“(ii) the technology requirements of the Department of Defense, as identified in the most recent—

(1) to accelerate the adoption of commercially developed advanced technology in the areas of manufacturing, space, energy, materials, autonomy, and such other key technology areas as may be identified by the Secretary; and

(2) to expand outreach to communities that do not otherwise have a Defense Innovation Unit presence, including economically disadvantaged communities.

“(c) Consultation with other organizations.—For the purposes of providing technical expertise and reducing costs and duplicative efforts, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments shall work to ensure and support the sharing of information on the research and consulting that is being carried out across the Federal Government in Department-wide shared information systems including the Defense Technical Information Center.”;

(A) by redesignating paragraph (31) as paragraph (33); and

(B) by inserting after paragraph (30) the following new paragraphs:

“(33) Spectrum activities.”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan (in this section referred to as the “Plan”) for the establishment of the Minority Institute for Defense Research (in this section referred to as the “Consortium”).

(2) ELEMENTS.—The Plan shall include the following:

(3) PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.—The Plan shall be posted on a publicly available website of the Department.

(1) establish a process to solicit and review proposals of names from—

(2) develop a list of all names received pursuant to paragraph (1);

(3) provide opportunity for public comment on the names included on such list; and

(4) choose a name from such list to name the Consortium.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may establish a program to award grants, on a competitive basis, to minority institutions for the purposes described in paragraph (2).

(2) PURPOSES.—The purposes described in this paragraph are the following:

(3) APPLICATION.—To be eligible to receive a grant under this section, a minority institution shall submit to the Secretary an application in such form, and containing such information, as the Secretary may require.

(4) PREFERENCE.—In awarding grants pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary may give preference to a minority institution with a R1 or R2 status on the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 2304 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraph (1) shall—

(1) The term “Department” means the Department of Defense.

(2) The term “institution of higher education” has the meaning given such term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).

(3) The term “minority institution” means—

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

(5) The term “University Affiliated Research Center” means a research organization within an institution of higher education that—

(1) Main reduction gear.

(2) Electrical propulsion motors.

(3) Other propulsion drive train components.

(4) Main propulsion system.

(5) Auxiliary propulsion unit.

(6) Electrical generation and distribution systems.

(7) Shipboard control systems.

(8) Power control modules.

(1) Test of the full propulsion drive train.

(2) Test and facilitation of machinery control systems integration.

(3) Simulation of the full range of electrical demands to enable the investigation of load dynamics between the hull, mechanical and electrical equipment, the combat system, and auxiliary equipment.

(1) DELIVERY DATE.—The term “delivery date” has the meaning given that term in section 8671 of title 10, United States Code.

(2) SENIOR TECHNICAL AUTHORITY.—The term “Senior Technical Authority” means the official designated as the Senior Technical Authority for the DDG(X) destroyer class of vessels pursuant to section 8669b of title 10, United States Code.

(1) To shape the formulation and application of policy through the conduct of research and analysis regarding irregular warfare.

(2) To maintain open-source databases on issues relevant to understanding terrorism, irregular threats, and social and environmental change.

(3) To serve as a repository for datasets regarding research on security, social change, and irregular threats developed by institutions of higher education that receive Federal funding.

(4) To support basic research in social science on emerging threats and stability dynamics relevant to irregular threat problem sets.

(5) To transition promising basic research—

(6) To facilitate the collaboration of research centers of excellence relating to irregular threats to better distribute expertise to specific issues and scenarios regarding such threats.

(7) To enhance educational outreach and teaching at professional military education schools to improve—

(8) To support classified research when necessary in appropriately controlled physical spaces.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in coordination with covered officials, shall—

(2) DEVELOPMENT OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES FOR LIVE FIRE TESTING.—

(3) REGULAR SURVIVABILITY AND LETHALITY TESTING THROUGHOUT LIFE CYCLE.—

(1) ASSESSMENT AND SELECTION OF PROGRAMS.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that identifies the programs selected to participate in the demonstration activities under subsection (a)(2)(C).

(2) MODERNIZATION AND DIGITIZATION REPORT.—

(1) COVERED OFFICIALS.—The term “covered officials” means—

(2) COVERED SYSTEM.—The term “covered system” means any warfighting capability that can degrade, disable, deceive, or destroy forces or missions.

