2017 US Code
Title 10 - Armed Forces
Subtitle A - General Military Law
Part IV - Service, Supply, and Procurement
Chapter 144 - Major Defense Acquisition Programs
Sec. 2431 - Weapons development and procurement schedules

(a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress each calendar year, not later than 45 days after the President submits the budget to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, budget justification documents regarding development and procurement schedules for each weapon system for which fund authorization is required by section 114(a) of this title, and for which any funds for procurement are requested in that budget. The documents shall include data on operational testing and evaluation for each weapon system for which funds for procurement are requested (other than funds requested only for the procurement of units for operational testing and evaluation, or long lead-time items, or both). A weapon system shall also be included in the annual documents required under this subsection in each year thereafter until procurement of that system has been completed or terminated, or the Secretary of Defense certifies, in writing, that such inclusion would not serve any useful purpose and gives his reasons therefor.

(b) Any documents required to be submitted under subsection (a) shall include detailed and summarized information with respect to each weapon system covered and shall specifically include each of the following:

(c) In the case of any weapon system for which procurement funds have not been previously requested and for which funds are first requested by the President in any fiscal year after the Budget for that fiscal year has been submitted to Congress, the same documentation requirements shall be applicable to that system in the same manner and to the same extent as if funds had been requested for that system in that budget.

(Added Pub. L. 93–155, title VIII, §803(a), Nov. 16, 1973, 87 Stat. 614, §139; amended Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, §805, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 538; Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §511(5), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2920; Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, §909(c), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1120; Pub. L. 97–258, §3(b)(1), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1063; Pub. L. 98–525, title XIV, §1405(3), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2621; renumbered §2431 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(5), 110(d)(12), (g)(6), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 995, 1003, 1004; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XIII, §1314(a)(1), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1175; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1301(13), title XIV, §1484(f)(3), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1668, 1717; Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3001, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3327; Pub. L. 104–106, div. D, title XLIII, §4321(b)(18), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 673.)

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in Pub. L. 92–156, title V, §506, Nov. 17, 1971, 85 Stat. 429, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 93–155, §803(b)(2).

1996—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104–106, §4321(b)(18)(A)(i), substituted "Any documents" for "Any report" in first sentence.

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 104–106, §4321(b)(18)(A)(ii), substituted "the documents" for "the report".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–106, §4321(b)(18)(B), substituted "documentation" for "reporting".

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(a), substituted "not later than 45 days after" for "at the same time" and "budget justification documents" for "a written report" in first sentence and "documents" for "report" in second and third sentences.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(b)(1), substituted "include each of the following:" for "include—" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (b)(1) to (3). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(b)(2)–(4), capitalized first letter of first word in pars. (1) to (3) and substituted period for semicolon at end of pars. (1) and (2) and period for "; and" at end of par. (3).

Subsec. (b)(4). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(b)(5) amended par. (4) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (4) read as follows: "the most efficient production rate and the most efficient acquisition rate consistent with the program priority established for such weapon system by the Secretary concerned."

1990—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–510, §1484(f)(3), substituted "covered and shall specifically include" for "covered, and specifically include, but not be limited to" in introductory provisions.

Pub. L. 101–510, §1301(13), redesignated subsec. (c) as (b), struck out "or (b)" after "under subsection (a)", and struck out former subsec. (b) which read as follows: "The Secretary of Defense shall submit a supplemental report to Congress not less than 30, or more than 90, days before the award of any contract, or the exercise of any option in a contract, for the procurement of any such weapon system (other than procurement of units for operational testing and evaluation, or long lead-time items, or both), unless—

Subsecs. (c), (d). Pub. L. 101–510, §1301(13)(C), redesignated subsecs. (c) and (d) as (b) and (c), respectively.

1987—Pub. L. 100–180 made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5). See 1986 Amendment note below.

1986—Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5), as amended by Pub. L. 100–180, §1314(a)(1), renumbered section 139 of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 99–433, §110(d)(12), substituted "Weapons development and procurement schedules" for "Secretary of Defense: weapons development and procurement schedules for armed forces; reports; supplemental reports" in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 99–433, §110(g)(6), substituted "section 114(a)" for "section 138(a)".

1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–525, §1405(3)(B), substituted "30" for "thirty" and "90" for "ninety" in introductory text.

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 98–525, §1405(3)(A), substituted "30" for "thirty".

1982—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97–258 substituted "section 1105 of title 31" for "section 201 of the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 11)".

1981—Subsec. (c)(4). Pub. L. 97–86 added par. (4).

1980—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 96–513 substituted "section 201 of the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 11)" for "section 11 of title 31".

1975—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–106 substituted "or more than ninety, days before" for "or more than sixty, days before".

For effective date and applicability of amendment by Pub. L. 104–106, see section 4401 of Pub. L. 104–106, set out as a note under section 2302 of this title.

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–180 applicable as if included in enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–433, see section 1314(e) of Pub. L. 100–180, set out as a note under section 743 of this title.

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–513 effective Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701(b)(3) of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1676(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1772, provided that:

"(1) Requirement.—Not later than the date on which the budget of the President for fiscal year 2021 is submitted under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer the acquisition authority and the total obligational authority for each missile defense program described in paragraph (2) from the Missile Defense Agency to a military department.

"(2) Missile defense program described.—A missile defense program described in this paragraph is a missile defense program of the Missile Defense Agency that, as of the date specified in paragraph (1), has received Milestone C approval (as defined in section 2366 of title 10, United States Code).

"(3) Report.—

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1683, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1777, provided that:

"(a) In General.—If consistent with the direction or recommendations of the Ballistic Missile Defense Review that commenced in 2017, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall develop, using sound acquisition practices, a highly reliable and cost-effective persistent space-based sensor architecture capable of supporting the ballistic missile defense system.

"(b) Testing and Deployment.—The Director shall ensure that the sensor architecture developed under subsection (a) is rigorously tested before final production decisions or operational deployment.

"(c) Functions.—The sensor architecture developed under subsection (a) shall include one or more of the following functions:

"(d) Cost Estimates.—Whenever the Director develops a cost estimate for the sensor architecture required by subsection (a), the Director shall use—

"(e) Plan.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017], the Director shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a plan that includes—

"(f) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term 'appropriate congressional committees' means—

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1685, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1781, provided that:

"(a) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that, if consistent with the direction or recommendations of the Ballistic Missile Defense Review that commenced in 2017—

"(b) Initial Operational Deployment.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that an effective interim kinetic or directed energy boost phase ballistic missile defense capability is available for initial operational deployment as soon as practicable.

