(1) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following findings:

(2) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that—

(1) as an addition to the contract covering up to 15 such destroyers authorized to be procured under section 112 of this Act; or

(2) under a separate contract entered into in fiscal year 2023.

(1) any obligation of the United States to make a payment under the contract is subject to the availability of appropriations for that purpose; and

(2) that total liability of the Federal Government for termination of any contract entered into shall be limited to the total amount of funding obligated to the contract at time of termination.

(1) a single contract for the procurement of up to 30 airframes in support of the CH–53K heavy-lift helicopter program; and

(2) a single contract for the procurement of up to 90 engines in support of such program.

(1) any obligation of the United States to make a payment under the contract is subject to the availability of appropriations for that purpose; and

(2) that total liability of the Federal Government for termination of any contract entered into shall be limited to the total amount of funding obligated to the contract at time of termination.

(1) to retire, prepare to retire, transfer, or place in storage any Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 85 aircraft (referred to in this section as an “HSC–85 aircraft”); or

(2) to make any changes to manning levels with respect to any HSC–85 aircraft squadron.

(1) an explanation of the operational impact of divestment of HSC–85 aircraft on the training and readiness of Navy special warfare units and missions based in the west coast of the United States;

(2) the estimated costs of sustaining HSC–85 aircraft at full operational capability from fiscal year 2024 through fiscal year 2028;

(3) a proposed cost sharing arrangement between the Navy and the United States Special Operations Command for sustaining HSC–85 aircraft at full operational capabilities from fiscal year 2024 through fiscal year 2028;

(4) identification of a replacement capability that would be available if prioritized and directed by the Secretary of Defense and would meet all operational requirements, including special operational-peculiar requirements of the combatant commands, that are fulfilled by HSC–85 aircraft as of the date of the report; and

(5) an estimate of the costs and a proposed schedule for establishing the replacement capability identified in paragraph (4) over the period of five years following the date of the report.

(1) An overview of the program schedule.

(2) A statement of the total cost of the program as of the date of the briefing, including the cost of development, testing, and production.

(3) A comparison of the total cost of the program relative to the original acquisition program baseline and the most recently approved acquisition program baseline as of the date of the briefing.

(4) An assessment of the flight testing that remains to be conducted under the program, including any testing required for validation of correction of technical deficiencies.

(5) An update on the status of the correction of technical deficiencies under the program and any effects on the program schedule resulting from the discovery and correction of such deficiencies.

(1) Section 134(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 130 Stat. 2038) is amended by striking “171” and inserting “153”.

(2) Section 142(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 129 Stat. 755 ) is amended by striking “171” and inserting “153”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 9062(j) of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraph (1) shall take effect on October 1, 2022.

(1) IN GENERAL.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2023 for the Air Force may be obligated or expended to reduce the number of KC–135 aircraft designated as primary mission aircraft inventory within the reserve components of the Air Force.

(2) PRIMARY MISSION AIRCRAFT INVENTORY DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “primary mission aircraft inventory” has the meaning given that term in section 9062(i)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code.

“(i) retire an F–22 aircraft;

“(ii) prepare to retire an F–22 aircraft; or

“(iii) keep an F–22 aircraft in a status considered excess to the requirements of the possessing command and awaiting disposition instructions (commonly referred to as ‘XJ’ status).

“(B) The prohibition under subparagraph (A) shall not apply to individual F–22 aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be no longer mission capable and uneconomical to repair because of aircraft accidents or mishaps.

“(2) (A) Beginning on October 1, 2022, the Secretary of the Air Force shall maintain a total aircraft inventory of F–22 aircraft of not less than 186 aircraft.

“(3) Not later than October 1, 2029, the Secretary of the Air Force shall ensure that all F–22 aircraft of the Air Force are equipped with—

(1) IN GENERAL.—During the covered period, the Secretary of the Air Force shall maintain a total inventory of C–130 aircraft of not less than 271 aircraft.

(2) EXCEPTION .—The Secretary of the Air Force may reduce the number of C–130 aircraft in the Air Force below the minimum number specified in subsection (a) if the Secretary determines, on a case-by-case basis, that an aircraft is no longer mission capable because of a mishap or other damage.