(3) DEPARTMENT.—The term “Department” means the Department of Defense.

(4) DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES.—The term “digital technologies” includes digital models, digital simulations, and digital twin capabilities that may be used to test the survivability and lethality of a covered system.

(5) DIRECTOR.—The term “Director” means the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation.

(6) FULL SPECTRUM SURVIVABILITY AND LETHALITY TESTING.—The term “full spectrum survivability and lethality testing” means a series of assessments of the effects of kinetic and non-kinetic threats on the communications, firepower, mobility, catastrophic survivability, and lethality of a covered system.

(7) NON-KINETIC THREATS.—The term “non-kinetic threats” means unconventional threats, including—

(8) SECRETARY.—The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Defense.

(1) match technology producers with programs, projects, and activities of the Department that may have a use for the technology developed by such producers; and

(2) provide technical assistance to such technology producers on participating in the procurement programs and acquisition processes of the Department.

(1) guide and advise technology producers on participating in the procurement programs and acquisition processes of the Department, including—

(2) match technology producers with programs, projects, and activities of the Department that may have a use for the technology developed by such producers, including programs, projects, and activities carried out by—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The terms of an agreement under subsection (a) shall be determined by the Secretary of Defense.

(2) METHODS OF SERVICE DELIVERY.—In entering into agreements under subsection (a), the Secretary may consider, on a case by case basis, whether the needs of the Department of Defense and technology producers would best be served by a qualified intermediary that provides services in a specific geographic region, serves a particular technology sector, or uses another method of service delivery.

(3) INCENTIVES.—The Secretary of Defense may include terms in an agreement under subsection (a) to incentivize a qualified intermediary to successfully facilitate the transition of science and technology from the research, development, pilot, and prototyping phases to full-scale implementation within the Department of Defense.

(4) LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS.—The Secretary of Defense may not use any amounts required to be expended under section 9(f)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(f)(1)) for any administrative costs incurred by a qualified intermediary associated with the pilot program under this section.

(1) PLAN REQUIRED BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense may not enter into an agreement under subsection (a) until the date on which the Secretary—

(2) DATA COLLECTION REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Defense shall collect and analyze data on the pilot program under this section for the purposes of—

(1) service acquisition executives (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code);

(2) the heads of appropriate Defense Agencies and Department of Defense Field Activities;

(3) procurement technical assistance centers (as described in chapter 142 of title 10, United States Code);

(4) the Administrator of Federal Procurement Policy; and

(5) such other individuals and organizations as the Secretary determines appropriate.

(1) ASSESSMENT.—The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct an assessment of the pilot program under this section. The assessment shall include an evaluation of the effectiveness of the pilot program with respect to—

(2) REPORT.—Not later than the date specified in paragraph (3), the Comptroller General shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the results of the assessment conducted under paragraph (1).

(3) DATE SPECIFIED.—The date specified in this paragraph is the earlier of—

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

(2) The term “qualified intermediary” means a nonprofit, for-profit, or State or local government entity that assists, counsels, advises, evaluates, or otherwise cooperates with technology producers that need or can make demonstrably productive use of the services provided by the intermediary pursuant to the pilot program under this section.

(3) The term “technology producer” means an individual or entity engaged in the research, development, production, or distribution of science or technology that the Secretary of Defense determines may be of use to the Department of Defense.

(1) determine whether the breathing system complies with Military Standard 3050 (MIL–STD–3050), titled “Aircraft Crew Breathing Systems Using On-Board Oxygen Generating System (OBOGS)”; and

(2) assess the safety and effectiveness of the breathing system for all pilots of F–35 aircraft.

(1) The pilot, aircraft systems, and operational flight environment of the F–35 aircraft shall not be assessed in isolation but shall be tested and evaluated as integrated parts of the breathing system.

(2) The testing and evaluation shall be conducted under a broad range of operating conditions, including variable weather conditions, low-altitude flight, high-altitude flight, during weapons employment, at critical phases of flight such as take-off and landing, and in other challenging environments and operating flight conditions.