"(c) Plan.—Together with the budget of the President submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, for fiscal year 2019, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a plan to achieve the requirement in subsection (b). Such plan shall include—

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1686, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1781, provided that:

"(a) Increase in Capacity and Continued Advancement.—The Secretary of Defense may—

"(b) Deployment.—Not later than December 31, 2021, the Secretary of Defense may—

"(c) Report.—

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1688, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1783, provided that:

"(a) Development.—If consistent with the direction or recommendations of the Ballistic Missile Defense Review that commenced in 2017, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall develop a space-based ballistic missile intercept layer to the ballistic missile defense system that is—

"(b) Space-based Ballistic Missile Intercept Layer Plan.—If the Director carries out subsection (a), not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017], the Director shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a plan to carry out subsection (a) during the 10-year period following the date of the plan. Such plan shall include the following:

"(c) Establishment of Space Test Bed.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall establish a space test bed to—

"(d) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term 'appropriate congressional committees' means—

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title II, §219, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2053, as amended by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title II, §215, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1326, provided that:

"(a) Designation of Senior Official.—

"(b) Joint Directed Energy Transition Office.—

"(c) Prototyping and Demonstration Program.—

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1681(a), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2623, provided that: "It is the policy of the United States to maintain and improve an effective, robust layered missile defense system capable of defending the territory of the United States, allies, deployed forces, and capabilities against the developing and increasingly complex ballistic missile threat with funding subject to the annual authorization of appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for National Missile Defense."

Pub. L. 106–38, §2, July 22, 1999, 113 Stat. 205, which provided that it was the policy of the United States to deploy as soon as technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending the territory of the United States against limited ballistic missile attack with funding subject to the annual authorization of appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for National Missile Defense, was repealed by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1681(b), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2623.

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1684(e), (f), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2627, provided that:

"(e) Designation Required.—

"(f) Definitions.—In this section:

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1686(a), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2628, provided that:

"(1) In general.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency is the technical authority of the Department of Defense for integrated air and missile defense activities and programs, including joint engineering and integration efforts for such activities and programs, including with respect to defining and controlling the interfaces of such activities and programs and the allocation of technical requirements for such activities and programs.

"(2) Detailees.—

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1687, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2629, provided that:

"(a) Executive Agent.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall serve as the executive agent for the Department of Defense for the development of a capability by the United States to counter hypersonic boost-glide vehicle capabilities and conventional prompt strike capabilities that may be employed against the United States, the allies of the United States, and the deployed forces of the United States.

"(b) Duties.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Director shall—

"(c) Reports Required.—Not later than March 31, 2017—

"(d) Notification of Funding Procedures.—Not later than 90 days after the date on which the Director submits the report under subsection (c)(1), the Director shall notify the congressional defense committees with respect to whether the Director intends to use established procedures for reprogramming or transfers to carry out subsection (a) to conduct activities regarding experimentation, modeling and simulation, or research and development, to develop a hypersonic defense capability.

"(e) Definitions.—In this section:

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1689, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2631, provided that:

"(a) Testing Required.—Except as provided in subsection (c), not less frequently than once each fiscal year, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall administer a flight test of the ground-based midcourse defense element of the ballistic missile defense system.

"(b) Requirements.—The Director shall ensure that each test carried out under subsection (a) provides, when possible, for one or more of the following:

"(c) Exceptions.—The Director may forgo a test under subsection (a) in a fiscal year under one or more of the following conditions:

"(d) Certification.—Not later than 45 days after forgoing a test for a condition or conditions under subsection (c)(8), the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a certification setting forth the condition or conditions that caused the test to be forgone under such subsection.

"(e) Report.—Not later than 45 days after forgoing a test for any condition specified in subsection (c), the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report setting forth the rationale for forgoing the test and a plan to restore an intercept flight test in the Integrated Master Test Plan of the Missile Defense Agency. In the case of a test forgone for a condition or conditions under subsection (c)(8), the report required by this subsection is in addition to the certification required by subsection (d)."

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1692, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2636, provided that:

"(a) Pilot Program.—Beginning not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2016], the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall carry out a pilot program to implement improvements to the data protection options in the programs of the Missile Defense Agency (including the contractors of the Agency), particularly with respect to unclassified, controlled technical information and controlled unclassified information.

"(b) Priority.—In carrying out the pilot program under subsection (a), the Director shall give priority to implementing data protection options that are used by the private sector and have been proven successful.

"(c) Duration.—The Director shall carry out the pilot program under subsection (a) for not more than a 5-year period.

"(d) Notification.—Not later than 30 days before the date on which the Director commences the pilot program under subsection (a), the Director shall notify the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives], the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate of—

"(e) Data Protection Options.—In this section, the term 'data protection options' means actions to improve processes, practices, and systems that relate to the safeguarding, hygiene, and data protection of information."

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1618, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1108, provided that:

"(a) Plan.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 25, 2015], the Commander of the United States Strategic Command and the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, shall jointly submit to the appropriate congressional committees a plan for the integration of overhead persistent infrared capabilities to support the missions specified in subsection (b)(1).

"(b) Elements.—The plan under subsection (a) shall—

"(c) Annual Determination.—The Secretary of Defense shall include, together with, or not later than 30 days after, the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the Department of Defense for a fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code), a written determination of how the plan under subsection (a) is being implemented.

"(d) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term 'appropriate congressional committees' means—

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1675, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1131, provided that:

"(a) Interoperability of Missile Defense Systems.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acting through the Missile Defense Executive Board, shall ensure the interoperability and integration of the covered air and missile defense capabilities of the United States, including by carrying out operational testing.

"(b) Annual Demonstration.—

"(c) Definitions.—In this section, the term 'covered air and missile defense capabilities' means Patriot air and missile defense batteries and associated interceptors and systems, Aegis ships and associated ballistic missile interceptors (including Aegis Ashore capability), AN/TPY–2 radars, or terminal high altitude area defense batteries and interceptors."

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1680, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1137, provided that:

"(a) In General.—The Secretary of Defense shall—

"(b) Report to Congress.—

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1681, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1138, provided that:

"(a) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that—

"(b) Multiple-object Kill Vehicle.—

"(c) Capabilities and Criteria.—The Director shall ensure that the multiple-object kill vehicle developed under subsection (b)(1) meets, at a minimum, the following capabilities and criteria:

"(d) Program Management.—The management of the multiple-object kill vehicle program under subsection (b) shall report directly to the Deputy Director of the Missile Defense Agency.

"(e) Report on Funding Profile.—The Director shall include with the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2017 (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) a report on the funding profile necessary for the multiple-object kill vehicle program to meet the objectives under subsection (b)."

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1682, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1139, provided that:

"(a) In General.—Subject to subsection (b), the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that all remaining ground-based interceptors of the ground-based midcourse defense system that are armed with the capability enhancement I exoatmospheric kill vehicle are replaced with the redesigned exoatmospheric kill vehicle before September 30, 2022.

"(b) Condition.—Subsection (a) shall not apply if the Director determines that flight and intercept testing of the redesigned exoatmospheric kill vehicle is not successful."

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1684, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1140, provided that:

"(a) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that additional missile defense sensor discrimination capabilities are needed to enhance the protection of the United States homeland against potential long-range ballistic missiles from Iran that, according to the Department of Defense, could soon be obtained by Iran as a result of its active space launch program.

"(b) Studies and Evaluations on Homeport of Sea-based X-band Radar.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 25, 2015], the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall commence any siting studies, environmental impact assessments or statements required pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) that have not otherwise been prepared, homeport agreements for sea-based X-band radar support, evaluations of any needed pier modifications, and evaluations of any communications capabilities or other requirements to carry out the reassignment of the homeport of the sea-based X-band radar to a homeport on the East Coast of the United States.

