reserve members

     This section raises the share of student loan debt the military can repay each year for members of the Selected Reserve. The current law allows repayment of up to 15 percent of a member's loan balance per year. This change raises that limit to 20 percent per year. The Selected Reserve includes part-time service members in the Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Coast Guard Reserve, and National Guard.

     Who this affects

     Members of the Selected Reserve who have student loan debt and qualify for the military's loan repayment benefit.

     Tradeoff

     Reserve members can pay off student loans faster with more federal support, but the government pays more per borrower each year.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 16301(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 15 percent and inserting 20 percent.

168. Air Force pilot retention program improvements

     This section changes a pilot retention program that the Air Force runs. The program offers special benefits to keep rated officers (pilots and other aircrew) from leaving the military. The change removes a requirement that officers stay in one place for at least one year. It also adds more flexibility in where those officers can be assigned. Officers can now request their preferred duty location, including staying at the same base for back-to-back assignments. They can also ask for a staff job that does not require them to move, or one that lets them keep flying while doing desk work.

     Who this affects

     Air Force rated officers (pilots and other flight-qualified officers) who participate in the retention demonstration program.

     Tradeoff

     Officers get more control over where they work and whether they fly, but the Air Force must balance those preferences against its own staffing needs.

     Show the exact bill text

     offer a rated officer described in subsection (b)— (A) assignment to the duty location preferred by the officer, including consecutive assignments to the same duty location; or (B) the opportunity to perform a staff assignment that— (i) does not require the officer to relocate; or (ii) permits the officer to remain in an active flying status while performing such assignment.

169. Temporary break program for Air Force fighter pilots

     This section tells the Air Force to create a five-year test program. It lets fighter aircrew officers take a one-time break from active duty. The break must last between 4 months and one year. To qualify, an officer must still owe at least two years of active duty service when the break starts. Aviation bonus payments are paused during the break. They can restart when the officer returns to active duty. The time spent on break does not count toward completing a bonus agreement. The Air Force must report to Congress every year on how the program is working. The goal is to find out whether planned breaks keep experienced fighter pilots from leaving the military early.

     Who this affects

     Active duty Air Force officers in fighter aircrew career fields. It also affects taxpayers and Air Force readiness, since it tries to retain experienced pilots.

     Tradeoff

     The program may help keep experienced fighter pilots in the military, but it temporarily removes them from active duty and pauses their bonus payments during that time.

     Show the exact bill text

     to permit officers in Air Force fighter aircrew career fields to take a one-time career intermission in order to evaluate whether targeted career intermissions reduce early separations and preserve experienced fighter aircrew subject-matter experts for air staff positions and leadership roles in the active component of the Air Force.

170. Online complaint system for military health care patients

     This section requires the Department of Defense to build an online system within 18 months. TRICARE enrollees who get care at military hospitals or through contracted health plans can use it to file complaints, report problems, or give positive feedback about getting care. They can also check the status of their complaint anytime. Complaints are sent to a patient advocate. Facility-level complaints are collected and sent to the Defense Health Agency every three months. For three years after launch, the Pentagon must report to Congress each March. Those reports must break down complaints by type: specialty care versus primary care, women's health versus other care, pediatric versus non-pediatric care, and administrative hurdles versus other access problems.

     Who this affects

     Military service members, retirees, and their families who are enrolled in TRICARE and receive care at military hospitals or through TRICARE-contracted health plans.

     Tradeoff

     The system gives patients a formal, trackable way to report problems, but it requires the Pentagon to build and maintain new technology and reporting processes, which takes staff time and money.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a digital system under which a covered beneficiary who receives health care at a military medical treatment facility or through a managed care support contractor under the TRICARE program may electronically— (A) file a complaint, raise awareness about an issue, or provide positive feedback relating to access to care at such military medical treatment facility or through such managed care support contractor; and (B) view the status of such complaint or issue at any time

171. Dental care access for military dependents

     This section changes a rule about dental care for military family members. Under the updated rule, dependents enrolled in a military dental plan can receive treatment from dental residents in training. These residents must be in a program approved by the American Dental Association. Care is only available when there is extra space and resources at the facility. The Secretary of Defense must confirm that enough resources exist before this care is offered.

     Who this affects

     Military family members (dependents) who are enrolled in a military dental plan. It also affects military dental treatment facilities that run accredited graduate dental programs.

     Tradeoff

     Dependents may get free or low-cost dental care from supervised residents, but access is not guaranteed and depends on available space and resources at each facility.

     Show the exact bill text

     Treatment under subparagraph (A) shall be provided on a space available basis and only if the Secretary of Defense determines that adequate resources exist to provide such treatment.

172. Hearing aids for children of retired service members

     This section expands who can get hearing aids through military health coverage. Right now, hearing aids are available to children covered under a specific TRICARE plan. This change adds TRICARE Select to that list. So children of retired service members enrolled in TRICARE Select family coverage can now receive hearing aids through military health benefits.

     Who this affects

     Children of retired military members who are enrolled in TRICARE Select family coverage. Retired service members who want hearing aid coverage for their children under this plan.

     Tradeoff

     More military families gain access to hearing aid coverage, which may increase costs to the military health care system.

     Show the exact bill text

     is amended by inserting or TRICARE Select before the period at the end.

173. Study on expanding mental health counselor coverage under TRICARE

     This section tells the Defense Health Agency (DHA) to study whether TRICARE should pay for mental health counselors from a wider range of accredited schools. Right now, TRICARE has limits on which counselors it will reimburse. The DHA must look at whether counselors with a master's degree or higher from schools accredited by any of 12 listed bodies should qualify. The DHA must report its findings to Congress by July 1, 2027. If the report says yes, the DHA must issue a rule putting that change into effect within two years of submitting the report.

     Who this affects

     Military members, their families, and retirees who use TRICARE for mental health care. Mental health counselors whose schools are accredited by the listed bodies but who currently cannot be reimbursed by TRICARE.

     Tradeoff

     Expanding which counselors TRICARE covers could increase access to mental health care for military families, but it could also raise program costs.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Director of the Defense Health Agency shall evaluate the feasibility and advisability of permitting reimbursement under the TRICARE program of certified mental health counselors who hold a masters or higher-level degree in counseling from a program that is accredited by a covered institution.

174. Fixing TRICARE specialty care provider directories

     This section requires the Defense Health Agency to make TRICARE health insurance directories more accurate for specialty care providers. New managed care contracts must include rules that force specialty providers to confirm their directory information at least four times a year. Contractors must also send outreach emails, prompt providers to check their info when billing, and let patients report wrong listings. Contractors must run monthly random tests by calling provider phone numbers listed in the directory to see if the information is correct. Financial penalties can be applied when information is wrong. Twice a year for three years, the Defense Health Agency's Inspector General must run its own random tests and report results to Congress. The Defense Health Agency director must brief Congress every year for five years on what is working. The Comptroller General must review progress every year for three years.

     Who this affects

     Military members, retirees, and their families who use TRICARE health coverage. Specialty care doctors and other providers listed in the TRICARE network directory are also directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     More accurate directories help patients find real, in-network providers, but the new verification and reporting requirements add administrative work for providers and contractors.

     Show the exact bill text

     make it a condition of joining the network managed by such contractor under the TRICARE program for specialty care providers to validate their provider directory information not less frequently than quarterly

175. Longer start-up time for TRICARE health care contractors

     This section changes how much time a new TRICARE contractor gets to set up before fully taking over. The old rule gave contractors nine months after winning the contract, with a hard limit of one year. The new rule gives contractors one full year, but the clock starts when the transition period of work actually begins, not when the contract is signed. This gives contractors more flexible time to prepare for an orderly handover of health care services.

     Who this affects

     Companies that win contracts to run TRICARE health care services for military members and their families. It also affects the military members and families who rely on smooth transitions between TRICARE contractors.

     Tradeoff

     Contractors get more time to prepare, which may reduce disruptions during transitions, but it could also mean a longer period before a new contractor is fully operational.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking nine months after the date of the award of the contract, but in no case later than one year after the date of such award and inserting one year after the date on which the transition period of performance begins under the contract to allow for adequate start-up time for an orderly transition

176. Fixes to cancer coverage pilot program for military families

     This section makes five small corrections to a cancer coverage pilot program created in the 2026 defense bill. It extends the program's end date from September 30, 2027 to January 31, 2028. It changes where program information must be posted, from any public website to the official TRICARE website. It adjusts the language around how eligibility is verified. It updates a year reference from 2026 to 2027. It also clarifies that a person must be enrolled in a health plan option under TRICARE, not just enrolled in TRICARE generally.

     Who this affects

     Military servicemembers, veterans, and their families who use TRICARE and may need supplemental cancer coverage through this pilot program.

     Tradeoff

     The changes extend the program and tighten its rules, but they do not expand who qualifies or how much coverage is provided.

     Show the exact bill text

     in subsection (a), by striking September 30, 2027 and inserting January 31, 2028

177. Helmet coverage for infant head-shaping condition under military health plan

     This section changes the TRICARE military health program. It adds cranial orthotic devices, also called molding helmets, to the list of covered benefits. These helmets treat deformational plagiocephaly, a condition where a baby's head becomes flat or misshapen. Under this change, the helmets qualify as reconstructive medical treatment. That means TRICARE can pay for them. Before this change, the helmets were not explicitly listed as a covered benefit.

     Who this affects

     Military families enrolled in TRICARE whose infants have been diagnosed with deformational plagiocephaly. Pediatric patients who need molding helmets would be the direct beneficiaries.

     Tradeoff

     More families get coverage for a medical device their infants may need, but the federal government takes on the added cost of paying for these helmets.

     Show the exact bill text

     Cranial orthotic devices (molding helmets) for deformational plagiocephaly may be provided as part of a reconstructive medical treatment.

178. Updates to health law definitions for military health care

     This section makes small wording changes to the Public Health Service Act. First, it updates the definition of 'armed forces' to match the definition already used in federal military law. It also adds a definition for 'Defense Agency' using that same source. Second, it changes two rules about medical record confidentiality. Those rules already covered the Uniformed Services health system. Now they also cover the Defense Agency that runs military health care under federal law. Finally, the section says these changes count as if they had been made back in 2016, when the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 became law.

     Who this affects

     Military service members and their families who use the military health care system. It also affects how health record privacy rules apply to the Defense Health Agency.

     Tradeoff

     Aligning definitions across laws makes rules clearer and more consistent, but backdating the changes to 2016 could affect how past legal questions are interpreted.

     Show the exact bill text

     in paragraph (1), by inserting or the Defense Agency responsible for military health care under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, after Uniformed Services

179. Expanded mental health counselor eligibility under TRICARE

     This section changes which mental health counselors can be paid through TRICARE, the military health insurance program. Right now, counselors need a degree from a program accredited by one specific group (the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs). This section lets counselors qualify if their degree comes from any of 12 broader regional or national accrediting bodies instead. The Defense Department must start following the new rule within one year of the law passing. Within 30 days of passage, the Secretary of Defense must brief Congress on how the change will be put into place.

     Who this affects

     Mental health counselors who hold masters or higher degrees from broadly accredited schools but not from the specific counseling-focused accreditor. Military members, retirees, and their families who use TRICARE for mental health care.

     Tradeoff

     More counselors become eligible for TRICARE payment, which could expand access to mental health care, but it also means TRICARE may pay providers whose training standards differ from those of the specialized counseling accreditor.

     Show the exact bill text

     an individual who holds a masters or higher-level degree in counseling from a program that is accredited by a covered institution shall be treated as holding such degree from a mental health counseling program or clinical mental health counseling program that is accredited by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs.

180. Wellness checks for injured or ill service members

     This section requires the Defense Department to set up rules for checking on service members who are sick or injured. A wellness check is needed when a doctor recommends a member stay off duty for 24 hours or more. If the member does not respond to a phone or electronic check, the person doing the check must visit in person. If the member cannot be found, the checker must follow existing rules for reporting missing personnel. Unit commanders must work with legal officers to carry out these rules. Commanders must also hold regular, private meetings with medical officers to discuss health concerns in their units. Finally, training on why health accountability matters must be added to existing leadership programs.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who are sick or injured, their unit commanders, military medical officers, and Defense Department civilian personnel involved in training.

     Tradeoff

     The checks add oversight to protect service member welfare, but they also place new administrative duties on unit commanders and medical staff.

     Show the exact bill text

     a member of the Armed Forces shall be considered to have sustained a significant injury or illness or to be on sick call if a medical professional recommends an absence of the member from regular duties for 24 hours or longer

181. Medical chaperones during sensitive exams at military facilities

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a policy for all military medical facilities. Under that policy, patients must be offered a medical chaperone during sensitive medical exams. The Secretary decides which exams count as 'sensitive.' The chaperone must be available when requested. This applies to all military medical treatment facilities.

     Who this affects

     Military service members, their families, and any other patients who receive care at military medical treatment facilities. Medical staff at those facilities must follow the new policy.

     Tradeoff

     Patients gain a privacy and safety protection during sensitive exams, but the military must find and train enough chaperones to meet the requirement at all facilities.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall establish and implement a policy throughout the Department of Defense to require that a medical chaperone be offered and available to be present with a patient during any sensitive medical examination, as determined by the Secretary, conducted at a military medical treatment facility.

182. Pilot program for shared military and veterans health care facilities

     This section requires the Defense Department and the Veterans Affairs Department to run a joint pilot program for up to five years. The program tests whether the two departments can share hospitals, clinics, staff, and services more fully than they do today. Between five and ten locations would be chosen within 180 days. Priority locations include areas with provider shortages, large veteran populations, and overlapping federal medical facilities. Active-duty troops, veterans in underserved areas, and people needing specialty or behavioral health care get priority access. Veterans may also choose community care instead of a military facility. The two departments must track wait times, care quality, costs, and health record sharing. They must report results to Congress each year, and submit a final report one year before the program ends.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members, transitioning troops, veterans, and military families who use federal health care. Staff and facilities at both Defense and Veterans Affairs medical sites are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Sharing facilities and staff could cut wait times and reduce wasted resources, but it also requires new coordination systems and may add administrative complexity for both departments.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall jointly carry out a pilot program to assess the feasibility and advisability of expanding reciprocal access to health care facilities, personnel, and services between the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

183. Medical screening for troops who served at classified or hazardous sites

     This section requires the Pentagon to add a checkbox to service records for troops who served at classified locations or certain hazardous facilities. Before a permanent move away from such a location, or during any yearly health checkup, a doctor must screen the service member to see if they served at one of those sites. If they did, the doctor must run additional tests for possible exposure to hazardous substances, radiation, or other workplace dangers. Tests can include medical history reviews, physical exams, lab work, imaging, and other needed procedures. All findings must go into the member's permanent medical file. When the member leaves the military, that exposure information must be sent to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who served at classified locations or at facilities listed under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. Health care providers at the Department of Defense are also affected, as they must carry out and document these screenings.

     Tradeoff

     Troops who may have been exposed to hazards at secret sites get more thorough health monitoring, but the added screenings and record-keeping create new administrative and cost burdens for the Department of Defense.

     Show the exact bill text

     During a covered examination, a covered member shall receive— (A) a screening to determine if such member served at a covered location at any time during service in the Armed Forces; and (B) if such member served at such a location, additional exposure-specific medical screenings and evaluations to identify potential exposure to hazardous substances, radiation, or other harmful occupational and environmental hazards encountered during service in the Armed Forces.

184. Cancer screenings for Department of Defense firefighters

     This section requires the Department of Defense to offer free cancer screenings to its firefighters. During each firefighter's yearly health checkup, the military must provide tests for breast, colon, prostate, and other cancers. Breast cancer screening applies to female firefighters, with mammograms starting at age 40. Colon cancer screening applies to firefighters 40 and older. Prostate screening applies to male firefighters 50 and older, or at age 40 if they are considered high risk. The CDC can add other cancers to the required list if it finds firefighters face higher rates than the general public. Firefighters can opt out if they choose. The Pentagon must track how many tests are done and the results, but must remove personal information before analyzing the data. It may also share results with the CDC to build knowledge about cancer rates among firefighters.