(3) The testing and evaluation shall assess operational flight environments for the pilot that replicate expected conditions and durations for high gravitational force loading, rapid changes in altitude, rapid changes in airspeed, and varying degrees of moderate gravitational force loading.

(4) A diverse group of F–35 pilots shall participate in the testing and evaluation, including—

(5) The F–35A, F–35B, and F–35C aircraft involved in the testing and evaluation shall perform operations with operationally representative and realistic aircraft configurations.

(6) The testing and evaluation shall include assessments of pilot life support gear and relevant equipment, including the pilot breathing mask apparatus.

(7) The testing and evaluation shall include testing data from pilot reports, measurements of breathing pressures and air delivery response timing and flow, cabin pressure, air-speed, acceleration, measurements of hysteresis during all phases of flight, measurements of differential pressure between mask and cabin altitude, and measurements of spirometry and specific oxygen saturation levels of the pilot immediately before and immediately after each flight.

(8) The analysis of the safety and effectiveness of the breathing system shall thoroughly assess any physiological effects reported by pilots, including effects on health, fatigue, cognition, and perception of any breathing difficulty.

(9) The testing and evaluation shall include the participation of subject matter experts who have familiarity and technical expertise regarding design and functions of the F–35 aircraft, its propulsion system, pilot breathing system, life support equipment, human factors, and any other systems or subject matter the Secretary determines necessary to conduct effective testing and evaluation. At a minimum, such subject matter experts shall include aerospace physiologists, engineers, flight surgeons, and scientists.

(10) In carrying out the testing and evaluation, the Secretary of Defense may seek technical support and subject matter expertise from the Naval Air Systems Command, the Air Force Research Laboratory, the Office of Naval Research, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and any other organization or element of the Department of Defense or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration that the Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, determines appropriate to support the testing and evaluation.

(1) findings and recommendations with respect to the breathing system; and

(2) a description of the specific actions the Secretary will carry out to correct deficiencies in the breathing system, as required under subsection (c).

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, shall seek to enter into an agreement with a federally funded research and development center with relevant expertise to conduct an independent sufficiency review of the final report submitted under subsection (e).

(2) REPORT TO SECRETARY.—Not later than seven months after the date on which the Secretary of Defense enters into an agreement with a federally funded research and development center under paragraph (1), the center shall submit to the Secretary a report on the results of the review conducted under such paragraph.

(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary of Defense receives the report under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall submit the report to the congressional defense committees.

(1) identify each facility and capability of the Major Range and Test Facility Base that is primarily concerned with the ground-based simulation of hypersonic atmospheric flight conditions and the test and evaluation of hypersonic technology in open air flight; and

(2) identify such facilities and capabilities that the Secretary would propose to designate, collectively, as the “Hypersonics Facility Base”.

(1) operational as of the date of the enactment of this Act; and

(2) deemed safe for use as of such date.

(1) The aviation-related operational testing and evaluation capacity of the Department of the Navy.

(2) The billets assigned to support such capacity.

(3) The aviation force structure, aviation inventory, or quantity of aircraft assigned to support such capacity, including rotorcraft and fixed-wing aircraft.

(1) The design and effectiveness of the testing and evaluation infrastructure and capacity of the Department of the Navy, including an assessment of whether such infrastructure and capacity is sufficient to carry out the acquisition and sustainment testing required for the aviation-related programs of the Department of Defense and the naval aviation-related programs of the Department of the Navy

(2) The plans of the Secretary of the Navy to reduce the testing and evaluation capacity and infrastructure of the Navy with respect to naval aviation in fiscal year 2022 and subsequent fiscal years, as specified in the budget of the President submitted to Congress on May 28, 2021.

(3) The technical, fiscal, and programmatic issues and risks associated with the plans of the Secretary of the Navy to delegate and task operational naval aviation units and organizations to efficiently and effectively execute testing and evaluation master plans for various aviation-related programs and projects of the Department of the Navy.

(1) A competitive acquisition strategy, informed by fiscal considerations, to—

(2) An implementation plan to implement such strategy.

(3) A schedule annotating pertinent milestones and yearly fiscal resource requirements for the implementation of such strategy.