"(c) Potential Future Missile Defense Sensor Sites.—

"(d) Deployment of Additional Coverage.—

"(e) Submission of Information.—

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1685, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1142, as amended by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1683, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2624, provided that:

"(a) In General.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 25, 2015], the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, shall commence the concept definition of a space-based ballistic missile intercept layer to the ballistic missile defense system that provides—

"(b) Elements.—The activities carried out under subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, the following:

"(c) Report.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 25, 2015], the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report that includes—

"(d) Commencement of RDT&E.—Not later than 60 days after the submittal of the report required by subsection (c), the Director may commence coordination and activities associated with research, development, test, and evaluation on the programs described in subsection (c)(2)."

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1687, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1143, provided that:

"(a) In General.—Consistent with the memorandum of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of January 27, 2014, regarding joint integrated air and missile defense, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall oversee the development of warfighter requirements for persistent and survivable capabilities to detect, identify, determine the status, track, and support engagement of strategically important mobile or relocatable assets in all phases of conflict in order to achieve the objective of preventing the effective employment of such assets, including through offensive actions against such assets prior to their use.

"(b) Purpose of Requirements.—The requirements developed pursuant to subsection (a) shall be used and updated, as appropriate, for the purpose of informing applicable acquisition programs and systems-of-systems architecture planning that are funded through the Military Intelligence Program, the National Intelligence Program, and non-intelligence programs.

"(c) Supporting Activities.—The Vice Chairman shall also oversee the development of the enabling framework for intelligence support for integrated air and missile defense, including concepts for the integrated operation of multiple systems, and, as appropriate, the development of requirements for capabilities to be acquired to achieve such integrated operations.

"(d) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that new acquisition programs for applicable major systems or capabilities, or for upgrades to existing systems, should not be undertaken until the applicable requirements described in subsections (a) and (c) have been developed and incorporated into programmatic decision-making."

Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title XVI, §1662, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3657, as amended by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1677(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1774, provided that:

"(a) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that—

"(b) Successful Testing Required Prior to Final Production or Operational Deployment.—The Secretary of Defense may not make a final production decision for, or operationally deploy, a covered system unless—

"(c) Assessment by Director of Operational Test and Evaluation.—The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall—

"(d) Assessment by Commander of United States Strategic Command.—The Commander of the United States Strategic Command shall—

"(e) Rule of Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, modify, or otherwise affect a determination of the Secretary with respect to the participation of the Missile Defense Agency in the Joint Capabilities Integration Development System or the acquisition reporting process under the Department of Defense Directive 5000 series, or to diminish the authority of the Secretary of Defense to deploy a missile defense system at the date on which the Secretary determines appropriate.

"(f) Covered System.—In this section, the term 'covered system' means a new or substantially upgraded interceptor or weapon system of the ballistic missile defense system, other than the re-designed exo-atmospheric kill vehicle covered by the acquisition plan developed under section 1663 [set out below]."

[For termination, effective Dec. 31, 2021, of reporting provisions in subsecs. (c)(2) and (d)(2) of section 1662 of Pub. L. 113–291, set out above, see section 1061 of Pub. L. 114–328, set out as a note under section 111 of this title.]

Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title XVI, §1663, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3658, provided that:

"(a) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that—

"(b) Acquisition Plan Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop an acquisition plan for the re-design of the exo-atmospheric kill vehicle of the ground-based midcourse defense system that includes rigorous elements for system engineering, design, integration, development, testing, and evaluation.

"(c) Objectives.—The objectives of the acquisition plan under subsection (b) shall be to ensure that the re-designed exo-atmospheric kill vehicle is operationally effective, reliable, producible, cost effective, maintainable, and testable.

"(d) Approval of Acquisition Plan Required.—The acquisition plan under subsection (b) shall be subject to approval by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

"(e) Testing Required.—Prior to operational deployment of the re-designed exo-atmospheric kill vehicle, the Secretary shall ensure that the re-designed kill vehicle has demonstrated, through successful, operationally realistic flight testing—

"(f) Report Required.—Not later than 60 days after the date on which the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics approves the acquisition plan under subsection (d), the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report describing the acquisition plan and the manner in which the plan will meet the objectives described in subsection (c)."

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title II, §235, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 714, provided that:

"(a) Deployment of Long-range Discriminating Radar.—

"(b) Additional Sensor Coverage for Threats From Iran.—

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title II, §237, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 717, provided that:

"(a) Improved Kill Assessment Capability.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Strategic Command and the Commander of the United States Northern Command, shall develop—

"(b) Improved Hit Assessment.—The Director, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Strategic Command and the Commander of the United States Northern Command, shall take appropriate steps to develop an interim capability for improved hit assessment for the ground-based midcourse defense system that can be integrated into near-term exo-atmospheric kill vehicle upgrades and refurbishment.

"(c) Report on Improved Capabilities.—Not later than April 1, 2014, the Director, the Commander of the United States Strategic Command, and the Commander of the United States Northern Command shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on—

"(d) Plan for Upgraded Enhanced Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle.—

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title II, §223(a)–(d), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4168, 4169, provided that:

"(a) Limitation on Construction and Deployment of Interceptors.—No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act [see Tables for classification] or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 or any fiscal year thereafter may be obligated or expended for site activation, construction, or deployment of missile defense interceptors on European land as part of the phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in Europe until—

"(b) Limitation on Procurement or Deployment of Interceptors.—No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 or any fiscal year thereafter may be obligated or expended for the procurement (other than initial long-lead procurement) or deployment of operational missiles on European land as part of the phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in Europe until the Secretary of Defense, after receiving the views of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, submits to the congressional defense committees a report certifying that the proposed interceptor to be deployed as part of such missile defense system has demonstrated, through successful, operationally realistic flight testing, a high probability of working in an operationally effective manner and that such missile defense system has the ability to accomplish the mission.

"(c) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the limitations in subsections (a) and (b) if—

"(d) Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed so as to limit the obligation and expenditure of funds for any missile defense activities not otherwise limited by subsection (a) or (b), including, with respect to the planned deployments of missile defense interceptors on European land as part of the phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in Europe—

Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title II, §234, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2234, set forth reporting requirements for the use of Department of Defense funds for the acquisition or deployment of operational missiles of a long-range missile defense system in Europe, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title II, §223(e), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4169.

Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title II, §233, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4393, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(e)(3), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4374, provided that:

"(a) General Limitation.—No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act [see Tables for classification] or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2009 or any fiscal year thereafter may be obligated or expended for procurement, site activation, construction, preparation of equipment for, or deployment of a long-range missile defense system in Europe until the following conditions have been met:

"(b) Additional Limitation.—In addition to the limitation in subsection (a), no funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2009 may be obligated or expended for the acquisition (other than initial long-lead procurement) or deployment of operational missiles of a long-range missile defense system in Europe until the Secretary of Defense, after receiving the views of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, submits to the congressional defense committees a report certifying that the proposed interceptor to be deployed as part of such missile defense system has demonstrated, through successful, operationally realistic flight testing, a high probability of working in an operationally effective manner and the ability to accomplish the mission.