     Who this affects

     All Department of Defense firefighters, meaning those whose primary job is firefighting. The Department of Defense and the CDC are also involved in tracking and sharing data.

     Tradeoff

     The program provides free cancer screening to a workforce at elevated cancer risk, but it adds ongoing costs to the Defense Department's budget.

     Show the exact bill text

     During the annual periodic health assessment of each firefighter of the Department of Defense, or at such other intervals as may be indicated in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the firefighter (at no cost to the firefighter) appropriate medical testing and related services to detect, document the presence or absence of, and prevent, certain cancers.

185. Pilot program for secure digital access to military health records

     This section tells the Defense Department to build and test a digital health record tool. The tool would let active duty service members collect their own medical records before they leave military service. The tool must work with the military's existing electronic health system. The Defense Department has 60 days to ask companies to bid on building the tool. It has 120 days to pick a contractor. It then has 180 days to run a pilot test in at least one branch of the military. After the test, the department surveys participants. Based on results, leaders can stop the program, keep it, grow it, or roll it out across all branches. No new money is allowed. The program must be paid for from existing funds through the Joint Incentive Fund. The department must brief Congress by April 1, 2027. The health record platform must meet specific security standards, including strong data encryption and the ability to share records with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

     Who this affects

     Active duty service members who receive care through the Defense Health Agency are directly affected. Private companies that build health record software may apply to provide the platform.

     Tradeoff

     The program could make it easier for service members to carry their health records after leaving the military, but it must be funded from existing Defense Department money rather than new spending.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a capability prototype that is interoperable with the electronic health record of the Department of Defense for active duty members of the Armed Forces who receive health care from the Defense Health Agency to digitally collect their medical records through a covered health record platform before separating from active duty.

186. Tracking and reviewing military-civilian health care partnerships

     This section requires the Defense Department to build and keep a central list of all its health care partnerships with civilian organizations. Each branch of the military must also keep its own list and share it with the Defense Health Agency. Once a year, the agency must review each military medical facility's local area to check how well those partnerships are working. The review looks at gaps in care, costs, quality, and medical readiness. The Defense Department must set standard measures to judge partnership performance. Starting April 1, 2027, and every year for five more years, the Defense Department must brief Congress on what it found, including any plans to expand, cut, or change partnerships.

     Who this affects

     Military service members, their families, and other people who use military health facilities are affected. Civilian hospitals and health care providers that work with the military are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     More oversight and data could improve care and cut waste, but building and maintaining the inventory and conducting yearly reviews will take staff time and money.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not less frequently than annually, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the Defense Health Agency, shall conduct a catchment area assessment of military–civilian health care partnerships and resource-sharing agreements of the Department of Defense.

187. Review required before shrinking military hospitals or clinics

     This section adds new rules before the Department of Defense can shrink, reorganize, or cut services at a military medical treatment facility. Before taking any such action, the Secretary of Defense must complete a detailed review. That review must check whether local civilian hospitals can handle the extra patients. It must also check whether nearby VA facilities have enough room and are easy to reach. It must look at how the change would affect wait times, travel distances, and access to specialists. It must assess whether military doctors would still get enough patient care experience to stay ready for combat. It must also consider risks to patients with ongoing or complex health needs. After the review, the Secretary must send a written certification and summary to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees. In addition, the Secretary must talk with those committees at least one year before moving forward with any such change.

     Who this affects

     Military service members, retirees, and their families who use military medical facilities. It also affects military medical staff and the oversight committees in Congress.

     Tradeoff

     The review requirement may protect patient access and medical readiness, but it also adds time and steps before the Pentagon can make facility changes, even when those changes might save money or improve efficiency.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may not carry out any action initiated after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 to downsize, realign, or otherwise reduce the scope of services at a military medical treatment facility until the Secretary conducts a comprehensive review consistent with this subsection.

188. Commander notification policy for service members at imminent suicide risk

     This section requires the Defense Department to create a clear policy within 180 days. The policy covers when military doctors must tell a service member's commander that the member faces imminent suicide risk. The policy must define 'imminent risk' using medical standards. It must cover things like suicidal thoughts, plans, and access to weapons. The policy limits what personal health details commanders can receive. It protects members from unfair job actions just because they sought mental health care. Health care providers and commanders must both receive training. The Defense Department must report to Congress within one year on how the policy is working.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members who receive mental health care through the military health system are affected. Military commanders and health care providers within the Defense Department are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Notifying commanders quickly may improve a member's safety, but sharing health information with command could discourage members from seeking mental health care.

     Show the exact bill text

     require timely notification to the appropriate commander when such a determination is made, while ensuring that only the minimum necessary information is disclosed to protect the privacy of the member

189. Defense Health Program oversight authority

     This section changes who is in charge of the Defense Health Program. It adds a new rule to existing law. The rule says the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs has authority over the entire Defense Health Program. Before this change, the law did not clearly state that one person held full authority over the whole program.

     Who this affects

     The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs gains clear legal authority. Members of the military and their families who use Defense Health Program services may be affected by how the program is managed.

     Tradeoff

     Centralizing authority under one official could make the program more consistent, but it also concentrates decision-making power in a single position.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs shall have authority over the entirety of the Defense Health Program.

190. Military health system billing improvement program

     This section requires the Department of Defense to launch a program within 180 days to improve how military hospitals and clinics bill and collect payments from outside health insurers. The program must standardize billing steps across all military medical facilities. It sets goals for faster and more accurate claims, fewer rejected bills, and better medical record-keeping. A senior Defense Health Agency official must lead the effort. The military can hire outside contractors to help. The program must work with the military's existing GENESIS electronic health record system. It can use automation and artificial intelligence to improve billing accuracy. Progress reports are due to Congress every 90 days for at least two years. The program ends three years after the law takes effect.

     Who this affects

     Military medical treatment facilities and their billing staff. Patients are indirectly affected because accurate billing and records can affect deployment eligibility and disability decisions.

     Tradeoff

     Improving billing collections could bring in more money for the military health system, but the program requires staff time, training, and possible contractor costs to set up.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, shall implement an enterprise-wide revenue cycle improvement initiative...to standardize revenue cycle management processes, strengthen governance and accountability, improve workforce capability, and increase the accuracy, timeliness, and yield of third-party collections and claims management across the military health system.

191. Reporting military medical professionals under investigation to state boards

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to notify state licensing and medical boards within 30 days of certain events. Those events are: when an investigation that could lead to criminal charges begins against a licensed military medical professional, or when that professional is formally charged with misconduct. The notice must go to the relevant state boards in the state where the professional is licensed.

     Who this affects

     Licensed medical professionals employed by the Department of Defense. State licensing and medical boards that oversee those professionals.

     Tradeoff

     Faster state board notification may help protect patients sooner, but it also means professionals face state board scrutiny before any charges are proven.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 30 days after a covered event with respect to misconduct allegedly committed by a licensed medical professional of the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense shall notify the relevant State licensing and medical boards regarding such misconduct.

192. Review of mental health disclosure rules for military health care providers

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to review all forms and processes used to credential and grant privileges to military health care providers. The review must happen within 180 days after a new centralized credentialing system is up and running. The goal is to find every place where applicants are asked to disclose mental, behavioral, or psychological health conditions. It also requires a comparison of these forms across the different military branches and the Defense Health Agency. The Secretary must then report the findings to Congress within one year, along with a plan and timeline for any changes.

     Who this affects

     Military health care providers applying for credentials or privileges within the Department of Defense. It also affects the military departments and the Defense Health Agency, which must align their forms and policies.

     Tradeoff

     The review could lead to fewer or clearer mental health disclosure requirements for providers, which may encourage them to seek care, but it could also raise questions about how to balance provider privacy with patient safety.

     Show the exact bill text

     identify questions, required disclosures, or other information required to be provided by the applicant that asks or requires the applicant to disclose mental, behavioral, psychological, or other related health conditions of the applicant

193. Expanding military toxic exposure tracking records

     This section expands the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record (ILER), a database that tracks harmful exposures for military members. It gives the Secretary of Defense new options. First, family members' exposures can be added when they live with a service member on an accompanied tour, anywhere in the world. Second, service members, veterans, family members, and survivors can get password-protected access to view their own records and request corrections. Third, the system could send real-time alerts about possible toxic exposures. Fourth, records can be kept after a person dies, to help with survivor benefits and research. The Defense Secretary must have the ILER at full operating capacity within two years. By January 1, 2028, the Secretary must report to Congress on whether each new feature will be put in place, and why or why not.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members, veterans, their family members, and survivors who may have been exposed to toxic substances during military service or accompanied tours.

     Tradeoff

     Broader record-keeping and access could improve health tracking and survivor benefits, but it also means storing more personal health data for more people, which raises privacy and data security considerations.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary may include in the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record of a member of the armed forces exposures experienced by family members of such member during an accompanied tour while such member is serving on active duty, regardless of whether the location is in the continental United States, outside the continental United States, or a classified location.

194. Pilot program for voice-based drug testing screening

     This section orders the Department of Defense to run a test program at up to five military bases. The program would cover between 40,000 and 50,000 active-duty service members. It tests whether voice analysis technology can predict who is at higher risk of drug use. Those flagged as higher risk would then be targeted for drug tests. The goal is to reduce the number of universal urine tests given to all personnel. Any technology used must be scientifically validated and peer-reviewed before the program starts. The program must also protect privacy under the Privacy Act of 1974. The Defense Secretary decides when to end the program.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty military members at up to five installations. The Defense Department's drug testing staff and programs are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Using voice screening may lower testing costs and save time, but it also raises questions about accuracy and whether automated risk scores could unfairly flag certain service members.

     Show the exact bill text

     only be conducted if the proposed voice-based automated screening technology or any other proposed screening technology is scientifically validated, peer-reviewed, and legally defensible as defined by the Secretary of Defense.

195. Military illness and non-combat injury tracking system

     This section directs the Secretary of Defense to build and run a new tracking system called the Joint Disease and Non-Battle Injury Surveillance and Readiness System (Joint DNBI System). The system would monitor health problems not caused by enemy action, such as infectious disease, heat injury, and training accidents. It covers active-duty troops, reservists on federal duty, and some other Defense Department personnel. The system must connect to military electronic health records and readiness reports. It must give commanders near-real-time health data. Each military department must use standard reporting rules and include illness and injury data in readiness reports. Patient data must follow existing federal privacy laws. The Secretary must brief Congress each year on trends. The system ends on September 30, 2032.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty military members, reservists in federal service, and some other Defense Department personnel. Military commanders and planners would also receive data from the system.

     Tradeoff

     The system could improve military readiness by giving commanders better health data, but it requires new spending, cybersecurity measures, and standardized reporting across all military branches.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall establish and maintain a Joint Disease and Non-Battle Injury Surveillance and Readiness System (in this section referred to as the Joint DNBI System) within the Defense Health Agency to provide standardized, interoperable, and real-time monitoring of disease and non-battle injury across the armed forces.

196. Protecting Army aeromedical evacuation units

     This section requires the Army Medical Service Corps to keep a dedicated aeromedical evacuation capability. That means specific personnel, training, doctrine, and aircraft set up only for medical evacuation missions. The Army's aviation branch controls how aircraft are organized and equipped. The Army's medical department controls patient care and clinical standards. The capability must support combat commanders, disaster response, chemical or biological emergencies, and base emergency medical services. The Army cannot move these units into general-purpose aviation or dual-use setups without first notifying Congress. That notice must include a formal risk assessment and a report based on current Army force structure documents. The Surgeon General of the Army keeps authority over medical staffing, oversight, and doctrine for these units. This section takes effect 180 days after the bill becomes law.

     Who this affects

     U.S. Army Medical Service Corps personnel and aeromedical evacuation units. It also affects patients who rely on dedicated military medical transport during combat, disasters, or other emergencies.

     Tradeoff

     Keeping a dedicated aeromedical evacuation force protects specialized medical capacity, but it limits the Army's flexibility to reorganize aviation assets without congressional review.

     Show the exact bill text

     The capability required under subsection (a) shall remain a distinct component within the Medical Service Corps of the Army and may not be restructured into general-purpose aviation elements or dual-use configurations without prior notification to the congressional defense committees

197. U.S. military medical partnership with Indo-Pacific and Arctic nations

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to build a joint medical program with partner countries in the Indo-Pacific and Arctic regions by June 1, 2027. The program covers sharing lessons from past combat care, holding joint medical conferences, and exchanging knowledge on health policy and medical supplies. It also sets up student exchange programs between the U.S. military's health sciences university and partner-nation military medical schools. Partners would receive training in trauma care, infectious disease, brain injuries, PTSD, and threats from chemical or nuclear weapons. The Defense Health Agency's Joint Trauma System would coordinate best practices across all partner militaries. The Secretary can add more activities as needed.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military medical personnel, students at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, and military medical services in Indo-Pacific and Arctic partner nations.

     Tradeoff

     The program could improve combat medical readiness across allied militaries, but it requires the Defense Department to commit staff, resources, and time to build and maintain these international partnerships.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than June 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense, working in coordination with the commanders of the appropriate combatant commands, shall seek to enter into a partnership with appropriate governmental counterparts in the Indo-Pacific and Arctic regions to establish a joint program focused on military trauma care and research.

198. Safe air transport for troops with dangerous infectious diseases

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a program by September 30, 2027. The program must safely move military and civilian Defense personnel by air when they are infected or possibly infected with a serious infectious disease. The program must train and certify medical staff for these flights. It must set safety rules to protect pilots and medical crews. It must manage equipment like protective gear and isolation systems. It must also work with other federal, state, local, and civilian partners to coordinate responses. The Defense Department must write rules and guidance to keep this program running across all its branches.

     Who this affects

     Military and civilian Defense Department personnel who may be exposed to dangerous infectious diseases. Pilots, medical crews, and support staff who transport infected patients are also directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     Building and maintaining this program adds cost and complexity to the Defense Department's budget, but it creates a dedicated system to protect service members and contain infectious disease outbreaks.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than September 30, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall establish, sustain, and resource a program to provide for the safe, long-range aerial transport of personnel of the Department of Defense known to be or suspected of being infected by a high-consequence infectious disease.

199. Annual report on combat casualty estimates

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress on projected military casualties in large-scale combat. The first report is due within 180 days of the law passing. After that, reports must come every year until 2032. Congress can also ask for reports more often. Each report must cover expected casualties, including deaths, wounds, missing troops, and non-battle injuries. It must also assess the military's medical system, including hospital beds, blood supplies, and medical staff. The report must identify gaps in medical readiness and recommend fixes. Most of the report will be classified, but a short unclassified summary must also be provided.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense, the Defense Health Agency, and military medical leaders must produce these reports. Members of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees will receive and review them.

     Tradeoff

     The reports give Congress detailed insight into military medical readiness, but most of the information will be classified and not available to the general public.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter until September 30, 2032, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on projected casualties of the Armed Forces in large-scale combat operations.

200. Review of emergency medical services on military bases

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to write a report within 180 days. The report must cover how emergency medical services (EMS) are organized and run across all military bases. It must look at ambulance numbers, staff training, response times, and survival rates for cardiac arrests. It must also check how well defibrillators (devices that restart a stopped heart) are placed and maintained on bases. The report must look at how base EMS works with nearby civilian hospitals and local emergency systems. It must note any gaps in equipment, staff, or funding. The Secretary must also give recommendations for creating one set of EMS standards across all of the Department of Defense. Finally, the Secretary must brief Congress on the findings within 30 days after the report is submitted.

     Who this affects

     Military service members, their families, and civilians who live or work on military bases. It also affects EMS staff, base commanders, and the Defense Health Agency.

     Tradeoff

     Producing this report requires time and staff resources from the Department of Defense, but it could lead to more consistent and faster emergency care across all military bases.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the organization, oversight, capabilities, and performance of emergency medical services across military installations.

201. Health care license portability for National Guard medical providers

     This section changes a rule about medical licenses for National Guard health care workers. Right now, certain providers can treat patients across state lines while on some types of duty. This section adds another type of duty to that list: Title 32 duty, which is state-controlled National Guard service paid by the federal government. Under the change, a National Guard medical provider on Title 32 duty can use their home-state license to treat members of the uniformed services, even if they are working in a different state.