(3) COVERED PERIOD DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term “covered period” means the period—

(1) IN GENERAL.—During fiscal year 2023, the Secretary of the Air Force may not reduce the total number of C–130 aircraft assigned to the National Guard below the number so assigned as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

(2) EXCEPTION.—The prohibition under paragraph (1) shall not apply to an individual C–130 aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be no longer mission capable because of a mishap or other damage.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The limitation under subsection (a) shall not apply to an individual C–40 aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case-by-case basis, to be no longer mission capable because of a Class A mishap.

(2) CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.—If the Secretary determines under paragraph (1) that an aircraft is no longer mission capable, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a certification that the status of such aircraft is due to a Class A mishap and not due to lack of maintenance or repairs or other reasons.

(1) modify the designed operational capability statement for any B–1 bomber aircraft squadron, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, in a manner that would reduce the capabilities of such a squadron below the levels specified in such statement as in effect on such date; or

(2) reduce, below the levels in effect on such date of enactment, the number of personnel assigned to units responsible for the operation and maintenance of B–1 aircraft if such reduction would affect the ability of such units to meet the capability described in paragraph (1).

(1) The term “covered period” means the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on September 30, 2026.

(2) The term “designed operational capability statement” has the meaning given that term in Air Force Instruction 10–201.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Secretary of the Air Force may not retire or prepare to retire more than a total of 13 E–3 Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft.

(2) RETIREMENT CONDITIONS.—Of the aircraft authorized to be retired under paragraph (1)—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the airborne warning and control capabilities and capacity of the Air Force.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The report under subsection (a) shall include the following:

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall conduct a study to determine the requirements for the combat search and rescue mission of the Air Force in support of the objectives of the National Defense Strategy.

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

(3) SUBMITTAL TO CONGRESS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Based on the results of the study conducted under subsection (a), the Secretary of the Air Force shall develop a strategy for the acquisition of capabilities to meet the requirements identified under such study.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The acquisition strategy under paragraph (1) shall include—

(3) SUBMITTAL TO CONGRESS.—

(1) The term “covered KC–135 aircraft” means a KC–135 aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force is in the process of replacing with a KC–46A aircraft.

(2) The term “classic association” means a structure under which a regular Air Force unit retains principal responsibility for an aircraft and shares the aircraft with one or more reserve component units.

(1) An overview of the Assistant Secretary’s acquisition strategy for the T–7 Advanced Pilot Training System, including the current status of the acquisition strategy as of the date of the report.

(2) The cost and schedule estimates for the program.

(3) In the case of the initial report under this section, the key performance parameters or the equivalent requirements for the program. In the case of subsequent reports, any key performance parameters or the equivalent requirements for the program that have changed since the submission of the previous report under this section.

(4) The test and evaluation strategy and execution date of the testing program, including any results, and a summary of testing points closed pertaining to the testing program.

(5) The logistics and sustainment strategy of the program, and the planning, execution, and implementation that has occurred related to that strategy as of the date of the report.

(6) An explanation of the causes related to any engineering, manufacturing, development, testing, production, delivery, acceptance, and fielding delays incurred by the program as of the date of the report and any associated impacts and subsequent efforts to address such delays.

(7) The post-production fielding strategy for the program.

(8) Any other matters regarding the acquisition of the T–7 Advanced Pilot Training System that the Assistant Secretary determines to be of critical importance to the long-term viability of the program.

(A) the anticipated location of such unit;

(B) the anticipated schedule for the establishment of such unit; and

(C) the number of aircraft that are expected to be transferred to such unit.

(1) the acquisition of used, overhauled, reconditioned, and remanufactured commercial dual-use parts; and

(2) the use of such commercial-dual use parts in all—

(1) pursuant to competitive procedures (as defined in section 3012 of title 10, United States Code); and

(2) only from suppliers that provide parts that possess an Authorized Release Certificate Federal Aviation Administration Form 8130-3 Airworthy Approval Tag from a certified repair station pursuant to part 145 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.

(1) COMMERCIAL DERIVATIVE.—The term “commercial derivative” means an item procured by the Department of Defense that is or was produced using the same or similar production facilities, a common supply chain, and the same or similar production processes that are used for the production of the item as predominantly used by the general public or by nongovernmental entities for purposes other than governmental purposes.