"(c) Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit continuing obligation and expenditure of funds for missile defense, including for research and development and for other activities not otherwise limited by subsection (a) or (b), including, but not limited to, site surveys, studies, analysis, and planning and design for the proposed missile defense deployment in Europe."

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, §229, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 45, provided that:

"(a) Finding.—Congress finds that Iran maintains a nuclear program in continued defiance of the international community while developing ballistic missiles of increasing sophistication and range that—

"(b) Policy of the United States.—It is the policy of the United States—

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §223, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2130, provided that:

"(a) Findings.—Congress makes the following findings:

"(b) Policy.—It is the policy of the United States that the Department of Defense accord a priority within the missile defense program to the development, testing, fielding, and improvement of effective near-term missile defense capabilities, including the ground-based midcourse defense system, the Aegis ballistic missile defense system, the Patriot PAC–3 system, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, and the sensors necessary to support such systems."

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title II, §234, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3174, as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §225, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2130, provided that:

"(a) Test and Evaluation Plans for Blocks.—

"(b) Reports on Test and Evaluation of Blocks.—At the conclusion of the test and evaluation of block 06 and each subsequent block of the Ballistic Missile Defense System, the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall submit to the Secretary of Defense and the congressional defense committees a report providing—

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title II, §232, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1835, provided that:

"(a) Relationship to Ballistic Missile Defense System.—The combined program of the Department of the Army known as the Patriot Advanced Capability-3/Medium Extended Air Defense System air and missile defense program (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 'PAC–3/MEADS program') is an element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System.

"(b) Management of Configuration Changes.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of the Army (acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) shall ensure that any configuration change for the PAC–3/MEADS program is subject to the configuration control board processes of the Missile Defense Agency so as to ensure integration of the PAC–3/MEADS element with appropriate elements of the Ballistic Missile Defense System.

"(c) Required Procedures.—(1) Except as otherwise directed by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Army (acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) may make a significant change to the baseline technical specifications or the baseline schedule for the PAC–3/MEADS program only with the concurrence of the Director of the Missile Defense Agency.

"(2) With respect to a proposal by the Secretary of the Army to make a significant change to the procurement quantity (including any quantity in any future block procurement) that, as of the date of such proposal, is planned for the PAC–3/MEADS program, the Secretary of Defense shall establish—

"(d) Report.—Not later than February 1, 2005, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of Senate and House of Representatives] a report describing the procedures developed pursuant to subsection (c)(2).

"(e) Definitions.—For purpose of this section:

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title II, §234, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1837, provided that:

"(a) Testing Criteria.—Not later than February 1, 2005, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, shall prescribe appropriate criteria for operationally realistic testing of fieldable prototypes developed under the ballistic missile defense spiral development program. The Secretary shall submit a copy of the prescribed criteria to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of Senate and House of Representatives].

"(b) Use of Criteria.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that, not later than October 1, 2005, a test of the ballistic missile defense system is conducted consistent with the criteria prescribed under subsection (a).

"(2) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that each block configuration of the ballistic missile defense system is tested consistent with the criteria prescribed under subsection (a).

"(c) Relationship to Other Law.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to exempt any spiral development program of the Department of Defense, after completion of the spiral development, from the applicability of any provision of chapter 144 of title 10, United States Code, or section 139, 181, 2366, 2399, or 2400 of such title in accordance with the terms and conditions of such provision.

"(d) Evaluation.—(1) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall evaluate the results of each test conducted under subsection (a) as soon as practicable after the completion of such test.

"(2) The Director shall submit to the Secretary of Defense and the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of Senate and House of Representatives] a report on the evaluation of each test conducted under subsection (a) upon completion of the evaluation of such test under paragraph (1).

"(e) Cost, Schedule, and Performance Baselines.—(1) The Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall establish cost, schedule, and performance baselines for each block configuration of the Ballistic Missile Defense System being fielded. The cost baseline for a block configuration shall include full life cycle costs for the block configuration.

"(2) The Director shall include the baselines established under paragraph (1) in the first Selected Acquisition Report for the Ballistic Missile Defense System that is submitted to Congress under section 2432 of title 10, United States Code, after the establishment of such baselines.

"(3) The Director shall also include in the Selected Acquisition Report submitted to Congress under paragraph (2) the significant assumptions used in determining the performance baseline under paragraph (1), including any assumptions regarding threat missile countermeasures and decoys.

"(f) Variations Against Baselines.—In the event the cost, schedule, or performance of any block configuration of the Ballistic Missile Defense System varies significantly (as determined by the Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Agency) from the applicable baseline established under subsection (d), the Director shall include such variation, and the reasons for such variation, in the Selected Acquisition Report submitted to Congress under section 2432 of title 10, United States Code.

"(g) Modifications of Baselines.—In the event the Director of the Missile Defense Agency elects to undertake any modification of a baseline established under subsection (d), the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of Senate and House of Representatives] a report setting forth the reasons for such modification."

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §221, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2484, related to annual submission of current performance goals and development baselines; research, development, test, and evaluation budget justification materials; and review of Missile Defense Agency criteria in relation to military requirements, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title II, §231(b)(3), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1339.

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §224, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2485, provided that:

"(a) Information To Be Furnished to Congressional Committees.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall provide to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] information on the results of each flight test of the Ground-based Midcourse national missile defense system.

"(b) Content.—Information provided under subsection (a) on the results of a flight test shall include the following matters:

Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title II, §232(c)–(h), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1037–1039, as amended by Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §225(b)(2)(A), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2486; Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title II, §221(b)(2), (c)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1419; Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title II, §233, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1836; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title II, §232, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3174; Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §224, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2130; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, §225, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 41; Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title II, §231(a), (b), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4390, 4391; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(e)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4374; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title II, §232(c), title X, §1062(h), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1340, 1585, provided that:

"[(c), (d). Repealed. Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, §1062(h), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1585.]

"(e) Internal DOD Reviews.—(1) The officials and elements of the Department of Defense specified in paragraph (2) shall on an ongoing basis—

"(2) Paragraph (1) applies with respect to the following:

"(f) Demonstration of Critical Technologies.—(1) The Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall develop a plan for ensuring that each critical technology for a missile defense program is successfully demonstrated in an appropriate environment before that technology enters into operational service as part of a missile defense program.

"(2) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation of the Department of Defense shall monitor the development of the plan under paragraph (1) and shall submit to the Director of the Missile Defense Agency any comments regarding that plan that the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation considers appropriate.

"[(g) Repealed. Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title II, §232(c), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1340.]

"(h) Annual OT&E Assessment and Characterization of Certain Ballistic Missile Defense Matters.—(1) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall each year assess the adequacy and sufficiency of the Missile Defense Agency test program during the preceding fiscal year.

"(2) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall also each year characterize the operational effectiveness, suitability, and survivability of the ballistic missile defense system, and its elements, that have been fielded or tested before the end of the preceding fiscal year.

"(3) Not later than February 15 each year the Director shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the assessment under paragraph (1) and the characterization under paragraph (2) with respect to the preceding fiscal year."

[Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title II, §231(c), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4391, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [amending Pub. L. 107–107, §232(h), set out above] shall take effect on October 1, 2008, and shall apply with respect to fiscal years beginning on or after that date."]

[For termination, effective Dec. 31, 2021, of annual reporting provisions in section 232(h) of Pub. L. 107–107, set out above, see section 1061 of Pub. L. 114–328, set out as a note under section 111 of this title.]

Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title II, §234, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1039, provided that:

"(a) Testing Infrastructure.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that each annual budget request of the Department of Defense—

"(2) The Secretary shall ensure that ballistic missile defense programs incorporate, to the greatest possible extent, operationally realistic test configurations (referred to as 'test bed' configurations) to demonstrate system performance across a broad range of capability and, during final stages of operational testing, to demonstrate reliable performance.

"(3) The Secretary shall ensure that the test infrastructure for ballistic missile defense programs is capable of supporting continued testing of ballistic missile defense systems after deployment.

"(b) Requirements for Early Stages of System Development.—In order to demonstrate acceptable risk and developmental stability, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that any ballistic missile defense program incorporates, to the maximum extent practicable, the following elements during the early stages of system development:

"(c) Specific Requirements for Ground-Based Mid-Course Interceptor Systems.—For ground-based mid-course interceptor systems, the Secretary of Defense shall initiate steps during fiscal year 2002 to establish a flight-test capability of launching not less than three missile defense interceptors and not less than two ballistic missile targets to provide a realistic test infrastructure."

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title II, §231, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1661, provided that the Secretary of Defense was to ensure that the National Missile Defense Program was structured and programmed for funding so as to support a test, in fiscal year 1999, of an integrated national missile defense system that was representative of the national missile defense system architecture that could achieve initial operational capability in fiscal year 2003, and that not later than Feb. 15, 1998, the Secretary was to submit to the congressional defense committees a plan for the development and deployment of a national missile defense system that could achieve initial operational capability in fiscal year 2003.

Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [div. C, title XXXI, §3132], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–455, as amended by Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §225(b)(3), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2486, provided that:

"(a) Jointly Funded Projects.—The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense shall modify the memorandum of understanding for the use of the national laboratories for ballistic missile defense programs, entered into under section 3131 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105–85; 111 Stat. 2034; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note), to provide for jointly funded projects.

"(b) Requirements for Projects.—The projects referred to in subsection (a) shall—

"(c) Participation by NNSA in Certain MDA Activities.—The Administrator for Nuclear Security and the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall implement mechanisms that increase the cooperative relationship between those organizations. Those mechanisms may include participation by personnel of the National Nuclear Security Administration in the following activities of the Missile Defense Agency:

Pub. L. 105–85, div. C, title XXXI, §3131, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 2034, provided that:

"(a) Memorandum of Understanding.—The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a memorandum of understanding for the purpose of improving and facilitating the use by the Secretary of Defense of the expertise of the national laboratories for the ballistic missile defense programs of the Department of Defense.

"(b) Assistance.—The memorandum of understanding shall provide that the Secretary of Defense shall request such assistance with respect to the ballistic missile defense programs of the Department of Defense as the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy determine can be provided through the technical skills and experience of the national laboratories, using such financial arrangements as the Secretaries determine are appropriate.

"(c) Activities.—The memorandum of understanding shall provide that the national laboratories shall carry out those activities necessary to respond to requests for assistance from the Secretary of Defense referred to in subsection (b). Such activities may include the identification of technical modifications and test techniques, the analysis of physics problems, the consolidation of range and test activities, and the analysis and simulation of theater missile defense deployment problems.

"(d) National Laboratories.—For purposes of this section, the national laboratories are—

Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, subtitle C, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 228–233, as amended by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title II, §236, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1665; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(6), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1041(c), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2646, provided that:

"This subtitle may be cited as the 'Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995'.

"Congress makes the following findings:

"It is the policy of the United States—

"(a) Establishment of Core Program.—To implement the policy established in paragraph (1) of section 233, the Secretary of Defense shall restructure the core theater missile defense program to consist of the following systems:

"(b) Use of Streamlined Acquisition Procedures.—The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe and use streamlined acquisition policies and procedures to reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of developing and deploying the theater missile defense systems specified in subsection (a).

"(c) Interoperability and Support of Core Systems.—To maximize effectiveness and flexibility of the systems comprising the core theater missile defense program, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that those systems are integrated and complementary and are fully capable of exploiting external sensor and battle management support from systems such as—

"(d) Follow-on Systems.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall prepare an affordable development plan for theater missile defense systems to be developed as follow-on systems to the core systems specified in subsection (a). The Secretary shall make the selection of a system for inclusion in the plan based on the capability of the system to satisfy military requirements not met by the systems in the core program and on the capability of the system to use prior investments in technologies, infrastructure, and battle-management capabilities that are incorporated in, or associated with, the systems in the core program.

"(2) The Secretary may not proceed with the development of a follow-on theater missile defense system beyond the Demonstration/Validation stage of development unless the Secretary designates that system as a part of the core program under this section and submits to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and on Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives] notice of that designation. The Secretary shall include with any such notification a report describing—

"(e) Program Accountability Report.—(1) As part of the annual report of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization [now Missile Defense Agency] required by section 224 of Public Law 101–189 (10 U.S.C. 2431 note), the Secretary of Defense shall describe the technical milestones, the schedule, and the cost of each phase of development and acquisition (together with total estimated program costs) for each core and follow-on theater missile defense program.

"(2) As part of such report, the Secretary shall describe, with respect to each program covered in the report, any variance in the technical milestones, program schedule milestones, and costs for the program compared with the information relating to that program in the report submitted in the previous year and in the report submitted in the first year in which that program was covered.

"(a) Findings.—(1) Congress hereby reaffirms—

"(2) Congress also finds that the demarcation standard described in subsection (b)(1) for compliance of a missile defense system, system upgrade, or system component with the ABM Treaty is based upon current technology.

"(b) Sense of Congress Concerning Compliance Policy.—It is the sense of Congress that—

"(c) Prohibition on Funding.—Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1996 may not be obligated or expended to implement an agreement, or any understanding with respect to interpretation of the ABM Treaty, between the United States and any of the independent states of the former Soviet Union entered into after January 1, 1995, that—

"(d) Exceptions.—Subsection (c) does not apply—

"(e) ABM-Qualifying Flight Test Defined.—For purposes of this section, an ABM-qualifying flight test is a flight test against a ballistic missile which, in that flight test, exceeds (1) a range of 3,500 kilometers, or (2) a velocity of 5 kilometers per second.

"It is in the interest of the United States to develop its own missile defense capabilities in a manner that will permit the United States to complement the missile defense capabilities developed and deployed by its allies and possible coalition partners. Therefore, the Congress urges the President—

"For purposes of this subtitle, the term 'ABM Treaty' means the Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, and signed at Moscow on May 26, 1972, and includes the Protocols to that Treaty, signed at Moscow on July 3, 1974.

"The Missile Defense Act of 1991 [Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title II, part C] (10 U.S.C. 2431 note) is repealed."