     Who this affects

     National Guard medical providers working Title 32 duty, and the uniformed service members they treat.

     Tradeoff

     Expanding license portability makes it easier to provide care across state lines, but it also means a provider may practice in a state where they are not locally licensed or reviewed.

     Show the exact bill text

     under title 32 when providing care to a member of the uniformed services.

202. Military medical readiness planning and standardization

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to build a formal process within 180 days. The process must figure out what medical care the military needs during combat and other operations. It covers wounded, sick, and injured troops from the moment of injury through full recovery. The process must also standardize medical equipment across all branches, collect lessons from past operations, and feed those lessons back into training and education programs. Each year through 2031, the Secretary must brief Congress on progress. A related older law from 2019 is repealed because this section replaces it.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty military members who may need medical care during operations. It also affects military medical staff, educators, and trainers across all branches and the Defense Health Agency.

     Tradeoff

     Building a unified medical planning process across all branches may improve care and readiness, but it requires significant coordination, time, and resources from multiple agencies.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of each military department, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, shall develop a process to establish required joint force medical capabilities for members of the Armed Forces that meet the operational planning requirements of the combatant commands.

203. Allowing U.S. and allied military doctors to work together more easily

     This section lets military health care workers from the U.S. and certain partner countries work more freely alongside each other. It adds Japan, South Korea, France, Germany, and Qatar to a list of countries whose military medical staff can practice under shared rules with U.S. forces. It also lets U.S. military medical staff work inside foreign military medical facilities or on their platforms during joint duties. Before that happens, a regional military commander must confirm that there is enough legal protection for the health care workers at that location. All exchanges still must follow existing licensing rules.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military health care professionals and their counterparts from Japan, South Korea, France, Germany, and Qatar. It also affects military commanders who must review and approve these arrangements.

     Tradeoff

     Expanding this program can improve medical teamwork with allies, but it requires commanders to carefully check that U.S. medical staff have enough legal protection in each foreign location.

     Show the exact bill text

     the commander of the appropriate geographic combatant command, or an authorized designee, following a review of applicable international agreements, national laws, and regulations, shall certify that sufficient mitigation of criminal and civil liability for health care professionals exists in the location in which authorized Federal duties are to be performed.

204. Task force for military medical partnerships in the Indo-Pacific

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to create a task force within 60 days of the law passing. The task force will work to secure agreements with foreign governments and medical facilities in the Indo-Pacific region. These agreements would let U.S. military personnel use foreign hospitals and medical sites during both peacetime and wartime. The task force will be led by a senior Pentagon official and will include members from the military branches, the State Department, the Defense Health Agency, and the Defense Logistics Agency. The group must identify which foreign governments are the best partners, review existing agreements, and build a plan to fill any gaps. Within 90 days, the task force must send Congress a progress report listing priority countries, what cooperation is wanted with each, and a plan to overcome any barriers by March 2027.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military service members who may need medical care or evacuation in the Indo-Pacific region. Foreign governments and medical facilities that could enter into agreements with the United States.

     Tradeoff

     Building these partnerships could improve care for injured troops in the region, but it requires diplomatic negotiations with foreign governments that may be slow or may not succeed.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall establish a task force responsible for securing and negotiating the international agreements required to implement the Indo-Pacific Medical Readiness Program

205. Pilot program for sharing medical data in the Indo-Pacific region

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to build a test health information technology platform. The platform would connect military and civilian medical facilities across the Indo-Pacific region. It would let doctors share patient health records quickly during a crisis or conflict. The platform must work on many devices, including in areas with low internet access. It must follow privacy and cybersecurity rules and support multiple languages used in the region. The Secretary has 180 days to send Congress a plan for the platform. One year after it launches, the Secretary must report back on how well it worked.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military service members and U.S. civilians in the Indo-Pacific region would benefit from faster medical care. Health care providers, defense agencies, and partner-nation medical facilities would use the platform.

     Tradeoff

     Faster sharing of health records during a crisis could improve care, but connecting military and civilian systems across many countries raises privacy and cybersecurity risks that the platform must try to manage.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall develop a pilot health information technology platform...that can function across military and civilian medical facilities in the United States and foreign countries in the area of operations of the United States Indo-Pacific Command.

206. Review of chaperone policies at military health facilities

     This section requires the Defense Health Agency (DHA) to check whether all of its medical facilities follow a December 2025 policy on using chaperones during sensitive medical exams. The DHA director has 60 days to complete that review. If a facility is not following the policy, the director must tell Congress within seven days what resources are needed to fix that. Within 180 days, the director must send a full report to the Armed Services Committees in both chambers. That report must include findings from the review, a plan with timelines to reach compliance, an assessment of resource limits, plans for stronger formal guidance, a system for ongoing monitoring with inspections and data collection, a look at how current law affects chaperone use, and suggestions for changes to the law.

     Who this affects

     Military service members and other patients who receive care at DHA facilities. It also affects DHA leadership and facility staff who must follow and enforce chaperone rules.

     Tradeoff

     Stronger oversight and reporting may improve patient safety during sensitive exams, but it also places new administrative and resource demands on the DHA.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Defense Health Agency shall review the compliance by all facilities of the Defense Health Agency with chaperone policies required by the policy memorandum of the Defense Health Agency dated December 15, 2025.

207. Defense Health Agency unfunded priorities reporting

     This section requires the Director of the Defense Health Agency to send a report to Congress and top military leaders within 10 days after the President's annual budget is released. The report must list programs and projects that the agency needs but did not receive funding for. For each unfunded item, the report must explain what it is, how much money is needed, why it was left out of the budget, and what risks would be reduced if it were funded. The items must be ranked by urgency. The requirement ends five years after the law is enacted.

     Who this affects

     The Defense Health Agency and its leadership must produce and submit the report. Congress, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff receive it.

     Tradeoff

     The report gives Congress more information about military health needs that were left unfunded, but it adds a recurring reporting burden on the Defense Health Agency.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 10 days after the date on which the budget of the President for a fiscal year is submitted to Congress...the Director of the Defense Health Agency shall submit...a report on the unfunded priorities of the Defense Health Agency.

208. Review of menopause research for women in the military

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to study what is already known about menopause and perimenopause in female service members. The review must look at completed and ongoing research. It must also find gaps in knowledge about treatments, the link between military service and menopause, the effect of combat roles and toxic exposures (such as burn pits and PFAS chemicals), and mental health impacts. The Secretary must also check whether military doctors are trained on mid-life women's health and whether treatments are available to female service members who need them. By January 31, 2028, the Secretary must send Congress a report with findings, training recommendations, and a strategic plan to fill research gaps. The effort must avoid duplicating work already done by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Health and Human Services.

     Who this affects

     Female service members experiencing perimenopause or menopause are directly affected. Military health care providers (covered providers) are also affected because the review looks at their training.

     Tradeoff

     The section adds a reporting and planning requirement for the Defense Department, which takes staff time and resources, but it may lead to better care for female service members.

     Show the exact bill text

     the effect of combat roles on symptoms relating to perimenopause and menopause, including exposure to burn pits, toxic chemicals, and perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (commonly known as PFAS)

209. Reporting on serious failures at military hospitals

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to notify Congress within 30 days when a major failure happens in a key area of a military hospital. Key areas include operating rooms, intensive care units, critical care units, and emergency departments. The notice must explain what broke down, why it happened, and how long it will last. It must also cover how many patients were affected and what steps are being taken to keep them safe. Starting May 1, 2027, the Secretary must give Congress a briefing every three months for three years. Those briefings will summarize all reported failures, available repair funding, and any suggested changes to the law.

     Who this affects

     Military service members, their families, and retirees who use military hospitals. Defense Department leaders and hospital administrators must prepare and submit these reports.

     Tradeoff

     More oversight may improve accountability and patient safety, but it adds new reporting work for the Defense Department.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall notify the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 30 days after the date on which a material failure affects patient care in an operating room, critical care unit, intensive care unit, or emergency department at a military medical treatment facility.

210. Study on the military health system

     This section directs the Secretary of Defense to hire a federally funded research and development center by June 2027. That center will study the military health system. The study must look at how well the current system supports troops in combat, protects force health, and provides care to service members and their families. It must also examine several possible future models. Those models include keeping the current TRICARE program as is, creating a marketplace of health plans similar to the federal employee benefit plan, requiring doctors in Medicare to also accept TRICARE patients, or merging military health care with the VA's community care model. Each option must include cost estimates and an analysis of risks to existing military medical facilities. The center must send its full report to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary must then send an unaltered copy to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees and give those committees a briefing by March 1, 2028.

     Who this affects

     Active duty service members, military retirees, and their dependents who use TRICARE are affected. Military medical providers, managed care contractors, and defense health administrators are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The study could lead to cost savings or better coverage, but changing the health system structure could also disrupt care that millions of military families currently rely on.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than June 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into a contract or other agreement with a federally funded research and development center pursuant to which the center shall carry out a study on the military health system.

211. Warfighter Performance Optimization Initiative

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a new program called the Warfighter Performance Optimization Initiative. The program brings together existing health and fitness efforts under one framework called Total Force Fitness. It covers four areas: physical fitness (reducing injuries and improving nutrition and sleep), psychological and social fitness (building resilience and preventing suicide and substance abuse), spiritual fitness (supporting ethical decision-making and stress management), and cognitive fitness (improving decision-making and problem-solving). The program sits under the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs. The Secretary of Defense must report to Congress every 90 days for three years on how the program is working.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members and military personnel across all branches of the Armed Forces. The program also touches military families through social fitness support.

     Tradeoff

     The initiative could improve military readiness and reduce injuries, but it adds new reporting requirements and may require funding and staff to manage the expanded program.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries concerned, shall establish a comprehensive initiative for warfighter performance optimization to be known as the Warfighter Performance Optimization Initiative...within which the Total Force Fitness (TFF) program shall serve as the foundational framework for improving readiness, resilience, and lethality across the Armed Forces.

212. Military Family Limb Loss and Limb Difference Support Program

     Starting in fiscal year 2028, the Department of Defense must create a new program to help military families dealing with limb loss or limb differences. The program would offer peer mentoring, education about limb care, help returning to community life, and coordination of non-medical resources. The Defense Secretary can partner with outside organizations that already have experience helping people with limb loss, including children and veterans. Within 180 days of the bill becoming law, the Secretary must send Congress a plan covering costs, staffing, performance goals, and how the program connects to military health research. Annual reports to Congress are required for the first four years of the program.

     Who this affects

     Military family members and others covered under military health care (chapter 55, title 10) who have experienced limb loss or limb difference. This includes dependents of active-duty and retired service members.

     Tradeoff

     The program adds new support services for a specific group of military family members, but it also requires federal spending on staffing, contracts, and administration that has not yet been estimated.

     Show the exact bill text

     Beginning in fiscal year 2028, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a program, to be known as the Military Family Limb Loss and Limb Difference Support Program...to augment the holistic rehabilitative care for covered beneficiaries with limb loss or limb dysfunction through peer mentoring, education, and community outreach.

213. Review of primary care gaps at Air Force medical facilities

     This section requires the Defense Health Agency to brief Congress within 180 days. The briefing must cover the mix of active-duty and civilian doctors at Air Force base clinics. It must also identify any primary care shortfalls that could appear if the Air Force mobilizes for war, especially at remote or underserved locations. For each facility with a shortfall, the agency must provide a plan to improve care access, recruit and keep medical staff, and sharpen military medical readiness. The briefing must also include hiring tools, such as student loan repayment and direct-hire authorities, along with quality metrics like patient wait times and provider numbers. Finally, it must assess whether a pilot program hiring civilian health care workers could help meet those needs.

     Who this affects

     Service members and their families who receive care at Air Force base medical clinics. Civilian and active-duty medical staff at those facilities are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The briefing could reveal care gaps and lead to more civilian hires and incentives, but that may increase costs and raise questions about balancing civilian versus active-duty medical staffing.

     Show the exact bill text

     an assessment of the force mix of active duty and civilian medical providers at military medical treatment facilities located on installations of the Air Force; and an accompanying plan to address any primary care shortfalls that could result from a mobilization of the Air Force for military operations, particularly in locations that are remote or medically underserved.

214. Audit of the military pharmacy benefits program

     This section requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO), led by the Comptroller General, to audit the TRICARE pharmacy benefits program within one year. The audit must look at how much contractors charge the military for drugs versus how much they pay pharmacies. It must also examine reimbursement rates, prior authorization rules, prescription fill times, and whether military families can actually reach a pharmacy. The contractor running TRICARE pharmacy benefits must hand over all requested data within 30 days. Contractors cannot hide information by calling it a trade secret or proprietary, though the GAO must keep it from the public. Refusing to share data counts as a serious contract violation. If the audit finds that pharmacies are paid less than their cost to buy drugs, the GAO must also assess how that affects pharmacy participation and patient access. The Defense Secretary must report a plan to Congress within 90 days and must update existing contracts to meet these new rules.

     Who this affects

     Military members and their families who use TRICARE pharmacy benefits are affected, as are the private contractors who run the program and the pharmacies (retail, mail order, and specialty) that fill prescriptions for those beneficiaries.

     Tradeoff

     Greater oversight and transparency into contractor pricing could reveal hidden costs or access problems, but it may also add compliance burdens on contractors and could affect how future pharmacy contracts are structured.

     Show the exact bill text

     Failure to provide information required under this subsection shall constitute a material breach of contract.

215. Review of military influenza vaccine rules

     This section asks the Government Accountability Office (the Comptroller General) to study how the Department of Defense handles flu vaccine requirements for service members. The review must describe both old and new rules, including a policy memo issued April 20, 2026. It must also look at what risks and benefits the Secretary of Defense weighed before changing the policy. The review must examine whether the new rules affect the military's ability to meet medical readiness goals. The Comptroller General must brief the Senate and House Armed Services Committees by September 30, 2027, and then deliver a written report.

     Who this affects

     Military service members subject to flu vaccine rules are affected. The Department of Defense and congressional Armed Services Committees are also involved.

     Tradeoff

     The review could provide useful information about military health readiness, but it takes time and staff resources from the Comptroller General's office.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a review of the influenza vaccine requirements of the Department of Defense and the considerations that led to recent policy changes with respect to such requirements as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

216. Multi-year purchase contracts for weapons and ammunition

     This section lets the Defense Department sign multi-year purchase contracts starting in fiscal year 2027 for 19 specific weapons and munitions. The list includes missiles like the Javelin and Naval Strike Missile, torpedoes, sea mines, guided rockets, bombs, and sonobuoys used to detect submarines. It also covers 6.8mm infantry ammunition. The idea is to buy in bulk over several years instead of one year at a time. Buying in bulk can lower the price per unit. Contracts can be new deals or changes to existing ones. The government can also buy parts or materials early if that saves money. Any payments due after 2027 still depend on Congress approving funding for those later years.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors who make these weapons and the military branches that buy them. Taxpayers fund these contracts.

     Tradeoff

     Multi-year contracts can reduce unit costs through bulk buying, but they commit the government to spending across future years that Congress has not yet fully approved.

     Show the exact bill text

     the head of an agency is authorized to enter into one or more multi-year contracts, beginning in fiscal year 2027, for the procurement of any of the following systems

217. Holding back defense travel funds until software acquisition report is delivered

     This section withholds 5 percent of travel funds for a specific Pentagon office until the Secretary of Defense sends a report to Congress. The report must arrive within 90 days of the law taking effect. It must cover how the Pentagon is rolling out its 'Software Pathway,' a preferred method for buying and developing software. The report must explain progress on adopting the Software Pathway across military departments and defense agencies. It must also describe steps to make commercial contracting tools the default way to buy software capabilities. Once Congress receives the report, the remaining funds can be spent.

     Who this affects

     The Pentagon's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment is directly affected, since its travel budget is held back. Military departments and defense agencies are also affected because the report covers their software buying practices.

     Tradeoff

     Tying funds to the report gives Congress a way to check on software acquisition progress, but it briefly limits a Pentagon office's travel spending until the report is delivered.