(2) COMMERCIAL DUAL-USE PARTS.—The term “commercial dual-use parts” means a product that is—

(3) COMMERCIAL PRODUCT.—The term “commercial product” has the meaning given such term in section 103 of title 41, United States Code.

(4) DUAL-USE.—The term “dual-use” has the meaning given such term in section 4801 of title 10, United States Code.

(1) (A) Identification of each rotary wing aircraft program of the Department of Defense that is in the research and development or procurement phase.

(2) Identification of—

(3) An assessment of the military industrial base capacity and skills that are available (as of the date of the assessment) to design and manufacture the platforms and capabilities identified under paragraphs (1) and (2) and a list of any gaps in such capacity and skills.

(4) (A) Identification of each component, subcomponent, or equipment supplier in the military rotary wing aircraft industrial base that is the sole source within such industrial base from which that component, subcomponent, or equipment may be obtained.

(5) Analysis of the likelihood of future consolidation, contraction, or expansion, within the rotary wing aircraft industrial base, including—

(6) Such other matters the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment determines appropriate.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Concurrently with the submission of the next annual report required to be submitted under section 4814 of title 10, United States Code, after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes—

(2) FORM.—The report required under paragraph (1) may be submitted as an appendix to the annual report required to be submitted under section 4814 of title 10, United States Code.

(1) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:

(2) in subsection (e) in the second sentence, by striking “Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center” and inserting “the official designated under subsection (b)”; and

(3) by striking subsection (h).

(1) by amending paragraph (6) of subsection (a) to read as follows:

(2) in subsection (b)(1)(F)—

(3) in subsection (c)(2), by striking “the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center” and inserting “the activities under section 238 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232)”.

(1) in paragraph (3), by inserting “or the official designated under subsection (b) of section 238 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061)” after “Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center”;

(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting “or the official designated under subsection (b) of section 238 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061)” after “Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center”; and

(3) in paragraph (5), by inserting “or the official designated under subsection (b) of section 238 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061)” after “Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center”.

(1) in the section heading, by striking “Pilot program on data repositories” and inserting “Data repositories”;

(2) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:

(3) in subsection (b), by striking “If the Secretary of Defense carries out the pilot program under subsection (a), the data repositories established under the program” and inserting “The data repositories established under subsection (a)”; and

(4) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking “the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center” and inserting “the office of the official designated under subsection (b) of section 238 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061)”;

(2) by striking paragraph (2); and

(3) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively.

(1) in the section heading, by striking “the Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center” and inserting “the senior official with principal responsibility for artificial intelligence and machine learning”;

(2) in subsection (a)—

(3) in subsection (b)—

(4) in subsection (c)(1)—

(5) in subsection (d), by striking “the Director” and inserting “the Official”;

(6) in subsection (e)—

(7) in subsection (f), by striking “the Director” and inserting “the Official”; and

(8) in subsection (g)—

(1) in the section heading, by striking “Joint Artificial Intelligence Center” and inserting “office of the senior official with principal responsibility for artificial intelligence and machine learning”;

(2) in subsection (a)—

(3) in subsection (b)—

(4) by striking subsection (c).

(1) by striking paragraph (3); and

(2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3).

(1) To solicit feedback from the combatant commands and the Joint Staff to identify operational challenges that—

(2) From amounts made available to carry out this section, to allocate funds to entities in the combatant commands and the Joint Staff to address such operational challenges through—

(3) To identify, acquire, and field existing mission integration capabilities and enhance ongoing research and development.

(4) To support exercises, experimentation, and demonstrations to highlight and refine mission integration software and address associated interoperability challenges.

(5) To assist in fielding mission integration software by the military departments to encourage the development and employment of such software on a larger scale.

(1) A description of any operational challenges that were identified under subsection (b)(1).

(2) Of those operational challenges—

(3) Identification of any mission integration software procured, developed, or fielded by the Armed Forces or the combatant commands.

(4) A description of any exercises, experimentation, and demonstrations performed.

(1) The term “Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer” means the official designated under subsection (b) of section 238 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115–232; 10 U.S.C. note prec. 4061).