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title II, §231, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2699, provided that:

"(a) General Limitation.—Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1995, or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense from any funds appropriated for fiscal year 1995 or for any fiscal year before 1995, may not be obligated or expended—

"(b) Limitation Relating to Brilliant Eyes.—Of the funds appropriated pursuant to the authorizations of appropriations in section 201 [108 Stat. 2690] that are made available for the space-based, midcourse missile tracking system known as the Brilliant Eyes program, not more than $80,000,000 may be obligated until the Secretary of Defense submits to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the compliance of that program with the ABM Treaty, as determined under the compliance review conducted pursuant to subsection (c).

"(c) Compliance Review for Brilliant Eyes.—The Secretary of Defense shall review the Brilliant Eyes program to determine whether, and under what conditions, the development, testing, and deployment of the Brilliant Eyes missile tracking system in conjunction with a theater ballistic missile defense system, with a limited national missile defense system, and with both such systems, would be in compliance with the ABM Treaty, including the interpretation of that treaty set forth in the enclosure to the July 13, 1993, ACDA letter.

"(d) Compliance Review for Navy Upper Tier System.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall review the theater ballistic missile program known as the Navy Upper Tier program to determine whether the development, testing, and deployment of the system being developed under that program would be in compliance with the ABM Treaty, including the interpretation of the Treaty set forth in the enclosure to the July 13, 1993, ACDA letter.

"(2) Of the funds made available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1995, not more than $40,000,000 may be obligated for the Navy Upper Tier program before the date on which the Secretary submits to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the compliance of that program with the ABM Treaty, as determined under the compliance review under paragraph (1).

"(e) Definitions.—In this section:

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §234, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1595, contained findings of Congress, required compliance review, and limited funding pending submission of report, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(6), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 235.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §235, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1598, provided that:

"(a) Integration and Compatibility.—In carrying out the Theater Missile Defense Initiative, the Secretary of Defense shall—

The Secretaries of the military departments shall seek the maximum integration and compatibility of their ballistic missile defense systems as well as of the respective roles and missions of those systems.

"(b) TMD Master Plan.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report (which shall constitute the TMD master plan) containing a thorough and complete analysis of the future of theater missile defense programs. The report shall include the following:

"(c) Description of Testing Program.—The Secretary of Defense shall include in the report under subsection (b)—

"(d) Relationship to Arms Control Treaties.—The Secretary shall include in the report under subsection (b) a statement of how production and deployment of any projected Theater Missile Defense program will conform to all relevant arms control agreements. The report shall describe any potential noncompliance with any such agreement, when such noncompliance is expected to occur, and whether provisions need to be renegotiated within that agreement to address future contingencies.

"(e) Submission of Report.—The report required by subsection (b) shall be submitted as part of the next annual report of the Secretary submitted to Congress under section 224 of Public Law 101–189 (10 U.S.C. 2431 note).

"(f) Objectives of Plan.—In preparing the master plan, the Secretary shall—

"(g) Review and Report on Deployment of Ballistic Missile Defenses.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall conduct an intensive and extensive review of opportunities to streamline the weapon systems acquisition process applicable to the development, testing, and deployment of theater ballistic missile defenses with the objective of reducing the cost of deployment and accelerating the schedule for deployment without significantly increasing programmatic risk or concurrency.

"(2) In conducting the review, the Secretary shall obtain recommendations and advice from—

"(3) Not later than May 1, 1994, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the Secretary's findings resulting from the review under paragraph (1), together with any recommendations of the Secretary for legislation. The Secretary shall submit the report in unclassified form, but may submit a classified version of the report if necessary to clarify any of the information in the findings or recommendations or any related information. The report may be submitted as part of the next annual report of the Secretary submitted to Congress under section 224 of Public Law 101–189 (10 U.S.C. 2431 note)."

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §242(a)–(e), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1603–1605, stated congressional findings, required Secretary of Defense to develop plan to coordinate development and implementation of Theater Missile Defense programs of United States with theater missile defense programs of allies of United States, specified contents of such plan, required Secretary to submit to Congress report on such plan in both classified and unclassified versions, required Secretary to include in each annual Theater Missile Defense Initiative report to Congress report on actions taken to implement such plan, specified contents of such report, related to restriction on funds, stated sense of Congress that whenever United States deployed theater ballistic missile defenses to protect country that had not provided support for development of such defenses United States was to consider seeking reimbursement from such country to cover at least incremental cost of such deployment, and related to congressional encouragement of allies of United States to participate in cooperative Theater Missile Defense programs of United States and encouragement of participation by United States in cooperative theater missile defense efforts of allied nations, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(7), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 235.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §243, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1605, as amended by Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, §1073(e)(1)(E), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2658; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §225(b)(4)(B), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2486, provided that:

"(a) Management Responsibility.—Except as provided in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall provide that management and budget responsibility for research and development of any program, project, or activity to develop far-term follow-on technology relating to ballistic missile defense shall be provided through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or the appropriate military department.

"(b) Waiver Authority.—The Secretary may waive the provisions of subsection (a) in the case of a particular program, project, or activity if the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees that it is in the national security interest of the United States to provide management and budget responsibility for that program, project, or activity through the Missile Defense Agency.

"(c) Report Required.—As a part of the report required by section 231(e) [107 Stat. 1593], the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report identifying—

"(d) Definition.—For the purposes of this section, the term 'far-term follow-on technology' means a technology that is not incorporated into a ballistic missile defense architecture and is not likely to be incorporated within 15 years into a weapon system for ballistic missile defense.

"(e) Conforming Amendment.—Section 234 of the Missile Defense Act of 1991 [Pub. L. 102–190; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note] is repealed."

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title II, §231, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2354, provided that:

"(a) Establishment of Theater Missile Defense Initiative.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a Theater Missile Defense Initiative office within the Department of Defense. All theater and tactical missile defense activities of the Department of Defense (including all programs, projects, and activities formerly associated with the Theater Missile Defense program element of the Strategic Defense Initiative) shall be carried out under the Theater Missile Defense Initiative.

"(b) Funding for Fiscal Year 1993.—Of the amounts appropriated pursuant to section 201 [106 Stat. 2349] or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense for research, development, test, and evaluation for fiscal year 1993, not more than $935,000,000 may be obligated for activities of the Theater Missile Defense Initiative, of which not less than $90,000,000 shall be made available for exploration of promising concepts for naval theater missile defense.

"(c) Report.—When the President's budget for fiscal year 1994 is submitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report—

"(d) Effective Date.—The provisions of subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall be implemented not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 23, 1992]."

Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title II, part C, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1321, as amended by Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title II, §234(a)–(d)(1), (e), (f), title X, §1053(1), (2), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2356, 2357, 2501; Pub. L. 103–35, title II, §§202(a)(2), 203(b)(1), May 31, 1993, 107 Stat. 101, 102; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §§232, 243(e), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1593, 1606; Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title II, §233, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2700, specified that such provisions could be cited as the "Missile Defense Act of 1991", and related to missile defense goal of United States, implementation of goal, review of follow-on deployment options, definition of term "ABM Treaty", and interpretation of such provisions, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §238, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 233.