     Show the exact bill text

     Of the funds described in subsection (c), not more than 95 percent may be obligated or expended until the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits the report required under subsection (b).

218. Required report on multi-year defense purchase contracts

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to include a detailed report in the annual budget materials sent to Congress. The report must cover all active multi-year purchase contracts used by the Defense Department. For each contract, the report must show which years it covers, the total cost, how much money is spent each year, and how many items are being produced. It must also list all multi-year contracts planned for the next several budget years. Finally, it must explain why each contract saves money or helps keep defense suppliers stable. The Defense Department must use existing offices and tools to gather this data, not create new ones.

     Who this affects

     The Defense Department, its military branches, and defense contractors who hold multi-year supply contracts. Congress also benefits by receiving clearer information on long-term spending commitments.

     Tradeoff

     Congress gains more visibility into long-term defense contracts, but the Defense Department must take on extra reporting work each budget cycle.

     Show the exact bill text

     A concise description of any industrial base stabilization, cost-avoidance, any efficiency benefits that justifies each current or planned multiyear request.

219. Government rights to military contractor technical data and software

     This section changes the rules for who can use technical data and software created under Defense Department contracts. Right now, contractors can limit how the government uses their data. Under this section, the default rule becomes that the government gets 'government purpose rights' to any technical data, software, or documentation delivered under a DoD contract. That means the government can use it for official purposes, including sharing it with other contractors. A company that wants to keep tighter control over its data must prove, with clear and convincing evidence, that it privately funded the development. The company must also file a detailed list of what it is claiming, show proof of private funding, and label the specific parts of the deliverables it wants to protect. If a company fails to do that, the government automatically gets the broader rights. The section also allows the government to access detailed manufacturing or process data during wartime or contingency operations, if the original supplier cannot meet military readiness needs.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and subcontractors who deliver technical data or software to the Department of Defense. The military and government agencies that use that data are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The government gains easier access to contractor data and software, which can support competition and military readiness, but contractors lose some control over proprietary information they may have funded privately.

     Show the exact bill text

     any technical data, computer software, or computer software documentation delivered under a contract, subcontract, or other agreement entered into by the Department of Defense for the acquisition of noncommercial products or services shall be provided with government purpose rights unless the contractor establishes, through clear and convincing evidence, entitlement to more restrictive rights.

220. Defense acquisition accountability, commercial experts, and financial training

     This section requires the Defense Department to improve how it buys weapons and technology in three ways. First, it must create standard performance measures for acquisition managers and build a data dashboard to track cost, schedule, and workforce health. Second, it sets up a five-year pilot program to hire 10 to 30 private-sector experts, called Senior Commercial Acquisition Executives, to guide purchases of software, artificial intelligence, cyber tools, and similar technology. These experts must have at least eight years of commercial buying experience and prior responsibility for deals worth more than $50 million. Third, it creates a pilot training program for military contracting officers called the Gold Tier Capital Certification. That training covers commercial finance, deal structuring, and private-sector investment methods. Officers who earn the certification get promotion credit, faster approval paths, and priority access to industry rotations. All three efforts require regular reports to Congress, and the pilot hiring authority ends five years after the law is enacted.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department acquisition managers and contracting officers are directly affected. Private-sector finance and technology professionals who may be hired as Senior Commercial Acquisition Executives are also affected, as are nontraditional defense contractors who may gain more access to Pentagon contracts.

     Tradeoff

     Bringing in private-sector experts and commercial finance training could speed up purchasing and reduce costs, but it also adds new bureaucratic programs, hiring costs, and oversight requirements.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall appoint not less than 10 and not more than 30 highly qualified experts as Senior Commercial Acquisition Executives — (i) to actively assist the Secretary in the development, instruction, and continuous refinement of the Gold Tier Capital Certification Training Program established under subsection (c); and (ii) to align commercial and public practices for defense acquisitions and contracts.

221. Definitions for restrictions on buying from certain foreign countries

     This section creates a new chapter in federal law that sets up the definitions used when the Defense Department limits purchases from certain foreign countries. It defines four 'covered countries': North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran. It defines 'covered entities' as companies tied to those governments, including specific firms like Huawei, ZTE, Hikvision, Hytera, and Dahua. It defines 'covered items' as goods or services that can be restricted, such as telecommunications equipment, drones, printed circuit boards, and batteries. It also defines 'covered telecommunications equipment or services' to include equipment made by those named companies or any company the Secretary of Defense believes is controlled by a covered country's government.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and suppliers who sell goods or services to the U.S. military. Companies based in or tied to North Korea, China, Russia, or Iran are directly named.

     Tradeoff

     Stricter definitions may block risky foreign suppliers from military contracts, but could also limit purchasing options and raise costs for the Defense Department.

     Show the exact bill text

     The term covered country means— (A) the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea); (B) the People's Republic of China; (C) the Russian Federation; and (D) the Islamic Republic of Iran.

222. Ban on military purchases from certain foreign countries and companies

     This section stops the Defense Department from buying goods or services that were made, mined, or assembled by certain foreign countries or companies listed as security risks. The ban covers a wide range of items. These include rare earth metals, chemicals, drones, printed circuit boards, batteries, personal protective equipment, telecommunications equipment, and weapons-related goods. The rule applies to both main contracts and lower-level subcontracts. However, it does not apply to contracts that were already in place before the ban took effect. Prime contractors can rely on their suppliers' written promises of compliance. They do not have to run independent audits to verify those promises.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department contractors and their suppliers who make or use materials from countries or companies flagged as security risks. This includes businesses that sell chemicals, electronics, drones, metals, or telecom equipment to the military.

     Tradeoff

     The ban adds supply chain security for the military but may raise costs or limit options for contractors who currently rely on foreign-made parts.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense may not— (1) procure, renew, or extend a contract for the procurement of any covered item that is, or contains materials or components that are mined, refined, processed, manufactured, or assembled, in whole or in part, by a covered country or covered entity

223. National security waiver for banned items

     This section lets the Secretary of Defense bypass purchasing bans on certain items and telecom equipment. The Secretary must write down why the waiver is needed for national security. The written notice must go to Congress at least 15 days before the waiver takes effect. In urgent cases, the notice can arrive up to 7 days after the waiver is issued. The Secretary can share this authority with senior military department officials for single-department needs. For waivers that cover more than one military department, the authority can go to the Deputy Secretary of Defense or the Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and its military departments are directly affected. Congress receives required notifications about each waiver.

     Tradeoff

     The waiver allows faster purchasing when national security is urgent, but it means banned items or services can be bought, and Congress may only learn about it after the fact in emergencies.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibitions under section 4992 of this title if the Secretary determines in writing that such waiver is necessary to the national security interests of the United States.

224. Exceptions to defense procurement rules for commercial and small purchases

     This section sets out when normal defense procurement rules do not apply. Most commercial products and off-the-shelf items are covered by the chapter's rules. But off-the-shelf items get a pass from most rules unless they involve specialty metals that haven't been built into a larger product, metal forgings or castings not yet part of a finished item, or certain telecommunications equipment used in critical missions. Two other exceptions also apply. First, purchases below the simplified acquisition threshold (a dollar cutoff set in law) are exempt from one key rule. Second, purchases made outside the United States for military operations abroad or for use overseas are also exempt from that same rule.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and government buyers who purchase commercial goods, off-the-shelf items, specialty metals, or telecommunications equipment for the military. It also affects buyers making small purchases or buying goods for overseas military operations.

     Tradeoff

     Fewer rules make buying faster and cheaper, but the exemptions could reduce oversight of specialty metals and sensitive equipment used in critical military systems.

     Show the exact bill text

     This chapter only applies to COTS items that are— (A) specialty metals, including mill products, that have not been incorporated into end items, subsystems, assemblies, or components; (B) forgings or castings of specialty metals, unless incorporated into COTS end items, subsystems, or assemblies; or (C) covered items or covered telecommunications equipment or services that perform a mission-critical function and are not incorporated into end items, subsystems, assemblies, or components.

225. Stricter rules for removing risky suppliers from defense contracts

     This section updates the law that lets the Pentagon block suppliers it considers a security risk. It adds new steps before a supplier can be excluded. The Pentagon's top legal office must now sign off that the decision meets the law's requirements. The Inspector General must also review the process and confirm all rules were followed. The law must notify Congress within 5 days of any such decision, or the decision has no effect. Suppliers get a 30-day window to address the Pentagon's concerns before being cut off. The section also says this exclusion power can only be used to protect defense systems from sabotage, not to settle contract disputes or gain leverage in negotiations. It also requires the Pentagon to certify that a foreign company actually took harmful or suspicious actions before being removed.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and suppliers, especially those flagged as foreign security risks. The Pentagon's legal office and Inspector General gain new oversight duties.

     Tradeoff

     Adding more oversight steps and a 30-day window for suppliers may slow the process of removing risky vendors, but it also reduces the chance that the exclusion power is misused.

     Show the exact bill text

     A determination under this section shall not be invoked for contract disputes or as a negotiating tool and shall only be invoked to protect critical defense systems from adversary exploitation by screening out suppliers who pose unacceptable risks of sabotage or malicious subversion in the procurement process.

226. Limits on missile contracts with certain contractor control clauses

     This section restricts how the Defense Department uses money on specific missile contracts. The Defense Secretary must certify in writing that these contracts do not let the government remove or hire contractor employees, or direct how a contractor spends its own money on research or equipment. If an older contract already has such language, the government must try to remove it through negotiation. The section also bars the Defense Department from changing contract terms to help a contractor that is falling behind on cost, schedule, or performance. The only exception is a narrow emergency contracting law from 1958. The contracts covered include missiles such as the Patriot PAC-3, Tomahawk, JASSM, LRASM, SM-6, SM-3 Block IB, AMRAAM, THAAD, and certain hypersonic and low-cost cruise missile systems.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department officials who manage missile contracts, and the companies that make these missiles. Taxpayers who fund these programs are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     This section protects contractors from government overreach into their operations, but it also limits the government's ability to fix contract problems without formal legal procedures.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds appropriated by this Act or any previous Act, or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense may be obligated or expended on a covered contract or other agreement unless the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense committees, in writing, that such contract or other agreement does not contain any clause or provision that would authorize the Secretary to— (A) remove or install personnel at any prime contractor or subcontractor; or (B) direct the internal resources of any prime contractor or subcontractor

227. Spending freeze on commercial item buying system until rules are tightened

     This section blocks the Department of Defense from spending any money on its centralized commercial item buying system until two conditions are met. First, the Secretary of Defense must issue department-wide rules and update procurement regulations to carry out a 2026 law on commercial item buying. Second, the Secretary must create stricter standards for deciding when a product is NOT commercial, especially for software, artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, cloud computing, and cybersecurity tools. After the Secretary says both conditions are met, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has 180 days to review the new rules and check a sample of recent buying decisions. The GAO must then report to Congress on whether the rules are strong enough and whether decisions are being made carefully.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors selling technology products to the Pentagon, and Defense Department acquisition officials who classify items as commercial or non-commercial. Taxpayers are also affected because these rules govern how the Pentagon prices and buys goods.

     Tradeoff

     Freezing the system delays its use and may slow some procurement, but the review is meant to prevent the Pentagon from misclassifying items and overpaying for technology products.

     Show the exact bill text

     No funds authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2027, or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense, may be obligated or expended for the centralized commercial item capability required by section 3456(a) of title 10, United States Code, until the conditions described in subsection (b) are satisfied.

228. Stock buyback and dividend limits for defense contractors

     Starting June 15, 2027, any company that wants a Defense Department contract must agree in writing to stop buying back its own stock and stop paying dividends. The Secretary of Defense can waive this rule if a company commits to a "qualifying defense investment" plan. That means spending money to grow its defense business, such as building factories, buying equipment, training workers, or stockpiling materials. If a company breaks its agreement, the government can suspend payments, pull the waiver, bar the company from future contracts, or take other actions. The company has 15 days to submit a fix plan after getting a violation notice. The Pentagon must report annually to Congress on all waivers and violations, and make those reports public. This rule expires on January 1, 2031.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors that are publicly traded companies and seek Pentagon contracts after June 2027. Shareholders of those companies are also affected, since dividends and buybacks may be restricted.

     Tradeoff

     Contractors may direct more money toward defense production, but they lose flexibility in how they return profits to shareholders.

     Show the exact bill text

     beginning on June 15, 2027, the Secretary of Defense may not enter into a contract for the procurement of goods or services, unless the contractor agrees in writing that the entity shall not— (1) purchase an equity security of such entity, or any parent entity of such entity, that is listed on a national securities exchange; or (2) pay dividends or make any other capital distribution with respect to the equity securities of the entity.

229. Update to rules on buying certain critical minerals

     This section makes a small technical edit to an existing law from 2026. That law restricted the military from buying molybdenum, gallium, or germanium from unfriendly foreign countries. It also allowed the military to produce those minerals from recycled material. This section fixes a cross-reference in that law, changing the phrase 'amendments made by paragraphs (1) and (2)' to 'amendments made by this section.' It also moves one paragraph to a new location in the text. These are housekeeping changes that do not alter the substance of the underlying restrictions.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and any suppliers of molybdenum, gallium, or germanium to the military.

     Tradeoff

     The edit cleans up the legal text but does not change any policy, so there is no practical tradeoff for affected parties.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking amendments made by paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting amendments made by this section

230. Public reporting for special defense contracts

     The Department of Defense sometimes uses a flexible contracting tool called 'other transaction authority.' This tool lets the Pentagon make agreements outside normal contracting rules. Section 817 requires that any project funded this way be reported on a public website. That website was created by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. The goal is to make these spending deals visible to the public, just like regular Pentagon spending.

     Who this affects

     It affects the Department of Defense and companies or research groups that receive funds through other transaction authority agreements. It also affects taxpayers and watchdog groups who use public spending databases.

     Tradeoff

     More public reporting increases transparency and accountability, but it may add administrative work for Pentagon staff managing these flexible agreements.

     Show the exact bill text

     Any project carried out by the Department of Defense using other transaction authority under section 4021 of title 10, United States Code, shall be reported in the same manner as other Department of Defense expenditures for inclusion in the searchable public website established by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006

231. U.S.-grown flowers and greens for Defense Department purchases

     This section limits how the Department of Defense can spend money on cut flowers and cut greens. Starting one year after the law passes, the Department may only buy flowers and greens that were grown in the United States, Washington D.C., a U.S. territory, or land under a federally recognized tribal government. The Department may still accept gift flowers from foreign governments or their agents, but only if the country of origin is clearly labeled at delivery and kept on display the whole time the flowers are shown.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and its purchasing offices are affected when buying decorative flowers or greens. Foreign governments and their agents who give flowers as gifts to the Department are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The rule supports U.S. growers but may limit the Department's choices and could raise costs if domestic supply is limited.

     Show the exact bill text

     Funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense may only be used for the procurement of a cut flower or cut green if the cut flower or cut green is grown in a qualifying area.

232. Audit and removal of risky cellular modules in Defense systems

     This section requires the Department of Defense to search all its systems and infrastructure for cellular modules made by companies linked to China or flagged as supply-chain risks. The search must start within 180 days of the law passing. It covers military departments, combatant commands, defense agencies, and contractor-operated systems tied to Defense networks. The audit must record each module's maker, model, firmware, and cybersecurity risk. Within one year, and every two years for up to six years after that, the Defense Secretary must report findings and mitigation plans to Congress. Those plans can include removing and replacing modules, retiring old equipment, isolating networks, fixing firmware, or switching to trusted suppliers. Cost estimates and timelines must be included. The Government Accountability Office must then review those reports. Reports are public but can include a classified section.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and defense contractors whose systems connect to Defense networks. Any company that makes or supplies cellular modules for Defense equipment could also be affected.

     Tradeoff

     Removing risky cellular modules could improve cybersecurity, but finding and replacing them across the entire Defense enterprise is likely to cost significant time and money.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall initiate a Department-wide audit to identify the presence of covered cellular modules within covered systems.