(2) The term “mission integration software” means software that supports military operations by creating interoperability between systems, tools, and applications, including weapons, platforms, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems, intelligence fusion systems, tasking systems, tactical data links, cyberspace and electronic warfare systems, communications systems, command and control systems, common operating pictures, and commanders’ decision aids.

(1) the establishment of one or more manufacturing innovation institutes specializing in the research and development of bioindustrial manufacturing processes;

(2) providing funding to one or more existing manufacturing innovation institutes—

(3) the establishment of dedicated facilities within one or more manufacturing innovation institutes to serve as regional hubs for the research, development, and the scaling of bioindustrial manufacturing processes and products to higher levels of production; or

(4) designating a manufacturing innovation institute to serve as the lead entity responsible for integrating a network of pilot and intermediate scale bioindustrial manufacturing facilities.

(1) research on the use of bioindustrial manufacturing to create materials such as polymers, coatings, resins, commodity chemicals, and other materials with fragile supply chains;

(2) demonstration projects to evaluate bioindustrial manufacturing processes and technologies;

(3) activities to scale bioindustrial manufacturing processes and products to higher levels of production;

(4) strategic planning for infrastructure and equipment investments for bioindustrial manufacturing of defense-related materials;

(5) analyses of bioindustrial manufactured products and validation of the application of biological material used as input to new and existing processes to aid in future investment strategies and the security of critical supply chains;

(6) the selection, construction, and operation of pilot and intermediate scale bioindustrial manufacturing facilities;

(7) development and management of a network of facilities to scale production of bioindustrial products;

(8) activities to address workforce needs in bioindustrial manufacturing;

(9) establishing an interoperable, secure, digital infrastructure for collaborative data exchange across entities in the bioindustrial manufacturing community, including government agencies, industry, and academia;

(10) developing and implementing digital tools, process security and assurance capabilities, cybersecurity protocols, and best practices for data storage, sharing and analysis; and

(11) such other activities as the Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.

(1) how the institutes or facilities may complement each other by functioning as a together as a network;

(2) how to geographically distribute support to such institutes or facilities—

(3) how the activities supported under this section can be coordinated with relevant activities of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees and the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology a plan for the implementation of this section that includes—

(2) BRIEFINGS.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the submittal of the plan under paragraph (1), and biannually thereafter for five years, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the appropriate congressional committees a briefing on the progress toward the implementation of the plan.

(1) The term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(2) The term “bioindustrial manufacturing” means the use of living organisms, cells, tissues, enzymes, or cell-free systems to produce materials and products for non-pharmaceutical applications.

(3) The term “manufacturing innovation institute” means a Manufacturing USA institute (as described in section 34(d) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278s(d))) that is funded by the Department of Defense.

(1) the development of additive manufacturing processes for the production of metal components and other metal-based materials for the subsurface fleet of the Navy;

(2) the testing, evaluation, and qualification of such processes, components, and materials; and

(3) the use of such processes, components, and materials to meet requirements and milestones applicable to the subsurface fleet of the Navy.

(1) MARKET RESEARCH.—The Secretary of the Army shall conduct market research to identify commercially available software to determine whether such software has the potential to fulfill the applicable requirements of the warfighter machine interface program of the Army.

(2) REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after the conclusion of the market research required under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the on the results of the research, including a list of any commercial software identified as part of the research.

(1) PROGRAM.—

(2) GRANTS AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary shall award, on a competitive basis, grants to eligible institutions to carry out the activities under paragraph (4)(A).

(3) APPLICATION.—An eligible institution seeking a grant under this section shall submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such information and assurances as the Secretary may require, including a description of—

(4) PROGRAM COMPONENTS.—

(5) EVALUATION.—Not later than 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare and submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives providing an update on the pilot program, including—

(6) TERMINATION.—The authority of the Secretary to award grants under the pilot program established by this section shall terminate 10 years after the date on which the Secretary establishes such program.

(7) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 180 days after the termination of the pilot program under paragraph (6), the Secretary shall prepare and submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the pilot program that includes the following:

(1) The term “eligible institution” means a historically Black college or university or other minority-serving institution that is classified as a high research activity status institution at the time of application for a grant under subsection (b).

(2) The term “high research activity status” means R2 status, as classified by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.