(1) An analysis of the impact on combat effectiveness and sustainment cost from increased thrust, fuel efficiency, and thermal capacity for each variant of the F–35, to include the improvements on acceleration, speed, range, and overall mission effectiveness, of each advanced propulsion system.

(2) An assessment in the reduction on the dependency on support assets, to include air refueling and replenishment tankers, and the overall cost benefits to the Department from reduced acquisition and sustainment of such support assets, from the integration of each advanced propulsion system.

(3) A competitive acquisition strategy, informed by fiscal considerations, the assessment on combat effectiveness, and technical limitations, to—

(4) An implementation plan to implement the strategy described in paragraph (3).

(5) A schedule annotating pertinent milestones and yearly fiscal resource requirements for the implementation of such strategy.

(1) The term “variant of the F-35” means:

(2) The term “advanced propulsion system” means:

(1) the status of the airborne electronic attack capabilities and capacity of the Air Force; and

(2) the feasibility and advisability of adapting the ALQ–249 Next Generation Jammer for use on Air Force tactical aircraft, including an analysis of—

(1) a list of weapon systems and programs, to be selected by the Secretary of Defense, which can be integrated with autonomy software as described in subsection (a) by fiscal year 2025;

(2) timelines for autonomy software integration into the weapon systems and programs as identified under paragraph (1);

(3) funding requirements related to the development, acquisition, and testing of autonomy software;

(4) plans to leverage commercially-available artificial intelligence software, universal common control software, and autonomy software and related self-driving or self-piloting technologies, where appropriate; and

(5) plans to include autonomy software, artificial intelligence, and universal common control.

(1) the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering;

(2) the Secretaries of the military departments; and

(3) such other organizations and elements of the Department of Defense as the Secretary determines appropriate.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date on which the strategy required under subsection (a) is submitted to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives, and not later than October 1 of each of the five years thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report that describes the status of the implementation of the strategy.

(2) CONTENTS.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall—

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)—

(2) in paragraph (2)(A), in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking “priorities,” and inserting “priorities, including priorities relating to the current or projected risks to military installation resilience,”.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The first section 118a of such title is amended—

(2) CLERICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

“(vii) Identify and assess risk resulting from, or likely to result from, current or projected effects on military installation resilience.”.

(1) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report describing how the aspects of military installation resilience have been incorporated into modeling, simulation, war-gaming, and other analyses by the Department of Defense.

(2) FORM.—The report required by paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report containing information (disaggregated by military department) as follows:

(2) USE OF ASSESSMENT TOOL.—The Secretary shall use the Climate Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Tool of the Department (or such successor tool) in preparing each report under paragraph (1).

(1) The term “military installation resilience” has the meaning given that term in section 101(e) of title 10, United States Code.

(2) The term “National Defense Strategy” means the national defense strategy under section 113(g)(1) of such title.

(3) The term “National Military Strategy” means the national military strategy under section 153(b) of such title.

(1) in subsection (b)—

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

(1) in subsection (c)—

(2) in subsection (d), in the second sentence, by inserting “by an eligible landowner or agricultural producer” after “Participation”;

(3) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f);

(4) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new subsection (e):

(5) in subsection (f), by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

“(i) Analytical tools for evaluation of energy resilience measures.— (1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a process to ensure that the Department of Defense, in the evaluation of energy resilience measures on military installations, uses analytical tools that are accurate and effective in projecting the costs and performance of such measures.

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 173 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of such subchapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 2920 the following new item:

“2921. Energy efficiency targets for data centers.”.

(1) INVENTORY REQUIRED.—By not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall conduct an inventory of all data centers owned or operated by the Department of Defense. Such survey shall include the following:

(2) DATA CENTER DEFINED.—In this section, the term “data center” has the meaning given such term in the most recent Integrated Data Collection guidance of the Office of Management and Budget.

(1) A timeline of necessary actions required to meet the energy assessment targets for covered data centers.

(2) The estimated costs associated with meeting such targets.

(3) An assessment of the business case for meeting such targets, including any estimated savings in operational energy and water costs and estimated reduction in energy and water usage if the targets are met.

(4) An analysis of any statutory, regulatory, or policy barriers to meeting such targets identified pursuant to section 2921(a)(E) of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a).