233. Lower threshold for foreign influence disclosures by defense contractors

     This section changes a reporting rule for Defense Department contractors. Under a 2020 law, contractors had to disclose foreign ownership or control if their contracts exceeded $5 million. This section lowers that dollar threshold to $500,000. That means more contractors must now report any foreign ties to the government.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department contractors with contracts between $500,000 and $5 million who have foreign ownership or influence. They will now be required to make disclosures they did not have to make before.

     Tradeoff

     More foreign influence information becomes visible to the government, but more contractors must now go through a reporting process that takes time and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking in excess of $5,000,000 and inserting in excess of $500,000

234. Reporting large price increases on sole-source, cost-plus contracts

     This section adds a new rule for certain government contracts. It applies to cost-plus contracts that were awarded without competition. Under those contracts, sellers must tell the contracting officer within 30 days if a product or service price rises 25 percent or more above what was in the original bid or what the government paid last year. Sellers must also report if the price rises 50 percent or more above what was paid five years earlier. The rule creates a formal notice requirement so the government knows quickly when prices jump sharply.

     Who this affects

     Companies that hold sole-source, cost-plus federal contracts and the Defense Department contracting officers who manage those contracts.

     Tradeoff

     The rule gives the government faster notice of big price increases, but it adds a new reporting step that contractors must track and comply with.

     Show the exact bill text

     An offeror shall be required to report to the relevant contracting officer not later than 30 days after becoming aware that the price of a product or service under a covered contract reaches or exceeds— (1) 25 percent above the price specified in the contract bid or the government paid for that product or service the previous calendar year; or (2) 50 percent above the price paid for such a product or service 5 years earlier.

235. Reporting contractor price violations to a federal database

     This section requires the Defense Contract Audit Agency or a service acquisition executive to enter certain information into a federal database called FAPIIS. The information must be entered when a contractor fails to report required price increases on products or services sold to the military. The entry must include audit findings about the violation. It must also include details about the unreported price increase, such as the item's stock number, how many were ordered, the unit cost, the total cost, which agency bought or paid for them, and the date of the order.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors who sell goods or services to the military. Federal agencies that buy from those contractors may also be affected.

     Tradeoff

     Putting violation records in a public database can discourage price cheating, but it may also deter some contractors from bidding on government work if they fear minor reporting errors become permanent public records.

     Show the exact bill text

     Contractors who fail to report price increases as required under 3705(a)(2) of this title.

236. Late cost data submission cannot block price reductions

     This section changes a federal law about defense contracts. When a contractor charges the government too much because they gave bad cost or pricing data, the government can reduce the contract price. Contractors currently have a few defenses they can use to avoid that price cut. This section adds a new rule: if a contractor submitted their cost or pricing data after the price was already agreed upon, they cannot use that late submission as a defense. In other words, turning in data late will not protect a contractor from having to repay overcharges caused by bad data.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and subcontractors that submit cost and pricing data on federal contracts. The Department of Defense also is affected, as it gains a stronger tool to recover overcharges.

     Tradeoff

     The government gains more ability to recover overcharges, but contractors lose a legal defense that may have protected them even when late data did not actually harm the government.

     Show the exact bill text

     the cost or pricing data were submitted by the prime contractor or subcontractor after the date of agreement on the price of the contract or, if applicable consistent with subsection (a)(2), such other date agreed upon between the parties.

237. New Pentagon supply chain risk office

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a Supply Chain Risk Management Integration Cell by March 1, 2027. The Cell will sit inside the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy. Its job is to oversee all Defense Department programs that watch for risky suppliers. It will manage lists of restricted vendors, run transparency programs, and bring together data from across the department and from commercial sources. Cybersecurity duties are kept separate and will not move to this Cell. Within 90 days of the Cell opening, the Pentagon must update its acquisition rules to match the new structure. Before the Cell opens, the Pentagon must brief Congress on planned staffing, costs, and a timeline for consolidating the work.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department officials and contractors who supply goods or services to the military. Companies on restricted vendor lists may also be affected.

     Tradeoff

     Centralizing supply chain oversight could make risk decisions faster and more consistent, but it also concentrates significant authority in one office, which could create a bottleneck.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than March 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a Supply Chain Risk Management Integration Cell within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy.

238. Broader reverse engineering rights for military prototype projects

     This section changes a rule about reverse engineering in military prototype contracts. Right now, the law allows reverse engineering only to fix obsolete parts. This section removes that limit. After the change, the military can reverse engineer items under prototype project authority for any reason, not just to deal with obsolescence.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and the Department of Defense. Both sides are affected when prototype project contracts are negotiated or carried out.

     Tradeoff

     Giving the military broader reverse engineering rights may speed up repairs and upgrades, but it could also reduce the legal protections that contractors rely on to protect their designs.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 4022(e)(5)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking to address obsolescence .

239. Required competition for missile rocket motor suppliers

     This section sets rules for where the Pentagon must buy solid rocket motors for two missile systems. For the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile, no more than half of fiscal year 2027 funds can be spent until the Defense Secretary confirms that at least 40 percent of the rocket motors come from a second or additional supplier. For the Standard Missile-6, the law sets a schedule. Starting in 2028, at least 20 percent of those rocket motors must come from a second or additional supplier. That share rises to 30 percent in 2029 and 40 percent in 2030. The goal is to ensure the military is not dependent on just one company for these key parts.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors who make solid rocket motors for PAC-3 and Standard Missile-6 systems. It also affects the Pentagon, which must meet these sourcing rules to spend certain funds.

     Tradeoff

     Spreading orders across multiple suppliers may lower the risk of supply shortages, but it could also raise costs or slow production if new suppliers need time to scale up.

     Show the exact bill text

     not more than 50 percent may be obligated or expended unless the Secretary of Defense certifies that at least 40 percent of fiscal year 2027 procurement of the Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) solid rocket motors is sourced from a secondary or additional qualified supplier.

240. Review of critical defense materials supply chains

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to study four materials used in military equipment: boron carbide, copper-based circuit board parts, synthetic diamond, and silicon carbide. The study must look at ways to keep the U.S. military supplied with these materials. Options include limiting purchases to U.S. or allied suppliers, spending more to grow production capacity, banning purchases from certain countries, or taking no action at all. The study must weigh national security, economic effects, and treaty obligations. By February 1, 2027, the Defense Secretary must report findings, recommendations, and any actions already taken to congressional armed services committees.

     Who this affects

     Defense suppliers and manufacturers who produce or use boron carbide, copper circuit board parts, synthetic diamond, or silicon carbide. It also affects the Defense Department's buying choices for military equipment.

     Tradeoff

     Restricting where the military buys these materials could improve supply security but may raise costs or reduce the number of available suppliers.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and other appropriate officials, shall review the list of items under subsection (b) to determine and develop appropriate actions to maintain access to critical defense industry components and materials

241. Quality standards for optional combat boots sold at military stores

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to issue new rules within two years. Those rules would make sure that any combat boots sold at military exchange stores meet quality and durability standards. The boots must be certified through a quality assurance program run by the relevant military branch. Service members who buy their own boots, instead of using boots provided by the military, would be covered by this rule. The Secretary can give a military branch a 90-day waiver if its quality assurance program is not yet up and running.

     Who this affects

     Service members who buy their own combat boots rather than use government-issued ones. Retailers who sell combat boots at military exchange stores.

     Tradeoff

     Service members get a quality guarantee on boots they buy themselves, but boot sellers must meet certification requirements to remain on military exchanges.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall issue regulations requiring that any optional combat boots being sold at military exchanges be certified by the combat boot quality assurance program conducted by the relevant military service, to ensure combat boots meet uniform regulations regarding durability, quality, and uniform standards.

242. Report on waivers for buying critical materials from foreign sources

     This section requires the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to send a report to Congress by May 1, 2027. The report covers 'domestic nonavailability determinations,' which are waivers the Defense Department grants when it cannot find a U.S. source for a critical or strategic material. The report must list all waivers issued over the past five years. It must also note whether each waiver covered a single program or a whole category of materials. In addition, the report must review how the Department processes these waivers, including how long approvals take and how well the Department communicates with industry. The Under Secretary can add any other information they think is relevant.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department officials who process waivers, defense contractors who seek them, and Congress members who oversee defense purchasing rules.

     Tradeoff

     Greater transparency about foreign-source waivers helps Congress spot gaps in U.S. supply chains, but compiling the data requires staff time and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     identify all DNADs issued over the previous 5 years; (2) identify whether DNADs were granted for a specific program or end item or granted for a class of material; (3) assess the Department of Defense's review process for DNADs, including timeframes for approval and communication with industry

243. Spending hold on drone industry and travel funds until reports are submitted

     This section holds back a portion of two specific funding streams for fiscal year 2027. First, no more than 80 percent of the funds for the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group can be spent. Second, no more than 95 percent of the Pentagon's travel expense funds for the Office of the Secretary of Defense can be spent. Both limits stay in place until two reports are sent to Congress. One report covers the small drone manufacturing industry base. The other report also relates to drone industrial matters under an earlier defense law. Once both reports are delivered to the relevant congressional committees, the remaining funds are freed up.

     Who this affects

     The Defense Autonomous Warfare Group and the Office of the Secretary of Defense are directly affected. Congress uses this tool to push the Pentagon to deliver required reports.

     Tradeoff

     Withholding funds pressures the Pentagon to submit required reports, but it could slow spending on drone programs and Pentagon travel until those reports are delivered.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not more than 80 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2027 and available to the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, and not more than 95 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2027 for operation and maintenance, defense-wide, for the Office of the Secretary of Defense for travel expenses, may be obligated or expended until—

244. Energetics industrial base roadmap

     This section requires the Director of the Joint Energetics Transition Office to submit a plan to Congress by March 1, 2027. The plan must cover the current state of the U.S. industry that makes explosives, propellants, and related materials for weapons. It must assess whether that industry can meet today's and future weapons needs. It must identify shortages in key chemicals used to make these materials. It must also look at new technologies that could modernize the industry. Finally, it must list all federal money spent on this industry so far, broken down by year and purpose.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense, military departments, and companies that supply explosives and propellants for U.S. weapons programs. Congress receives the report and uses it for oversight.

     Tradeoff

     Creating the roadmap requires staff time and resources from several agencies, but it gives Congress a clearer picture of gaps and risks in the weapons materials supply chain.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than March 1, 2027, the Director of the Joint Energetics Transition Office, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy and the Secretaries of the military departments, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a roadmap for the future desired state for the energetics industrial base.

245. Study of military uniform and textile supply chains

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to hire an independent research center to study the U.S. textile industry that makes military uniforms, boots, and other clothing items. The study must cover the past five to ten years of supply problems, contracting practices, and factory capacity. It must also look at whether domestic factories can ramp up production quickly in a crisis. Researchers will examine rules under the Berry Amendment, which requires the military to buy American-made textiles. The study must also review whether military clothing specifications are slowing down production or limiting quality. An initial briefing to Congress is due by May 1, 2027. The full report is due by September 30, 2028.

     Who this affects

     U.S. textile and footwear manufacturers that supply the military. Military service members who use the uniforms and gear these companies produce.

     Tradeoff

     The study could lead to better supply chain planning and stronger domestic production, but it requires time and federal spending before any changes are made.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall contract with a federally funded research and development center to conduct a detailed assessment of the textile industrial base providing uniform items to the military services.

246. Pilot program for combat boot subsidies

     This section tells the Army to start a test program by June 1, 2027. The program gives Army soldiers a 30 percent discount on one pair of approved combat boots. Soldiers must buy the boots at an Army and Air Force Exchange Service store. The program runs at three military bases chosen by the Army Secretary. The Army will track how many soldiers use the discount and which boots they buy. The program ends on December 31, 2029. The Army must also brief Congress on the program's plan and results each year.

     Who this affects

     Army soldiers who receive a cash clothing replacement allowance are eligible. Exchange stores at three selected military bases are also involved.

     Tradeoff

     Soldiers get a 30 percent discount on boots, but the cost of that discount is paid back to stores by the Army, meaning it comes from defense funds.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary shall establish a subsidy for an eligible member for the purchase of combat boots that comply with the requirements of section 4862 of title 10, United States Code, in an amount that is equal to 30 percent of the price of such boots.

247. Pentagon team to strengthen military textile supply chains

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create a cross-functional team by April 1, 2027. The team will include representatives from each military service, the Defense Logistics Agency, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy. It must meet at least four times a year. The team's job is to map out the domestic textile supply chain and find weak spots. By January 1, 2028, the team must launch a competitive pilot program. That program will offer funding to help domestic textile companies add production capacity, modernize facilities, find backup suppliers, and compete for military uniform contracts. The team must also give Congress regular updates on its progress.

     Who this affects

     Domestic textile manufacturers that supply the military are affected, as are military service members who rely on uniform and gear supplies. Defense agencies involved in procurement and industrial planning are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The program could make military textile supply chains more reliable and reduce dependence on single suppliers, but it requires new government coordination efforts and the use of defense funds for industrial support.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than January 1, 2028, the cross-functional team shall establish a competitive pilot program to revitalize supply chains in the domestic textile industrial base.

248. Tracking and reducing foreign adversary investment in defense supply chains

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to set up a dedicated office by March 1, 2027. That office will track money and ownership linked to foreign adversaries inside the defense supply chain. It will map where risky foreign capital flows into weapons systems and key technologies. The office will share threat information with defense companies. It will also build a data tool, called the Economic Security Risk Assurance capability, by January 1, 2028. That tool will pull together information on suppliers, ownership, and funding sources. It will run automated alerts when risky changes are detected. Companies can share supplier risk data voluntarily and receive protections similar to those used in cybersecurity information sharing. The office must report to Congress each year from 2027 through 2030.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors, especially small and medium-sized suppliers, are directly affected. Federal acquisition officials, program managers, and the defense intelligence community are also involved.

     Tradeoff

     The new office and data system could catch hidden foreign influence in defense supply chains, but building and running them requires significant government resources and asks companies to share sensitive business data.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than March 1, 2027, the Secretary of Defense shall designate, within the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, an office with primary responsibility for identifying, assessing, monitoring, and mitigating risks related to adversarial capital in the defense industrial base and broader defense innovation base.

249. Updates to rules for listing Chinese military companies in the U.S.

     This section changes an existing law that requires the Defense Department to publish a list of Chinese military companies operating in the United States. It removes the requirement to use only the "most recent" or "latest" information when making the list, giving the department more flexibility. It also adds many new definitions to the law. New terms cover things like what counts as "assistance" from China's government, what makes a company a "contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base," and what "military-civil fusion" zones and planning efforts are. The changes expand which companies can be placed on the list. For example, companies that supply goods or services that could help China's military, even indirectly, may now qualify. Companies that receive Chinese government grants or hold certain Chinese industrial planning designations may also qualify. The section also directs the Defense Secretary to write regulations explaining how the law works.

     Who this affects

     U.S. and foreign companies that do business with, are owned by, or receive support from Chinese government or military-linked entities. It also affects the Defense Department, which must apply the new definitions when updating the list.

     Tradeoff

     Broader definitions mean more companies could be flagged and face restrictions, but that also increases the risk that companies with limited or indirect ties to China's military are listed.

     Show the exact bill text

     contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base — (A) means an entity that manufactures, produces, exports, or provides materials, products, or services that— (i) can supply, service, or expand China's military-civil fusion strategy; or (ii) could be used for military or defense purposes

250. Expanding printed circuit board sourcing rules to include key materials

     This section updates a law that governs where the military can buy printed circuit boards. Right now, the law covers printed circuit boards. This change adds three materials to that same rule: copper clad laminate, copper foil, and glass fibers. These materials are used to make printed circuit boards. The section also adds clear definitions for each new term. Copper clad laminate is copper foil bonded to a non-conducting base layer. Copper foil is thin copper used as a conducting layer. Glass means glass fibers used as a non-conducting layer. These changes take effect on January 1, 2029.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and suppliers who make or sell printed circuit boards and their key raw materials to the U.S. military. Foreign producers of copper foil, copper clad laminate, and glass fibers used in military electronics are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Expanding sourcing rules to cover more materials may strengthen supply chain security, but it could also limit supplier options and raise costs for defense manufacturers.