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior authorization act:

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title II, §221, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1511.

Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title I, §117, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 1933, as amended by Pub. L. 104–106, div. D, title XLIII, §4321(i)(3), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 676, required Secretary of Defense to submit a stretchout impact statement for certain major defense acquisition programs at same time the budget for any fiscal year is submitted to Congress and to submit to Committees on Armed Services of Senate and House of Representatives, no later than Mar. 15, 1989, a report on feasibility and effect of establishing maximum production rates by December 1990 for certain major defense acquisition programs, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, §1041(c), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1885.

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §222, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1055, prohibited use of appropriated funds for certain Strategic Defense Initiative program contracts with foreign entities, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title II, §222, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4168.

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §223, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1056, as amended by Pub. L. 103–199, title II, §203(a)(1), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2321, provided that: "Military technology developed with funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the Ballistic Missile Defense Program may not be transferred (or made available for transfer) to Russia or any other independent state of the former Soviet Union by the United States (or with the consent of the United States) unless the President determines, and certifies to the Congress at least 15 days prior to any such transfer, that such transfer is in the national interest of the United States and is to be made for the purpose of maintaining peace."

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §224, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1056, provided that: "No agency of the Federal Government may plan for, fund, or otherwise support the development of command and control systems for strategic defense in the boost or post-boost phase against ballistic missile threats that would permit such strategic defenses to initiate the directing of damaging or lethal fire except by affirmative human decision at an appropriate level of authority."

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §226, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1057, prohibited Secretary of Defense from deploying anti-ballistic missile system unless such deployment was specifically authorized by law after Dec. 4, 1987, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(3), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 234.

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §227, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1057, authorized the Secretary of Defense, using funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for the Strategic Defense Initiative program, to enter into a contract not to be awarded before Oct. 1, 1989, to provide for the establishment and operation of a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) to provide independent and objective technical support to the Strategic Defense Initiative program, and provided that no Federal funds could be provided to the new FFRDC after the end of the five-year period beginning on the date of the award of the first contract awarded.

Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title II, §213, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3841, prohibited the Secretary of Defense from obligating or expending any funds for the purpose of operating a Federally funded research and development center that was established for the support of the Strategic Defense Initiative Program after Nov. 14, 1986, unless the Secretary submitted to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with respect to such proposed center and funds were specifically authorized to be appropriated for such purpose in an Act other than an appropriations Act or a continuing resolution.

Pub. L. 99–145, title IX, §915, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 688, as amended by Pub. L. 100–26, §11(a)(2), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 288, required Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an annual report setting forth Secretary's plan for performance during next fiscal year of cost analyses for major defense acquisition programs for purpose of determining how much production of covered systems under such programs should cost, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1322(d)(2), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1672.

Pub. L. 99–145, title II, §222, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 613, provided that strategic defense system developed as consequence of research, development, test, and evaluation conducted on Strategic Defense Initiative program could not be deployed in whole or in part unless President made a certain determination and certification to Congress and funding for deployment of such system was specifically authorized by legislation enacted after date of certification, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 234.

Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title II, §224, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1398, as amended by Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §240, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1603; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title II, §244, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2463, provided that not later than March 15 of each year, the Secretary of Defense was to transmit to Congress a report on the programs and projects that constitute the Ballistic Missile Defense program and on any other program or project relating to defense against ballistic missiles, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1032(b)(1), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 751.

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §231(a), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1059, provided that not later than Mar. 15, 1988 and Mar. 15, 1989, the Secretary of Defense was to transmit to Congress a report on the programs that constitute the Strategic Defense Initiative and on any other program relating to defense against ballistic missiles.

Pub. L. 98–525, title XI, §1102, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2580, required Secretary of Defense, at time of his annual budget presentation to Congress beginning with fiscal year 1986 and ending with fiscal year 1990, to transmit to Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Affairs of House of Representatives and Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Relations of Senate, a detailed report on programs that constitute SDI, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §231(b), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1060.

Pub. L. 98–525, title XII, §1252, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2610, directed Secretary of Defense, not later than one year after Oct. 19, 1984, to develop a plan for an improved system for the management of technical data relating to any major system of the Department of Defense and, not later than 5 years after Oct. 19, 1984, to complete implementation of the management plan, directed Comptroller General, not later than 18 months after Oct. 19, 1984, to transmit to Congress a report evaluating the plan developed, and directed Secretary of Defense, not later than 180 days after Oct. 19, 1984, to transmit to Congress a plan to improve substantially the computer capability of each of the military departments and of the Defense Logistics Agency to store and access rapidly data that is needed for the efficient procurement of supplies.

Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(h) [title VIII, §8104], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1904, 1942, provided that: "It is the sense of the Congress that—(a) the President shall inform and make every effort to consult with other member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Japan, and other appropriate allies concerning the research being conducted in the Strategic Defense Initiative program. (b) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, shall at the time of the submission of the annual budget presentation materials for each fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1984, report to the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, and Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives on the status of the consultations referred to under subsection (a)."

[For abolition, transfer of functions, and treatment of references to United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, see section 6511 et seq. of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.]

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §208, Dec. 4, 1986, 101 Stat. 1048, prohibited the Secretary of Defense, until Oct. 1, 1988, from carrying out a test of the Space Defense System (antisatellite weapon) involving the F–15 launched miniature homing vehicle against an object in space until the President certified to Congress that the Soviet Union had conducted, after Dec. 4, 1987, a test against an object in space of a dedicated antisatellite weapon.

Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title II, §231, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3847, prohibited the Secretary of Defense, until Oct. 1, 1987, from carrying out a test of the Space Defense System (anti-satellite weapon) against an object in space until the President certified to Congress that the Soviet Union had conducted, after Nov. 14, 1986, a test against an object in space of a dedicated anti-satellite weapon.

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior acts:

Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title XI, §1101], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783–177, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title XI, §1101], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341–177.

Pub. L. 99–190, §101(b) [title VIII, §8097], Dec. 19, 1985, 99 Stat. 1185, 1219.

Pub. L. 99–145, title II, §208(a), (b), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 610, provided that:

"(a) Requirement Regarding the Use of Funds.—None of the funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization in this or any other Act may be obligated or expended to test against an object in space the miniature homing vehicle (MHV) anti-satellite warhead launched from an F–15 aircraft unless the President has made a determination and a certification to the Congress as provided in section 8100 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1985 [set out as a note below] (as contained in section 101(h) of Public Law 98–473 (98 Stat. 1941)).

"(b) Limitation on Number of Tests.—Not more than three tests described in subsection (a) may be conducted before October 1, 1986."

Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(h) [title VIII, §8100], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1904, 1941, provided that:

"(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds appropriated or made available in this or any other Act may be obligated or expended to test against an object in space the miniature homing vehicle (MHV) anti-satellite warhead launched from an F–15 aircraft unless the President determines and certifies to Congress—

"(b) During fiscal year 1985, funds appropriated for the purpose of testing the F–15 launched miniature homing vehicle anti-satellite warhead may not be used to conduct more than three tests of that warhead against objects in space.

