INSIGHTi

FY2022 NDAA: Status of Legislative Activity
December 22, 2021
By law (31 U.S.C. §1105(a)), the President is to send the federal budget request to Congress by the first
Monday in February. In practice, the President sometimes sends it later, particularly during presidential
transition years. On May 28, 2021, President Joseph R. Biden submitted the FY2022 budget request.
Representative Adam Smith, Chair of the House Committee on Armed Services (also known as the House
Armed Services Committee, or HASC), had said that a budget submitted on May 10 or later could affect
the timing for completion of an annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) by the October 1
start of the government’s fiscal year.
On July 28-29, the seven HASC subcommittees considered and reported draft legislative proposals
(known as marks) to the full committee with recommendations for matters in the FY2022 NDAA under
their jurisdiction. On August 25, Chairman Smith released each subcommittee’s proposal in preparation
of the full committee markup. On September 1, HASC began considering and marking up the legislation.
On September 2, the committee voted 57-2 to order H.R. 4350 reported to the House with an amendment
in the nature of a substitute reflecting the work product of the two-day markup. On September 10, the
committee filed its report, H.Rept. 117-118, to accompany the legislation. (On September 17, the
committee filed a supplemental report that included the Congressional Budget Office’s cost estimate for
the bill, among other information.) On September 21-23, the House debated and considered amendments
to H.R. 4350 and, on September 23, passed the measure by a vote of 316-113.
On July 19-20, the seven subcommittees of the Senate Committee on Armed Services (also known as the
Senate Armed Services Committee, or SASC), marked up draft legislative proposals with
recommendations for matters in the FY2022 NDAA under their jurisdiction. Two of the markups were
held in open sessions (Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support, and Subcommittee on
Personnel); five were closed. On July 21, SASC considered the legislation in a closed session and voted
23-3 to order reported an original bill reflecting changes agreed to in markup. On September 22, SASC
reported S. 2792 and filed the accompanying report S.Rept. 117-39. The Senate did not vote on final
passage of S. 2792. On November 19, Senator Jack Reed, Chair of SASC, offered on the floor an
amendment in the nature of a substitute (S.Amdt. 3867) to H.R. 4350 to replace the text of the House-
passed legislation with a modified version of the SASC-reported bill. The Senate did not agree to end
debate on the amendment (S.Amdt. 3867), as modified; cloture was not invoked, by a vote of 45-51.
Unlike in most years, the House and Senate did not establish a conference committee to resolve
differences between the two versions of the bill. Instead, leaders of the HASC and the SASC negotiated a
bicameral agreement based on the two versions. On December 7, the committees released the text of the
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11833
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

---

link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 3 Congressional Research Service
2
agreement, which was filed as a House amendment to an unrelated Senate-passed bill, S. 1605. The same
day, an explanatory statement to accompany the House amendment to S. 1605 was published in Part 2 of
the House section of the Congressional Record. The final text of the NDAA made clear that this statement
was to be treated as if it were the formal bicameral statement issued by a conference committee. Also that
day, the House agreed to S. 1605, as amended, by a vote of 363-70. On December 15, the Senate agreed
to the House amendment to S. 1605 by a vote of 88-11.
Table 1 shows the status of legislative activity on the FY2022 NDAA.
Table 1. FY2022 NDAA: Status of Legislative Activity
Public
House
Senate
Law
Vote #
Vote #
(yeas,
(yeas,
Bill #,
nays),
HASC-SASC
Bill #,
nays),
HASC-SASC P.L. #,
Date
Report #,
Date
Negotiated
Date
Report #,
Date
Negotiated
Date
Reported
Date
Passed
Proposal
Reported
Date
Passed
Proposal
Signed
H.R. 4350,
H.Rept.
293






09/10/21
117-118,
(316-113),
09/10/21
09/23/21




S. 2792,
S.Rept.



09/22/21
117-39,
09/22/21
House

405
Explanatory
House

499
Explanatory

amendment
(363-70),
statement
amendment
(88-11), statement
to S. 1605,
12/07/21
published in
to S. 1605,
12/15/21 published in
12/7/21
Congressional
12/7/21
Congressional
Recorda
Recorda
Source: CRS analysis of selected actions in Congress.gov.
a. On December 7, 2021, the explanatory statement to accompany S. 1605 was published in Part 2 of the House section
of the Congressional Record.
Figure 1 shows the dates of enactment for the annual defense authorization act since FY1977, when the
federal government transitioned to a fiscal year beginning October 1, 1976. The President had not signed
S. 1605, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2022, as of December 21, 2021; the patterned bar
for FY2022 reflects the 81 days between October 1, 2021, and December 21, 2021.

---

Congressional Research Service
3
Figure 1. Days Between Start of Fiscal Year and Enactment of Annual Defense
Authorization Acts, FY1977-FY2021
(in days)

Source: CRS analysis of dates of enactment of public law from CRS Report 98-756, Defense Authorization and
Appropriations Bills: FY1961-FY2021, by Barbara Salazar Torreon and Sofia Plagakis.
Notes: Negative values indicate number of days between enactment of annual defense authorization acts and start of fiscal
year. The President had not signed the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2022 as of December 21, 2021; the
patterned bar for FY2022 reflects the 81 days between October 1, 2021, and December 21, 2021. Annual defense
authorization legislation for FY1979, FY1989, FY1996, FY2008, FY2016, and FY2021 was enacted over a presidential veto.


Author Information

Brendan W. McGarry
Valerie Heitshusen
Analyst in U.S. Defense Budget
Specialist on Congress and the Legislative Process





Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

---

Congressional Research Service
4

IN11833 · VERSION 1 · NEW

---