(3) The term “historically Black college or university” has the meaning given the term “part B institution” under section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061).

(4) The term “other minority-serving institution” means an institution of higher education specified in paragraphs (2) through (7) of section 371(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1067q(a)).

(5) The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Defense.

(6) The term “very high research activity status” means R1 status, as classified by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.

(7) The term “very high research activity status indicators” means the categories used by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education to delineate which institutions have very high activity status, including—

(1) have applicablity to the job-related functions of such personnel; and

(2) may have applicability in the civilian sector.

(1) expand outreach to covered personnel regarding the availability of patent-related training, legal assistance, and other support for personnel interested in developing patentable inventions;

(2) expand the availability of patent-related training to covered personnel, including by making such training available online;

(3) clarify and issue guidance detailing how covered personnel, including personnel outside of the laboratories and other research organizations of the Department of the Navy, may—

(4) carry out other such activities as the Secretary determines appropriate in accordance with the purposes of the pilot program.

(1) The term “covered personnel” means members of the Navy and Marine Corps and civilian employees of the Department of the Navy, including members and employees whose primary duties do not involve research and development.

(2) The term “patentable invention” means an invention that is patentable under title 35, United States Code.

(1) the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program under section 2901 of title 10, United States Code; and

(2) the Department of Energy.

(1) to conduct research and development into electric battery technologies and any associated manufacturing and production needs;

(2) to expand the battery recycling capabilities of the Department of Defense;

(3) to reduce the reliance of the Department of Defense on foreign competitors for critical materials and technologies, including rare earth materials; and

(4) to transition battery technologies, including technologies developed from other pilot programs, prototype projects, or other research and development programs, from the prototyping phase to production.

(1) are located in and operate in the United States, including any manufacturing operations;

(2) are owned by a United States entity; and

(3) deploy North American-owned intellectual property and content.

(1) developing and sharing best practices for achieving the objectives of the Program;

(2) providing information to the Secretary on the implementation of the Program, and related policy issues; and

(3) reporting to the congressional defense committees in accordance with subsection (h).

(1) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act and annually thereafter until the date on which the Program terminates under subsection (g), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the use of funds under the Program. Each report shall include the following:

(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date on which the Program terminates under subsection (g), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a final report on the results of the Program. Such report shall include—

(1) The term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(2) The term “eligible entity” means a battery producer or other entity involved in the battery production supply chain.

(1) The authority to carry out research and development projects under section 4001 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) The authority to enter into transactions other than contracts and grants under section 4021 of such title.

(3) The authority to enter into cooperative research and development agreements under section 4026 of such title.

(1) The consumption rate of plant-based protein options by members of the Navy under the pilot program.

(2) Effective criteria to increase plant-based protein options at naval facilities not identified under subsection (b).

(3) An analysis of the costs of obtaining and storing plant-based protein options compared to the costs of obtaining and storing livestock-based protein options at selected naval facilities.

(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term “appropriate congressional committees” means—

(2) PLANT-BASED PROTEIN OPTIONS.—The term “plant-based protein options” means edible vegan or vegetarian meat alternative products made using plant and other non-livestock-based proteins.

(1) review the programs, projects, and other activities of the Agency that are open to participation from early career scientists to identify opportunities for the expansion of such participation;

(2) conduct an assessment of the potential costs of the fellowship program described in subsection (a);

(3) establish detailed plans for the implementation of the fellowship program;

(4) define eligibility requirements for participants in the fellowship program;

(5) identify criteria for evaluating applicants to the fellowship program; and

(6) address such other matters as the Director determines appropriate.

(1) the plan developed under subsection (a); and

(2) recommendations for expanding opportunities for early career scientists to participate in the programs, projects, and other activities of the Agency.

(1) A strategy for the provision of long-term institutional support to historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions, including support for—

(2) An evaluation of the feasibility of expanding the support provided by the Department of Defense to historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions to include support for the development or enhancement of grant and contract administration capabilities at such institutions.

(3) An evaluation of options to strengthen support for historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions within the military departments and other organizations and elements of the Department, including an evaluation of the need for and feasibility of establishing dedicated organizations within the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force to increase engagement with such institutions.