"(c) The limitation on the expenditure of funds provided by subsection (a) of this section shall cease to apply fifteen calendar days after the date of the receipt by Congress of the certification referred to in subsection (a) or March 1, 1985, whichever occurs later."

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior authorization act:

Pub. L. 98–94, title XI, §1235, Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 695; as amended by Pub. L. 98–525, title II, §205, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2509.

Pub. L. 96–418, title VIII, §802, Oct. 10, 1980, 94 Stat. 1775, as amended by Pub. L. 97–99, title IX, §904(b), Dec. 23, 1981, 95 Stat. 1382; Pub. L. 98–115, title VIII, §805, Oct. 11, 1983, 97 Stat. 785; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1322(f), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1672, provided that:

"(a) The Secretary of Defense (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 'Secretary') may assist communities located near MX Missile System sites and communities located near the East Coast Trident Base, and the States in which such communities are located, in meeting the costs of providing increased municipal services and facilities to the residents of such communities, if the Secretary determines that there is an immediate and substantial increase in the need for such services and facilities in such communities as a direct result of work being carried out in connection with the construction, installation, or operation of the MX Missile System or the East Coast Trident Base, as the case may be, and that an unfair and excessive financial burden will be incurred by such communities, or the States in which such communities are located, as a result of such increased need for such services and facilities.

"(b)(1) Whenever possible, the Secretary shall carry out the program of assistance authorized under this section through existing Federal programs. In carrying out such program of assistance, the Secretary may—

"(2) The head of each department and agency shall cooperate fully with the Secretary in carrying out the provisions of this section on a priority basis.

"(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary, in cooperation with the heads of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, may provide assistance under this section in anticipation of the work to be carried out in connection with the MX Missile System sites or the East Coast Trident Base, as the case may be.

"(c) In determining the amount of financial assistance to be made available under this section to any local community for any community service or facility, the Secretary shall consult with the head of the department or agency concerned with the type of service or facility for which financial assistance is being made available and shall take into consideration—

"(d) Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for carrying out the MX Missile System deployment program and the East Coast Trident Base may, to the extent specifically authorized in Military Construction Authorization Acts, be used by the Secretary to provide assistance under this section."

Pub. L. 96–342, title II, §202, Sept. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 1079, provided that:

"(a) The Congress finds that a survivable land-based intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system is vital to the security of the United States and to a stable strategic balance between the United States and the Soviet Union and that timely deployment of a new basing mode is essential to the survivability of this Nation's land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. It is, therefore, the purpose of this section to commit the Congress to the development and deployment of the MX missile system, consisting of 200 missiles and 4,600 hardened shelters, and to insure that deployment of the entire MX system is carried out as soon as practicable.

"(b) The Secretary of Defense shall proceed immediately with the full-scale engineering development of the MX missile and a Multiple Protective Structure (MPS) basing mode and shall continue such development in a manner that will achieve an Initial Operational Capability of such missile and basing mode not later than December 31, 1986.

"(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the initial phase of construction shall be limited to 2,300 protective shelters for the MX missile in the initial deployment area.

"(d) In accordance with the finding of the Congress expressed in subsection (a), a full system of at least 4,600 protective shelters may be deployed in the initial deployment area if, after completion of a study to be conducted by the Secretary of Defense of an alternate site for a portion of the system, it is determined by the Congress that adverse cost, military considerations, or other reasons preclude split basing."

Pub. L. 96–29, title II, §202, June 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 79, provided that:

"(a) It is the sense of the Congress that maintaining a survivable land-based intercontinental ballistic missile system is vital to the security of the United States and that development of a new basing mode for land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles is necessary to assure the survivability of the land-based system. To this end, the development of the MX missile, together with a new basing mode for such missile, should proceed so as to achieve Initial Operational Capability (IOC) for both such missile and such basing mode at the earliest practicable date.

"(b) In addition, it is the sense of the Congress that the basing mode for the MX missile should be restricted to location on the least productive land available that is suitable for such purpose.

"(c) In accordance with the sense of Congress expressed in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall proceed immediately with full scale engineering development of the missile basing mode known as the Multiple Protective Structure (MPS) system concurrently with full scale engineering development of the MX missile, unless and until the Secretary of Defense certifies to the Congress that an alternative basing mode is militarily or technologically superior to, and is more cost effective than, the MPS system or the President informs the Congress that in his view the MPS system is not consistent with United States national security interests.

"(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or restrict the study of alternative basing modes for land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles."

Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, §811, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 539, as amended by Pub. L. 96–107, title VIII, §809, Nov. 9, 1979, 93 Stat. 815; Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, §917(e), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1131, which required reports to Congress respecting acquisitions of major defense systems, including total program acquisition unit costs, was repealed by Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1107(b), Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 746, effective Jan. 1, 1983, as provided in section 1107(c) of Pub. L. 97–252, set out as an Effective Date note under section 2432 of this title. See sections 2432 and 2433 of this title.

Pub. L. 93–552, title VI, §608, Dec. 27, 1974, 88 Stat. 1763, provided:

"(a) The Secretary of Defense is authorized to assist communities located near the TRIDENT Support Site Bangor, Washington, in meeting the costs of providing increased municipal services and facilities to the residents of such communities, if the Secretary determines that there is an immediate and substantial increase in the need for such services and facilities in such communities as a direct result of work being carried out in connection with the construction, installation, testing, and operation of the TRIDENT Weapon System and that an unfair and excessive financial burden will be incurred by such communities as a result of the increased need for such services and facilities.

"(b) The Secretary of Defense shall carry out the provisions of this section through existing Federal programs. The Secretary is authorized to supplement funds made available under such Federal programs to the extent necessary to carry out the provisions of this section, and is authorized to provide financial assistance to communities described in subsection (a) of this section to help such communities pay their share of the costs under such programs. The heads of all departments and agencies concerned shall cooperate fully with the Secretary of Defense in carrying out the provisions of this section on a priority basis.

"(c) In determining the amount of financial assistance to be made available under this section to any local community for any community service or facility, the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the head of the department or agency of the Federal Government concerned with the type of service or facility for which financial assistance is being made available and shall take into consideration (1) the time lag between the initial impact of increased population in any such community and any increase in the local tax base which will result from such increased population, (2) the possible temporary nature of the increased population and the long-range cost impact on the permanent residents of any such community, and (3) such other pertinent factors as the Secretary of Defense deems appropriate.

"(d) Any funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1974, for carrying out the TRIDENT Weapon System shall be utilized by the Secretary of Defense in carrying out the provisions of this section to the extent that funds are unavailable under other Federal programs. Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for any fiscal year beginning after June 30, 1975, for carrying out the TRIDENT Weapon System may, to the extent specifically authorized in an annual Military Construction Authorization Act, be utilized by the Secretary of Defense in carrying out the provision of this section to the extent that funds are unavailable under other Federal programs.

"(e) The Secretary shall transmit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives semiannual reports indicating the total amount expended in the case of each local community which was provided assistance under the authority of this section during the preceding six-month period, the specific projects for which assistance was provided during such period, and the total amount provided for each such project during such period."