     Show the exact bill text

     in subsection (a)(1), by inserting , copper clad laminate, copper foil, or glass after printed circuit board

251. Study on U.S.-Israel defense industry partnership

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress by March 30, 2027. The report must outline a plan for a formal partnership between the U.S. Defense Department and Israel's Ministry of Defense. The goal is to help defense technology companies in both countries work together more easily. Specific aims include sharing research, matching companies as mentors and partners, and cutting through regulatory red tape. The plan should also look at ways to attract private investment and focus on defense needs outside the Middle East. Within 30 days after the report is submitted, the Secretary must also brief the Armed Services Committees on whether the partnership is realistic.

     Who this affects

     U.S. and Israeli defense technology companies, including startups. Congress and the Department of Defense are also involved in reviewing the plan.

     Tradeoff

     A formal partnership could open new markets and speed up technology development, but it may also raise questions about sharing sensitive defense information and navigating different national regulations.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report with a plan for the establishment of a partnership between the Department of Defense and appropriate counterparts of the Government of Israel

252. Ban on Chinese-made fiber optic cables in Defense networks

     This section stops the Department of Defense from buying or using optical fiber cables made by companies owned or controlled by China. The ban also covers any private contractor or subcontractor working on a Defense contract. Within 180 days of the law passing, the Defense Department must update its contracting rules to require suppliers to certify where their fiber comes from and disclose their supply chains. The ban takes effect for contracts awarded on or after October 1 of the next fiscal year. The Defense Secretary can grant a waiver if no other source exists and national security requires it. Any waiver must be limited in time and scope, and Congress must be notified within 30 days.

     Who this affects

     The Defense Department, and any company or subcontractor that supplies fiber optic products under a Defense contract.

     Tradeoff

     The ban reduces a potential security risk from foreign-made network components, but it may limit supply options and raise costs if alternative suppliers are scarce.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may not procure, obtain, or use optical fiber and optical fiber cable that are produced, manufactured, or assembled by an entity that is owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of the People's Republic of China for use in Department of Defense information networks or communications systems.

253. Expanding restrictions on foreign-made drone parts

     This section updates a 2020 law that limits which drones the military can buy. The original law blocked drones made in certain foreign countries. This section adds new parts to that blocked list. The new blocked parts include batteries, motors, and electronic speed controllers made in those countries. It also covers any subcomponents or raw materials used inside the already-blocked parts. That last rule takes effect one year after this bill becomes law. The countries involved are called 'covered foreign countries' in the law, which generally refers to adversary nations like China.

     Who this affects

     U.S. defense contractors and drone makers who supply the military. Foreign companies, especially those in countries the law designates as covered foreign countries.

     Tradeoff

     Stricter rules may push the military toward safer, domestic drone supply chains, but they could also raise costs and limit the number of suppliers who can meet the new requirements.

     Show the exact bill text

     uses batteries, battery cells, battery management systems, motors, or electronic speed controllers developed in a covered foreign country or by an entity domiciled in a covered foreign country

254. Pilot program for domestic antimony and copper production

     This section directs the Defense Department to launch a five-year pilot program within 180 days of the law taking effect. The program focuses on recovering antimony and copper as byproducts of U.S. mineral production. It will test different recovery methods, plan for larger-scale production, and create sample materials for testing. The goal is to produce antimony that meets Defense Logistics Agency standards. The Defense Department can sign contracts or agreements with outside groups to run the program. Each year, for five years, the Defense Department must report to Congress on progress, costs, and steps to reduce U.S. reliance on foreign sources of these two metals.

     Who this affects

     U.S. mining and minerals companies that could become contractors. The military, which depends on antimony and copper for defense equipment.

     Tradeoff

     Building a domestic supply of these metals could reduce reliance on foreign sources, but the program costs money and may not lead to a lasting commercial supply once the pilot ends.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall establish a pilot program to support the recovery of antimony and copper as byproducts of mineral production in the United States.

255. Expanded list of Chinese military companies

     This section updates a 2021 law that tracks companies linked to China's military. It extends the tracking program from 2030 to 2035. It widens the definition of which companies qualify for the list. Now the list can include companies that supply goods or services to Chinese military, police, or security agencies, even through lower-level suppliers. It also covers companies that got government help from China through grants, loans, tax breaks, or other benefits tied to military planning. Subsidiaries and affiliates of listed companies can be added too. The section adds many new defined terms, such as 'military-civil fusion enterprise zone' and 'contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base.' It also removes a requirement that a company be operating inside the United States to be listed.

     Who this affects

     Companies doing business with or linked to China's military, police, or state industries may be added to a U.S. government watch list. U.S. agencies and contractors that work with those companies could also be affected.

     Tradeoff

     A broader list may better capture security risks, but it could also flag companies that have only indirect or minor ties to China's military programs.

     Show the exact bill text

     Entities that knowingly contract with, or provide services or components, which can include lower tier suppliers and subcontractors, to the People's Liberation Army, Chinese military and paramilitary elements, security forces, police, law enforcement, border control, the People's Armed Police, the Ministry of State Security, or any other organization subordinate to the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party

256. Updates to the Defense Mentor-Protege Program

     This section changes the rules for the Department of Defense Mentor-Protege Program. The program pairs larger companies (mentors) with smaller companies (proteges) to help the smaller firms win and perform defense work. Key changes include: the program is now open to more small businesses, not just 'disadvantaged' ones. Agreement terms can last up to five years. Mentors can now help proteges with cybersecurity, export controls, and facility security clearances. The program is also expanded to cover more types of agreements, like grants and cooperative agreements, not just traditional contracts. Proteges can get help from a wider set of outside groups, including colleges, manufacturing centers, and research organizations.

     Who this affects

     Small businesses that want to work with the Department of Defense. Larger companies that act as mentors in the program.

     Tradeoff

     Opening the program to more small businesses may help more firms enter the defense industry, but it also broadens the pool competing for mentor support and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking disadvantaged small business each place it appears and inserting eligible small business

257. Increased funding limits for APEX Accelerator program

     This section raises the dollar caps on grants given through the APEX Accelerator program. The APEX Accelerator program helps small businesses learn how to sell goods and services to the federal government. Three specific funding limits are increased. Two limits go from $1.5 million to $2 million each. One limit goes from $750,000 to $1 million. These changes allow the program to give larger grants to the organizations that run APEX Accelerator centers.

     Who this affects

     Organizations that operate APEX Accelerator centers, which in turn help small businesses compete for government contracts.

     Tradeoff

     Larger grants can help more small businesses get assistance, but the higher caps also mean more federal money is needed to fund the program.

     Show the exact bill text

     in paragraph (1), by striking $1,500,000 and inserting $2,000,000 ; (2) in paragraph (2), by striking $750,000 and inserting $1,000,000 ; and (3) in paragraph (4), by striking $1,500,000 and inserting $2,000,000 .

258. Extension of small business subcontracting test program

     This section extends a test program that lets the Department of Defense negotiate broader subcontracting plans with small businesses. The program was set to end on December 31, 2027. This change moves that end date to December 31, 2037, giving the program ten more years to run.

     Who this affects

     Small businesses that seek subcontracts from large defense contractors. It also affects the Department of Defense, which runs the program.

     Tradeoff

     Extending the program gives small businesses more time to benefit from flexible subcontracting deals, but it also continues a test program for a decade longer without a final review of whether it works.

     Show the exact bill text

     striking December 31, 2027 and inserting December 31, 2037

259. Grace period for small businesses to open local offices on defense construction contracts

     Current law requires a small business in the SBA's 8(a) program to already have a real, staffed office in the local area before it can win a construction contract there. This section changes that rule for Department of Defense construction contracts only. Under this section, a small business can win the contract first, then open a local office within 60 days of the award. The business must certify in writing to its SBA advisor that it will do so. This flexibility expires on December 31, 2032. Each year until then, the Secretary of Defense must report to Congress on how often this option was used, where it was used, and whether businesses actually opened their offices on time.

     Who this affects

     Small businesses in the SBA 8(a) program that want to bid on Defense Department construction contracts in areas where they do not yet have a local office. It also affects the SBA advisors who oversee those businesses.

     Tradeoff

     More small businesses can compete for defense construction contracts, but there is a risk that a winning company could fail to open a local office within 60 days as promised.

     Show the exact bill text

     such section 8(a)(11) shall be deemed satisfied if the Program Participant certifies to the Business Opportunity Specialist assigned to the Program Participant that the Program Participant will establish a staffed, physical office in the geographic area required under such section 124.501(k) not later than 60 days after the date of the contract award.

260. Technical corrections to recent defense authorization laws

     This section fixes small wording errors in recent defense laws. It corrects grammar and punctuation in the National Defense Authorization Acts for fiscal years 2025 and 2026, and in Title 10 of the U.S. Code. Examples include removing an extra word, adding a missing word like 'that' or 'by', fixing a dollar threshold from $2 million to $10 million, and updating a legal reference from 'Chapter 137' to 'Legacy provisions of chapter 137.' These are cleanup changes meant to make the law read as originally intended.

     Who this affects

     Federal agencies and defense contractors who must follow procurement rules. The changes clarify legal language those parties must comply with.

     Tradeoff

     Fixing drafting errors makes the law clearer and easier to follow, but changing a dollar threshold from $2 million to $10 million also changes a substantive rule, not just wording.

     Show the exact bill text

     in section 3702(a), as amended by section 1804(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026...by striking $2,000,000 in paragraph (4) and inserting $10,000,000

261. Funding hold until munitions reports are submitted

     This section limits how much money the Pentagon's Office of the Secretary of Defense can spend on travel. Only 90 percent of those funds can be used until two things happen. First, the Secretary of Defense must send Congress a report. That report must detail stockpiles of critical weapons needed to fight wars in two places at once. It must also include a plan to meet those weapon needs in the next budget cycle. Second, the Secretary must certify that the military's long-term weapon inventory reports now include estimated demand from U.S. allies and partners. Once both of those steps are done, the remaining 10 percent of travel funds becomes available.

     Who this affects

     The Office of the Secretary of Defense is directly affected, as its travel budget is held back. Congress and military planners are also affected, as they gain required information on weapons stockpiles and ally demand.

     Tradeoff

     Tying funds to reporting requirements gives Congress more oversight of weapons planning, but it also adds administrative steps that could slow spending on routine Pentagon travel.

     Show the exact bill text

     not more than 90 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees— (1) the report required under section 364 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 ... detailing the stockpiles of critical munitions required to fight simultaneous conflicts in different theaters of operation and a plan to implement critical munitions requirements

262. Repeal of subcontractor price history rule for contract bids

     This section removes a rule that was added to federal law. That rule had allowed a subcontractor bidding on a defense contract to submit recent price history instead of full cost or pricing data. This section deletes that option. It also cleans up the numbering in the law to reflect the change.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and subcontractors who bid on federal contracts. It also affects the Defense Department, which reviews cost and pricing data from bidders.

     Tradeoff

     Removing this option may require subcontractors to provide more detailed cost data, which can increase paperwork burdens but may give the government a clearer picture of actual costs.

     Show the exact bill text

     by striking subparagraph (B); and (3) by redesignating clauses (i) and (ii) as subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively.

263. Competitive bidding rules for military pharmaceutical contracts

     This section requires the Defense Department to use open, competitive bidding when awarding contracts related to pharmaceutical drugs, drug ingredients, or other pharmaceutical materials. This covers contracts for stockpiling, manufacturing, bringing production back to the U.S., or expanding supply chains. Before signing any such contract, the Defense Department must notify the Senate and House Armed Services Committees at least 15 days in advance. That notice must describe the work to be done, the expected cost, and the legal authority used to award the contract.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department officials who award pharmaceutical contracts, and companies that bid on those contracts. Congressional Armed Services Committees also receive required notifications.

     Tradeoff

     Open competition can lower costs and prevent favoritism, but the 15-day notice requirement and added process steps may slow down contract awards.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that any contract awarded for the purpose of pharmaceutical drug, active pharmaceutical ingredients, or other pharmaceutical materials stockpiling, manufacturing, onshoring, or supply chain expansion, is awarded using competitive sourcing procedures.

264. Faster approval process for new defense parts suppliers

     This section creates a faster way for companies to get approved as new suppliers of military parts. Right now, companies must go through a Source Approval Request process, which can take a long time. Under this new program, a company that makes the part it wants to supply, uses a standard application form, gets a certified engineer to review the technical data, and holds a recognized quality certification can qualify for a fast-track review. The review panel must decide within 14 days, though that clock can pause up to 30 days for a security check. As an extra incentive, if a company also hands over a complete set of engineering drawings with broad government rights, the Defense Department must award that company a three-year guaranteed supply contract. The contract price must be no more than 90 percent of what the military paid for the same part in the prior two years, and the government must order at least 60 percent of the average annual quantity it bought over the prior three years. Small businesses get extra help, such as subsidized reviews or fee waivers. The Defense Department must report results to Congress by January 1, 2028.

     Who this affects

     Companies that want to become approved suppliers of non-safety-critical military parts, including small businesses. The Defense Logistics Agency and military departments must run the new panels and award contracts.

     Tradeoff

     Faster approvals and guaranteed contracts could bring in more suppliers and lower costs, but bypassing normal competition rules and relying on third-party engineer certifications instead of full government reviews adds some risk that part quality or supplier security may not be as thoroughly checked.

     Show the exact bill text

     A qualifying Source Approval Request Package shall be referred to an Expedited Qualification Panel for the military department, which shall be established by the Secretary concerned by not later than June 30, 2027... Not later than 14 days after receipt of a Qualifying Source Approval Request Package, the applicable Expedited Qualification Panel shall issue a determination on whether to grant approval or disapproval of the Source Approval Request.

265. Army travel funds held back until acquisition officials are certified

     This section holds back 25 percent of the Army's fiscal year 2027 travel funds for the Office of the Secretary of the Army. The funds stay frozen until the Secretary of the Army tells Congress that every portfolio acquisition executive in the Army holds a proper certification. That certification is required by federal law under title 10, section 1732. Once the Secretary sends that written confirmation, the remaining funds can be used.

     Who this affects

     The Army, specifically the Office of the Secretary of the Army and its portfolio acquisition executives. Congressional defense committees receive the certification.

     Tradeoff

     This rule pushes the Army to meet a legal certification standard, but it also delays access to a portion of travel funds until that standard is confirmed in writing.

     Show the exact bill text

     not more than 75 percent may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Army certifies to the congressional defense committees that all portfolio acquisition executives of the Army are certified acquisition officials in accordance with section 1732 of title 10, United States Code.

266. Medical supplies for radiation and burn injuries for overseas troops

     This section lets the Defense Department buy and store medical treatments for military personnel stationed overseas. The treatments cover three specific conditions: acute radiation syndrome (sickness from radiation exposure), skin injuries from radiation, and thermal burns. The Defense Department can use funds to purchase these treatments in advance, store them in pre-set locations, and keep them ready for use. The section also allows spending on upkeep and making sure the supplies work when needed. Spending is limited to treatments already identified as required under a prior 2025 defense law.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military personnel stationed overseas who could be exposed to radiation or extreme heat. The Defense Department manages and funds the program.

     Tradeoff

     Stocking these supplies in advance improves readiness for a nuclear or high-heat incident, but requires dedicated funding that must be appropriated by Congress before any purchasing can begin.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense may procure, pre-position, sustain, and maintain medical countermeasures that are determined to be requirements pursuant to section 734(a) of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025

267. Waiver of compliance certificate for VA construction work done for the Pentagon

     This section changes a 2008 defense law. That law required a certificate of compliance when one federal agency buys goods or services on behalf of the Department of Defense. This section carves out an exception. When the Department of Veterans Affairs handles planning, design, or construction projects for the Department of Defense, no such certificate is needed. The certificate requirement is simply skipped for those specific transactions.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense are directly affected. Contractors working on joint planning, design, and construction projects between the two agencies may also be affected.

     Tradeoff

     Removing the certificate requirement may speed up joint construction projects between the two agencies, but it also removes one layer of oversight that was meant to confirm those purchases followed the rules.

     Show the exact bill text

     In the case of the procurement of property or services on behalf of the Department of Defense by the Department of Veterans Affairs for planning, design, and construction projects, a certificate of compliance shall not be required.