(4) A review of the adequacy of the level of staffing within the Department that is dedicated to engagement with historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions.

(5) A plan to improve data collection and evaluation with respect to historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions, including—

(6) Identification of the types of research facilities, personnel, capabilities, and subject areas that are in-demand within the Department so that historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions may prioritize investment in those types of facilities, personnel, capabilities, and subject areas as appropriate.

(7) Identification of metrics that may be used to evaluate, track, and improve the competitiveness of historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions for grants and contracts with the Department.

(8) An evaluation of options to implement criteria for the award of grants and contracts that assign value to the inclusion of historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions as research partners, including such mechanisms as weighted grant solicitation evaluation criteria and longer periods of performance to allow for capacity-building within such institutions.

(9) An evaluation of options to incentivize the defense industry to support capacity building within historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions, including through the incentivization of independent research and development or other activities.

(10) A plan to compile and maintain data regarding institutions of higher education, including historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions, that receive funding from departments and agencies of the Federal Government outside the Department of Defense.

(11) A review of the programs and practices of departments and agencies of the Federal Government outside the Department of Defense relevant to increasing research capacity at historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions for purposes of—

(12) Recommendations for the modification or expansion of the workforce development programs of the Department to increase the proportion of the workforce hired from historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions.

(13) Such other recommendations as the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering determines appropriate.

(14) A plan for the implementation of the recommendations included in the report, as appropriate, including an explanation of any additional funding, authorities, or organizational changes needed for the implementation of such recommendations.

(1) The term “historically Black college or university” means a part B institution (as defined in section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061)).

(2) The term “institution of higher education” has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1932 (20 U.S.C. 1001).

(3) The term “other minority-serving institution” means an institution of higher education specified in paragraphs (2) through (7) of section 371(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1067q(a)).

(1) An identification of facilities of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government and academia and industry testing facilities relevant to the capacity described in subsection (a).

(2) An analysis of the capability of each test facility to simulate various individual and coupled hypersonic conditions to accurately simulate a realistic flight-like environment with all relevant aero-thermochemical conditions.

(3) An identification of the coordination, scheduling, reimbursement processes, and requirements needed for the potential use of test facilities of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, as available.

(4) An analysis of the test frequency, scheduling lead time, test cost, and capacity of each test facility relating to testing technologies of the Department for hypersonic flight.

(5) A review of academia, contractor-owned, commercial ground and flight testbeds that could enhance efforts to test flight vehicles of the Department in all phases of hypersonic flight, and other technologies, including sensors, communications, thermal protective shields and materials, optical windows, navigation, and environmental sensors.

(6) An assessment of any cost- and time-savings that could result from using technologies identified in the strategy under subsection (c).

(1) REQUIREMENT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a strategy to coordinate the potential use of test facilities and ranges of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, as available, and academia, contractor-owned, commercial flight and reentry test capabilities to evaluate hypersonic technologies.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The strategy under paragraph (1) shall—

(3) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall develop the strategy under paragraph (1) in coordination with the Joint Hypersonic Transition Office, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the research labs of the military departments, and the Defense Test Resource Management Center.

(1) The congressional defense committees.

(2) The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.

(1) An assessment of the adequacy of the 30-year planning horizon that serves as the basis for the Strategic Plan for Test Resources.

(2) An assessment of whether and to what extent prior forecasts of the test and evaluation needs of the Department of Defense align with investments made by the Department in test and evaluation resources.

(3) An identification and assessment of—

(4) An assessment of whether and to what extent the test and evaluation efforts of the Department sufficiently address software-intensive, multi-domain, and continuously developed capabilities.

(5) Such other matters as the Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.

(1) A survey of members of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of a Secretary of a military department to identify the most important software and information technology challenges that result in lost working hours, including an estimate of the number and cost of lost working hours for each military department, the impact of each challenge on retention, and the negative impact to any mission.

(2) A summary of the policy or technical challenges that limit the ability of each Secretary of a military department to implement needed software and information technology reforms, based on interviews conducted with individuals who serve as chief information officer (or an equivalent position) in a military department.

(3) Recommendations to address the challenges described in paragraph (1) and improve the processes through which the Secretary provides software and information technology Departmentwide.