268. Rules for leasing military vessels, aircraft, and combat vehicles

     This section changes the rules the military must follow before leasing a vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle. Under current law, the Secretary of Defense must certify certain things to Congress before signing a lease. This section rewrites one of those required certifications. The new version requires the Secretary to confirm two things. First, the lease either speeds up delivery or is the most cost-efficient way to get the equipment. Second, the lease follows all relevant laws, budget rules, and Defense Department regulations. The change shifts the focus toward cost and speed while also adding a compliance check.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and Congress are directly affected. Defense contractors who lease equipment to the military may also be affected.

     Tradeoff

     Adding a cost and speed requirement may make it easier to justify leases quickly, but it also requires an extra compliance check that could add steps to the approval process.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary has certified to such committees that— (i) entering into the proposed contract provides an accelerated delivery schedule or is the most cost-efficient means of obtaining the vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle; and (ii) the Secretary has determined that the lease complies with all applicable laws, Office of Management and Budget circulars, and Department of Defense regulations.

269. Ban on buying modems or routers from Chinese-linked companies

     This section stops the Department of Defense from buying modems or routers from any company connected to the Chinese government. The ban covers new contracts, renewals, and extensions signed after the law takes effect. A 'covered Chinese entity' is any company that the Secretary of Defense, working with U.S. intelligence officials, decides is owned, controlled, directed, or otherwise tied to China's government. The term 'manufacturer' is defined broadly. It includes the company that makes the device, any company that subcontracts the work, any company that directs the work, and any parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate. The ban applies to both modems (devices that connect computers over phone or cable lines) and routers (devices that manage internet traffic between networks).

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and companies that sell networking equipment to the military. Companies with any ties to the Chinese government cannot bid on these contracts.

     Tradeoff

     The ban reduces a potential security risk from Chinese-linked hardware, but it narrows the pool of suppliers, which could raise costs or limit equipment choices for the military.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may not acquire any modem or router if the manufacturer, bidder, or offeror is a covered Chinese entity.

270. Ban on buying televisions from Chinese-linked companies

     This section stops the Department of Defense from buying televisions from any company that is owned, controlled, directed, or connected to the Chinese government. The ban covers new contracts, renewals, and extensions signed after this law takes effect. A company counts as 'covered' if the Secretary of Defense, working with intelligence officials, decides it has ties to China. The rule also covers parent companies, subsidiaries, and affiliates of the maker, not just the direct seller.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors and TV manufacturers that have any connection to China. It also affects any vendor that bids on Pentagon contracts for televisions.

     Tradeoff

     The rule aims to reduce security risks from Chinese-linked electronics, but it may limit supplier options for the Pentagon and could raise costs if fewer vendors qualify.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may not acquire any television if the manufacturer, bidder, or offeror is a covered Chinese entity.

271. Ban on sharing synthetic biology data with foreign adversaries

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to block any company or group that works under a Defense Department contract from sharing certain biological data with foreign adversaries. The banned data includes digital files that describe lab-made DNA, RNA, or proteins. These are sequences designed by humans or AI systems. The ban covers entities tied to foreign countries of concern, such as government bodies, foreign companies, or foreign persons controlled by those governments. The Secretary can issue a waiver if it serves national security. To do so, the Secretary must notify Congress at least 30 days before the waiver takes effect.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors, grant recipients, and any other entity doing work for the Department of Defense. It also affects foreign entities tied to countries of concern, who would be barred from receiving this data.

     Tradeoff

     The ban may protect sensitive biotechnology from adversaries, but it could also limit scientific cooperation with foreign partners in countries of concern, even when that cooperation might be beneficial.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall prohibit a covered entity from providing to a foreign entity of concern a digital sequence of synthetic DNA or RNA or a synthetic protein designed by humans or artificial intelligence systems.

272. Reporting on defense contractor ties to China

     This section requires defense contractors to report their business connections to China. Any company signing a major defense contract must submit data on its China-related sales, profits, assets, debts, investments, loans, suppliers, and employees. The Secretary of Defense must then combine all that data and send a summary report to the Armed Services Committees in both the Senate and the House. A 'covered contract' here means a contract for a major defense acquisition program, which typically involves large, complex weapons or systems purchases.

     Who this affects

     Defense contractors bidding on or holding major defense acquisition contracts are affected. Their suppliers down to the second tier are also counted in the required data.

     Tradeoff

     The reporting gives Congress more visibility into contractor ties to China, but it adds paperwork and compliance costs for the companies involved.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall require any entity entering into a covered contract with the Department of Defense to submit a report on the entity's operations related to China, including— (1) sales revenue from China; (2) profit attributable to its China business; (3) assets held or located in China...

273. Auditing Defense contractor disability hiring goals

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to audit Defense Department contractors each year from 2026 through 2029. The audit checks whether contractors are meeting a 7-percent hiring goal for qualified people with disabilities. That goal comes from the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and is enforced by the Department of Labor. Within five months after each audited fiscal year ends, the Secretary must send a report on the findings to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees.

     Who this affects

     Defense Department contractors must show their hiring data. People with disabilities who work for or seek jobs with those contractors are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     The audits add oversight and reporting costs for contractors and the Pentagon, but they may improve hiring outcomes for people with disabilities.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of Defense shall conduct an audit of the compliance of the contractors of the Department of Defense with the 7-percent utilization goal for employment of qualified individuals with disabilities

274. New Economic Defense Unit inside the Pentagon

     This section creates a new office inside the Department of Defense called the Economic Defense Unit. The office is led by a Director appointed by the Secretary of Defense. The Director reports directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. The Unit's job is to coordinate Pentagon activities that use economic tools to support U.S. military strength. Those tools can include protecting supply chains, countering adversaries' military buildup, securing access to critical materials, and working with private businesses and other federal agencies. The Unit does not get new powers to make deals or take ownership stakes in companies. It is limited to planning, coordinating, and advising. The Director must set conflict-of-interest rules for staff by mid-2027, and must brief Congress every three months and submit a written report each year.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and its staff are directly affected. Private businesses, other federal agencies, and U.S. allies may be affected through coordination and outreach activities.

     Tradeoff

     The Unit adds a new coordination layer that could improve economic strategy, but it also adds organizational complexity and staffing costs with authority limited to advising rather than direct action.

     Show the exact bill text

     There is established in the Department of Defense an Economic Defense Unit... Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer upon the Director or the Unit any new authority beyond planning, coordinating, and advising the Department of Defense with respect to economic competition activities.

275. Extension of Office of Strategic Capital pilot program

     This section extends a pilot program run by the Office of Strategic Capital. The program helps defense-related businesses get access to private capital and loans. Right now, the program was set to end in 2028. This section moves that end date to 2038, giving the program ten more years to operate.

     Who this affects

     Businesses and investors who work with the Department of Defense and seek financing through the Office of Strategic Capital. The change also affects the government office that runs the program.

     Tradeoff

     Extending the program gives more time for the government to connect defense projects with private money, but it also keeps a relatively new and still-being-tested program running for a much longer period before Congress must review it again.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 149(e)(9) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 2028 each place it appears and inserting 2038.

276. Ethics code for Defense Department finance and industry positions

     This section requires the Secretary of Defense to create or update a professional code of conduct by August 1, 2027. The code covers employees and contractors in four specific Defense Department offices that deal with economic policy, capital markets, and industrial supply chains. The code must stress integrity, careful judgment, and avoiding conflicts of interest. It must also require workers to document all their actions and communications, including talks with private companies. By September 15, 2027, the Secretary must brief Congress on how the code was put in place, how many people it covers, and how violations will be handled.

     Who this affects

     Employees and contractors working in the Economic Defense Unit, the Office of Strategic Capital, the Office of Expanded Competition, and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy.

     Tradeoff

     Adding a formal ethics code and documentation rules may improve accountability in sensitive financial roles, but it also adds reporting and compliance work for the affected offices.

     Show the exact bill text

     requires those individuals to avoid any action that would potentially distort markets or lead to the perception of distorting or manipulating markets

277. Reorganization of top Defense Department personnel offices

     This section renames and reorganizes several high-level offices in the Department of Defense. First, the 'Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness' is renamed to 'Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Health Affairs.' Second, a new position called the 'Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment and Readiness' is created. This new position absorbs the old 'Assistant Secretary for Readiness' job, which is eliminated. Third, a brand-new position called the 'Assistant Secretary of Defense for Housing, Personnel Movement, and Travel Policy' is created. This new official will oversee military housing, household moves, permanent change-of-station travel, and related programs. The changes take effect January 20, 2029, but the Secretary of Defense can act sooner if needed. Within 90 days of enactment, the Secretary must send Congress a plan for carrying out these changes.

     Who this affects

     Senior Defense Department officials and the staff of the affected offices are most directly affected. Service members may also be affected, since the new housing and travel office will oversee programs like military family housing and household-goods moves.

     Tradeoff

     Consolidating and renaming offices could reduce overlap and clarify responsibility, but reorganizations take time and resources, and may cause short-term disruption to ongoing programs.

     Show the exact bill text

     The position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (as in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act) is eliminated.

278. New under secretary for cyber and technology at the Pentagon

     This section creates a new Senate-confirmed position called the Under Secretary of Defense for Cyber, Information, and Networks. The person must come from civilian life and have a strong background in cyber operations, information technology, or managing large organizations. They cannot have left active military duty within the past seven years. This official will serve as the top cyber adviser to the Secretary of Defense and also as the Department's chief information officer. Their job covers cybersecurity policy, artificial intelligence strategy, data management, network modernization, cloud computing, and building the cyber workforce. Four assistant secretaries and two chief officers (one for digital and AI, one for information security) will report within this new office.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and its civilian and military workforce. Anyone dealing with Pentagon cybersecurity, IT systems, or AI programs will answer to this new official.

     Tradeoff

     Centralizing cyber and technology leadership under one new position could speed up decision-making, but it also adds a new layer of Senate-confirmed leadership and reorganizes existing roles.

     Show the exact bill text

     There is an Under Secretary of Defense for Cyber, Information, and Networks, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

279. Principal Cyber Advisor and Deputy Principal Cyber Advisor roles

     This section creates two top cyber leadership roles at the Department of Defense. First, it establishes a Principal Cyber Advisor. This person is the top civilian cyber official in the department, reporting directly to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense. The Advisor oversees cyber strategy, reviews budgets for cyber activities, and leads a cross-agency team of cyber experts. If the Advisor finds a military department's cyber budget to be inadequate, the Secretary must report that finding to Congress by March 31 each year. Second, the section creates a Deputy Principal Cyber Advisor. This person is a military officer, at the rank of major general or rear admiral. The officer advises on military cyber policy, helps oversee offensive and defensive cyber operations, and identifies gaps in cyber capabilities.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense, its military departments, defense agencies, and combatant commands are all affected. Military officers at the general and flag officer level are eligible for the deputy role.

     Tradeoff

     Adding these roles creates clearer civilian and military oversight of cyber programs, but also adds a new layer of leadership and review that agencies must coordinate with before submitting budgets.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Principal Cyber Advisor shall review each proposed budget transmitted under subparagraph (A) and, not later than January 31 of the year preceding the fiscal year for which the budget is proposed, shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a report containing the comments of the Principal Cyber Advisor with respect to all such proposed budgets, together with the certification of the Principal Cyber Advisor regarding whether each proposed budget is adequate.

280. Cyber governance structures for military cyber forces

     This section addresses how the military organizes leadership and decision-making for its cyber forces. It sets up governance structures, meaning rules about who is in charge of cyber units and how decisions get made. The goal is to clarify authority and responsibility within military cyber operations.

     Who this affects

     Military cyber personnel and the commanders who oversee them. It also affects how the Department of Defense manages its cyber workforce.

     Tradeoff

     Clearer governance can improve coordination, but adding new oversight structures may slow decisions in fast-moving cyber situations.

     Show the exact bill text

     Cyber governance structures on military cyber force matters

281. Creating a permanent U.S. military command for Africa

     This section writes the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) into federal law for the first time. Right now, AFRICOM exists only by presidential order. This bill adds it to Title 10 of U.S. Code, making it a permanent, statutory command. The command's main job is to plan, direct, and coordinate military operations and security partnerships across Africa. Troops are assigned to it through a formal process approved by the Secretary of Defense. The commander must be a four-star general or admiral, confirmed by the Senate. The commander has full authority over planning, operations, and security cooperation for the region.

     Who this affects

     Active and reserve military personnel assigned to Africa-related missions. It also affects the Secretary of Defense and the Senate, who gain formal roles in staffing and overseeing the command.

     Tradeoff

     Writing AFRICOM into law gives it more stability and congressional oversight, but it also makes the command harder for future presidents to dissolve or restructure without legislation.

     Show the exact bill text

     The principal mission of the United States Africa Command is to direct, synchronize, and coordinate military planning, operations, and security cooperation to defend and advance the national interests of the United States with respect to Africa in collaboration with international partners.

282. Formal establishment of U.S. Central Command in law

     This section writes U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) directly into federal law. CENTCOM already exists, but this section gives it a specific legal home in Title 10 of the U.S. Code. The command covers the Middle East, Egypt, and Central Asia. Its main job is to plan, run, and coordinate military operations and security partnerships in that region. The commander must be a four-star general or admiral, confirmed by the Senate. Forces are assigned to the command through the Global Force Management Process, which the Secretary of Defense approves. The commander also has full authority over all Defense Department planning and cooperation activities in the region.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military personnel and commanders assigned to the Middle East and Central Asia region. It also affects partner nations that work with CENTCOM on security cooperation.

     Tradeoff

     Putting CENTCOM in statute gives it a clearer legal foundation, but it also locks the command's structure into law, which could make future reorganization harder without an act of Congress.

     Show the exact bill text

     The principal mission of the United States Central Command is to direct, synchronize, and coordinate military planning, operations, and security cooperation to defend and advance national interests of the United States with respect to the central region in collaboration with international partners.

283. Creating a permanent military command for Europe

     This section writes into law a unified military command for U.S. defense activities in Europe, called the United States European Command (EUCOM). The command already exists in practice, but this section makes it a permanent part of federal law. The President, working through the Secretary of Defense and with advice from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sets up the command. Its main job is to plan, run, and coordinate military and security cooperation activities in Europe with allied partners. Troops are assigned to it through the military's Global Force Management Process. The commander holds the rank of general or admiral and must be confirmed by the Senate. The commander also gets full authority over all planning, operations, and security cooperation work for the Department of Defense in Europe.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military personnel assigned to European operations and the commander of EUCOM. It also affects allied nations that work with the U.S. military in Europe.

     Tradeoff

     Codifying the command into law makes it harder to dissolve or restructure without an act of Congress, which adds stability but also reduces executive flexibility.

     Show the exact bill text

     The principal mission of the United States European Command is to direct, synchronize, and coordinate military planning, operations, and security cooperation to defend and advance national interests of the United States with respect to Europe in collaboration with international partners.

284. New unified military command for North America

     This section creates a new military command called the United States Northern Command. The President, working through the Secretary of Defense, would set it up. Its main jobs are to plan and run military operations in North America and to support homeland defense and help civilian authorities when needed. The command's area covers Canada, the United States, Mexico, Greenland, Puerto Rico, the U.S. and British Virgin Islands, the Bahamas, and the Turks and Caicos Islands. The leader of this command would hold the rank of general or admiral. That leader would be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military personnel assigned to this command and civilian authorities who may receive defense support. It also affects partner nations within the defined area, such as Canada and Mexico.

     Tradeoff

     Creating a dedicated command for North America may improve coordination and speed of response, but it adds a new military structure with its own leadership and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     The principal missions of the United States Northern Command are— (A) to direct, synchronize, and coordinate military planning, operations, and security cooperation to defend and advance national interests of the United States with respect to North America in collaboration with international partners; and (B) to plan, organize, and execute missions relating to homeland defense and defense support for civil authorities.

285. New military command for Central and South America and the Caribbean

     This section creates a new unified military command called the United States Southern Command. The President, working through the Secretary of Defense, must set it up. Its main job is to plan, run, and coordinate military and security work in Central America, South America, and the Caribbean. Military forces from active and reserve units will be assigned to it through the standard Defense Department process. The commander must be a four-star general or admiral, confirmed by the Senate. The commander will have full authority over planning, operations, and security partnerships in the region.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty and reserve military personnel assigned to the new command. It also affects U.S. partner nations in Central America, South America, and the Caribbean who work with U.S. forces.

     Tradeoff

     Creating a dedicated command gives the region more focused military attention, but it adds a new command structure that requires staffing, funding, and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     The principal mission of the United States Southern Command is to direct, synchronize, and coordinate military planning, operations, and security cooperation to defend and advance national interests of the United States with respect to Central America, South America, and the Caribbean in collaboration with international partners.

286. Creating a unified military command for the Indo-Pacific region

     This section directs the President, through the Secretary of Defense, to formally establish the United States Indo-Pacific Command. The command's main job is to plan, run, and coordinate military operations and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region. Military forces from active and reserve units will be assigned to it through an existing Pentagon process. The commander must be a four-star general or admiral, appointed by the President with Senate approval. The commander has authority over all planning, operations, and security cooperation activities in the region.

     Who this affects

     Active and reserve military personnel assigned to the Indo-Pacific region. The commander of the new command and the Senate, which must confirm the appointment.

     Tradeoff

     Putting one commander in charge of the Indo-Pacific region can improve coordination, but it also concentrates a large amount of military authority in a single position.

     Show the exact bill text

     The principal mission of the United States Indo-Pacific Command is to direct, synchronize, and coordinate military planning, operations, and security cooperation to defend and advance national interests of the United States with respect to the Indo-Pacific region in collaboration with international partners.

287. Creation of a new military command for robots and drones

     This section lets the President, through the Secretary of Defense, create a new military command called RASCOM (United States Robotic and Autonomous Systems Command). RASCOM would oversee all military robots, drones, unmanned vehicles, and AI-controlled systems. It would handle training, testing, and field use of those systems across all branches. Each branch (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force) would set up its own sub-command under RASCOM. RASCOM could buy limited amounts of equipment on its own, up to $20 million per contract. It would also test whether new systems work as intended. The Pentagon would give RASCOM its own budget line so Congress can track spending. The Secretary of Defense must report to Congress on progress every year for five years after the command is set up. Some systems, like space tools, nuclear controls, and cyber weapons, are kept out of RASCOM's authority.

     Who this affects

     Military personnel in all branches who work with drones and robotic systems. Defense contractors who build or sell those systems to the military.

     Tradeoff

     Creating RASCOM could improve coordination of military drone and robot programs, but it adds a new layer of command structure and spending that Congress would need to fund and oversee.

     Show the exact bill text

     the President, through the Secretary of Defense, may establish under section 161 of this title a unified combatant command for robotic and autonomous systems, to be known as the United States Robotic and Autonomous Systems Command

288. Reorganizing how the military manages drones and robotic systems

     This section requires the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force to each submit plans within 180 days. The Navy's plan must show how to put one official in charge of most unmanned systems (excluding the largest drone categories, Groups 4 and 5). The Navy must also study whether to eliminate a current coordinating office and create a new dedicated office for robotic systems with its own budget authority. The Air Force must plan to put one official in charge of smaller drones (Groups 1 through 3) and similar systems. A joint working group will also be created inside an existing military board. That group will look for ways the services can share investments and avoid overlap in robotic systems. It must report its findings to Congress within 270 days.

     Who this affects

     Military officials in the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force who manage drone and robotic programs. Defense contractors and program offices that build or budget for unmanned systems may also see changes.

     Tradeoff

     Centralizing drone management under single officials could improve coordination and reduce waste, but reorganizing offices and budgets takes time and may disrupt existing programs.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan to consolidate the responsibilities for generating, organizing, training, and equipping all unmanned systems in the Department of the Navy (other than Group 4 and Group 5 unmanned aerial systems) under a single accountable official

289. Staffing and reporting rules for the anomalous health incidents team

     This section updates rules for a cross-functional team that looks into anomalous health incidents (sometimes called 'Havana Syndrome'). First, it sets a minimum staffing requirement. Seven specific Defense Department offices must each assign at least one full-time employee to the team. Those offices include the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Defense Health Agency, and the National Security Agency, among others. Second, it changes reporting rules. Starting no later than 90 days after this law passes, the team's leader must send a written report to Congress every 90 days. Each report must cover recent team activities, staff changes, the number of health incidents reported in the past 90 days with dates and locations, and an update on research funding. These reports continue until March 1, 2030.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military and defense personnel who report anomalous health incidents. Staff at seven named Defense Department agencies who may be assigned to the team.

     Tradeoff

     More staffing and more frequent written reports give Congress better oversight, but they also require dedicated personnel and staff time from seven agencies.

     Show the exact bill text

     (2) Composition At a minimum, the cross-functional team shall be staffed by at least one full-time employee designated by each of the following: (A) The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. (B) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. (C) The Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. (D) The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. (E) The Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. (F) The Director of the Defense Health Agency. (G) The Director of the National Security Agency.

290. Review of the military team investigating unexplained health incidents

     This section requires the Comptroller General, the head of the Government Accountability Office, to review a Defense Department team that investigates Anomalous Health Incidents. These are unexplained illnesses sometimes called 'Havana Syndrome,' which have affected U.S. personnel abroad. The review covers the team's work from February 2024 to February 2026. It looks at what the team did, how it was staffed, what it found about causes, and why it was moved from one Defense office to another. It also looks at how intelligence agencies supported the team. The Comptroller General must brief Congress within 180 days of the law passing. A final written report follows at a time agreed upon by Congress and the Comptroller General.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military and government personnel who may have experienced unexplained health incidents. Congressional defense and intelligence committees also receive the findings.

     Tradeoff

     The review adds oversight and may reveal useful findings, but it takes time and resources from the Comptroller General's office.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a review of the Anomalous Health Incidents Cross-Functional Team of the Department of Defense established under section 910 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022.

291. New research center for National Guard history

     This section creates a Center for the Study of the National Guard. The Secretary of Defense must set it up at a college or university. That school must already work with the National Guard Bureau, have a strong military history program, and be near a major National Guard base. The center will store historical documents and oral histories. It will also do research and run education programs about the National Guard. It will help the public learn about the Guard's role in defense and disaster response. It will also help the Defense Department plan policy for National Guard operations. The National Guard Bureau can share records with the center and run joint projects with it. The Secretary of Defense must try to run the center as a public-private partnership to keep federal costs low.

     Who this affects

     The National Guard Bureau, the Department of Defense, and the academic institution chosen to host the center are directly affected. Members of the public and researchers interested in National Guard history would also use the center.

     Tradeoff

     The center could preserve important military history and inform policy, but it adds a new program that requires federal resources even if some costs are offset by private partners.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, shall establish a center, to be known as the Center for the Study of the National Guard...at an appropriate academic institution that— (1) maintains an established relationship with the National Guard Bureau; (2) possesses a strong academic program in military history; and (3) is situated in proximity to a major installation of the National Guard.

292. Civil-Military Coordination Center for Gaza operations

     This section lets the Defense Department keep running a Civil-Military Coordination Center through December 31, 2027. The Center helps coordinate security, aid delivery, and rebuilding efforts in Gaza. By March 1, 2027, the Defense Secretary must send Congress a detailed plan covering the Center's staffing, funding, and goals. Those goals include fully disarming Hamas, keeping Hamas out of governance, and training an international stabilization force. Starting within 180 days of the law's passage, and every 180 days after that, the Secretary must also send Congress a report. The report must cover troop numbers at the Center, humanitarian aid volumes entering Gaza, how Hamas may have interfered with aid, and details about an International Stabilization Force operating in the area. Reports must be unclassified but can include a classified section.

     Who this affects

     U.S. military personnel assigned to the Center, people in Gaza receiving humanitarian aid, and Congress members overseeing defense policy are all directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     Keeping the Center running and requiring detailed reports gives Congress more oversight of U.S. involvement in Gaza, but it also commits U.S. personnel and funding to an ongoing military-civilian mission with no guarantee of success.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense may maintain and continue to operate, until December 31, 2027, the Civil-Military Coordination Center established by the Secretary before the date of the enactment of this Act

293. Updated drone definitions for a joint military-civilian task force

     This section changes how the law defines drone-related terms for Joint Interagency Task Force 401, a group that coordinates military and civilian agencies. First, it adds new actions to the list of safe drone operations. Those actions are detecting, identifying, monitoring, and tracking. Second, it expands the definition of 'unmanned aircraft system' to include the ground control station used to operate a drone. Before this change, the definition may not have clearly covered the control equipment, only the aircraft itself.

     Who this affects

     Joint Interagency Task Force 401 and the agencies that work with it. This also affects how drone-related rules and authorities apply to control station equipment.

     Tradeoff

     Broader definitions give clearer legal authority for drone operations, but they also expand the scope of activities and equipment that fall under these rules.

     Show the exact bill text

     The term unmanned aircraft system includes a control station that enables control of an unmanned aircraft.

294. Aligning homeland air defense funding with Golden Dome

     This section updates a law about a government task force that works on homeland air defense. It adds two new requirements. First, the task force must find shared programs and funding across federal agencies that support protecting important facilities from low-altitude aircraft threats. Second, the task force must coordinate its funding and planning priorities with the Golden Dome for America program. Golden Dome is a broader defense effort aimed at stopping next-generation air attacks, including those from small drones sent by major or hostile foreign powers.

     Who this affects

     Federal agencies involved in air defense planning, and facilities or assets defined as covered under existing law. Military and homeland security planners are most directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     Better coordination between programs could reduce wasted spending, but adding coordination requirements also means more meetings and reviews before decisions get made.

     Show the exact bill text

     to appropriately coordinate the funding and integration priorities of the Task Force with the architecture development, capability requirements, and implementation of Golden Dome for America to enhance alignment on the defense of the United States against next-generation aerial attacks, including by small unmanned aircraft from peer, near-peer, and rogue adversaries

295. Protection of military foreign language training programs

     This section blocks the Pentagon from cutting, ending, or replacing any foreign language, regional expertise, or cultural training programs in fiscal year 2027. The ban stays in place until 90 days after the Secretary of Defense sends Congress a certification. That certification must show the military has reached a high readiness level in the languages listed on the DoD Strategic Language Lists. Readiness is measured using the DoD Language Readiness Index. Until that certification is filed and 90 days pass, no money can be used to shrink or prepare to shrink these programs.

     Who this affects

     Active-duty service members and Defense Department personnel who participate in foreign language and cultural training programs. It also affects the Secretary of Defense, who must certify readiness levels to Congress before any cuts can happen.

     Tradeoff

     The section keeps language training programs funded and intact, but it also limits the Pentagon's ability to quickly adjust or restructure those programs, even if leaders believe changes would improve efficiency.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2027 may be obligated or expended by the Department of Defense to terminate, replace, reduce, or prepare to terminate, replace, or reduce a program of foreign language, regional expertise, and cultural capability training or instruction until 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional defense committees a certification...

296. Military strike records must be kept

     This section tells the Secretary of Defense to keep all records tied to U.S. military strikes in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. The records include strike videos, after-action reports, legal opinions, chat logs, and other documents. The Department of Defense must follow existing federal records laws when storing these files. The records can also be sent to the National Archives for long-term storage.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense must follow these rules. Researchers, oversight bodies, and the public may later access the records through the National Archives.

     Tradeoff

     Keeping detailed strike records supports accountability and historical review, but storing and managing sensitive military files takes time and resources.

     Show the exact bill text

     The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all records related to United States maritime strikes in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific are retained by the Department of Defense, including the following records: (1) Strike videos. (2) Investigative documents. (3) After action reports.

297. Pentagon authority to move money between accounts

     This section lets the Secretary of Defense move authorized funds between different Defense Department accounts in fiscal year 2027. The total amount that can be moved is capped at $6 billion. Moves between military personnel accounts do not count toward that cap. The Secretary can only move money to higher-priority items. The Secretary cannot move money to any item that Congress already rejected. When a transfer happens, the receiving account is treated as having a higher authorized amount. The Secretary must notify Congress after each transfer.

     Who this affects

     The Department of Defense and its budget accounts are directly affected. Congress is affected because it must be notified of each transfer.

     Tradeoff

     This gives the Pentagon flexibility to respond to changing needs quickly, but it also lets the executive branch shift up to $6 billion away from what Congress originally approved.

     Show the exact bill text

     the total amount of authorizations that the Secretary may transfer under the authority of this section may not exceed $6,000,000,000.

298. Pentagon financial audit rules and consequences

     This section deals with the Pentagon's ongoing effort to pass a clean financial audit. Right now, the Department of Defense must submit certain audit-related reports to Congress. Those reports can stop once the Pentagon receives a clean (unmodified) audit opinion. But if it later fails the audit, the reports must restart. If the Pentagon does not earn a clean audit by the end of 2028, new rules kick in on January 1, 2029. Under those rules, the top Pentagon finance official and the finance chiefs of the Army, Navy, and Air Force must be certified public accountants or must have led finances at an organization that already passed a clean audit. The bill also sets aside up to $500 million for fiscal year 2027 to use automation and artificial intelligence to speed up audit fixes. Finally, the bill creates a new Deputy Inspector General position inside the Pentagon's watchdog office. That person, who must be a CPA, will oversee the outside auditors who check the Pentagon's books.

     Who this affects

     The Pentagon, its top finance officials, and taxpayers who fund defense spending. Outside auditors and nominees for senior Defense Department financial positions are also directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     Requiring accounting credentials for Pentagon finance leaders and spending $500 million on audit tools may improve financial accountability, but it adds new hiring constraints and costs.

     Show the exact bill text

     If the Department of Defense does not obtain an unmodified audit opinion on its consolidated financial statements for fiscal year 2028 by December 31, 2028, the requirements of this subsection shall take effect on January 1, 2029.

299. Faster delivery of defense budget documents to Congress

     This section changes the rules for how quickly the Pentagon must share detailed budget documents with Congress. Right now, military leaders report their unfunded spending priorities to Congress, but there is no firm deadline for sharing the matching budget detail books. Under this section, the Department of Defense must send both the budget summary documents (called 'dash one' documents, covering areas like personnel, operations, procurement, and construction) and the matching Justification Books to Congress within seven days of those documents being delivered. This applies to the President's annual budget submission and to any updates sent later.

     Who this affects

     The Secretary of Defense and military service leaders are required to act faster. Members of Congress and their staff gain earlier access to detailed Pentagon spending information.

     Tradeoff

     Congress gets budget details sooner, which aids oversight, but the Pentagon must prepare and transmit detailed documents on a tight seven-day deadline.

     Show the exact bill text

     Not later than seven days after the date on which a covered document is delivered to Congress in support of the budget of the President submitted under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, for a fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense shall transmit to Congress the Justification Books for such covered document

300. Setting starting account balances for military financial audits

     This section sets fixed starting dollar amounts for specific financial accounts used by the Army, Air Force, Defense Logistics Agency, and U.S. Transportation Command. These starting amounts, called opening balances, are the official numbers auditors must use when checking each branch's financial records. For example, the Army's fund balance with the Treasury is set at about $2 billion as of October 1, 2025. The Defense Logistics Agency gets balances set for two funds, one starting October 1, 2024 and one going back to 2021. By law, auditors cannot question or adjust these starting points. They serve as agreed-upon baselines so that the audit process can move forward.

     Who this affects

     Military auditors checking Department of Defense financial statements are directly affected. The Army, Air Force, Defense Logistics Agency, and U.S. Transportation Command must use these fixed numbers in their official financial records.

     Tradeoff

     Setting fixed opening balances lets audits move forward without disputes over past figures, but it also means auditors cannot correct any errors that may exist in those starting numbers.

     Show the exact bill text

     For purposes of an audit conducted under this chapter on the financial statements of the Department of the Army, the opening balances as of October 1, 2025, for the Department of the Army Working Capital Fund shall be as follows: (1) For USSGL Account 101000, titled Fund Balance with Treasury, $2,010,085,640.47.