FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context
June 9, 2022
and Selected Issues
Pat Towell
The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022, enacted as Division C of the
Specialist in U.S. Defense
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (H.R. 2471; P.L. 117-103), provided $719.6
Policy and Budget
billion in discretionary budget authority for the Department of Defense (DOD)—

excluding supplemental funding—$22.5 billion (3.2%) more than the Administration’s
budget request. The annual defense appropriations bill typically funds all military-

related activities of DOD except for the construction of facilities (covered by a separate appropriations bill) and
accrual payments to the TRICARE medical insurance program for military retirees.
On July 15, 2021, the House Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 4432, a FY2022 defense appropriations
bill that would have provided 0.04% less than the budget request. The House took no action on that bill. On
October 20, 2021, the majority (Democratic) caucus of the Senate Committee on Appropriations introduced S.
3023, a consolidated FY2022 appropriations bill that incorporated the defense appropriations bill as Division A,
which would have provided 2.7% more than the request. Neither the Senate committee nor the Senate took any
action on the bill.
Efforts to craft a compromise funding measure were in progress when Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24,
2022. Subsequently, Congress passed an omnibus FY2022 appropriation as an amended version of H.R. 2471. On
March 9, 2022, the House approved by a vote of 361-69 the part of the bill that funds DOD among other agencies.
The following day the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 68-31. President Joseph R. Biden signed the bill on
March 15, 2022 (P.L. 117-103).
This report focuses on FY2022 regular defense appropriations (see table below). To date, Congress has also
provided the following amounts in FY2022 supplemental defense appropriations: $895 million in the Disaster
Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division B of P.L. 117-43); $2.2 billion in the Afghanistan
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-43); $4.312 billion in the Additional Afghanistan
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division B of P.L. 117-70); $6.528 billion in Ukraine Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division N of H.R. 2471; P.L. 117-103); and $20.104 billion in the Additional Ukraine
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (H.R. 7691; P.L. 117-128).
FY2022 Department of Defense (DOD) Appropriations Act
(H.R. 4432; S. 3023, Division A, H.R. 2471, Division C)
(in billions of dollars)
Senate
FY2022 Defense
House
Committee
Appropriations
FY2022
Committee-
Majority-
Enacted
Budget
reported H.R.
drafted bill
H.R. 2471, Div. C
Bill Title
Request
4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Military Personnel
157.9
157.5
157.4
157.5
Operation and Maintenance
253.6
254.3
257.8
256.3
Procurement
132.5
134.3
141.5
144.9
Research & Development
112.0
110.4
116.2
119.2
Revolving and Management Funds
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.0
Defense Health Program and Other DOD
37.9
39.0
38.7
39.8
Programs
Related Agencies
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
General Provisions
0.0
-1.4
1.7
-1.3
Congressional Research Service

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Senate
FY2022 Defense
House
Committee
Appropriations
FY2022
Committee-
Majority-
Enacted
Budget
reported H.R.
drafted bill
H.R. 2471, Div. C
Bill Title
Request
4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Total, Regular FY2022 DOD
697.1
697.1
716.4
719.6
Discretionary Funding in the bill
Source: CRS analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021, [table] pp. 382-397; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement to accompany the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Notes: Tables in the draft Senate committee report on S. 3023 include, both in the amount requested for Military Personnel by the
Administration and in the amount recommended by the committee, $9.34 bil ion appropriated as an accrual payment to the so-
called TRICARE for Life fund, which provides medical insurance for military retirees. Since this payment is made automatically under
a provision of permanent law (10 U.S.C. §§1111-1117), these funds are not provided by annual defense appropriations acts such as S.
3023, although this annual TRICARE for Life payment is designated as discretionary funding for purposes of the congressional budget
process. Accordingly, the TRICARE for Life payment is not included in this table.
Totals may not sum due to rounding. Figures do not include FY2022 supplemental defense appropriations.

Congressional Research Service

link to page 6 link to page 7 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Overview
The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022, enacted as Division C of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2022 (H.R. 2471; P.L. 117-103), provided $719.6 billion in discretionary
budget authority for the Department of Defense (DOD)—excluding supplemental funding—$22.5
billion (3.2%) more than the Administration’s budget request. This annual bill provides
discretionary funding for nearly all activities of the Department of Defense (DOD) except the
construction of facilities and the provision of family housing for authorized military personnel.1
On July 15, 2021, the House Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 4432, a FY2022 defense
appropriations bill that would have provided 0.04% less than the budget request. The House took
no action on that bill. On October 20, 2021, the majority (Democratic) caucus of the Senate
Appropriations Committee introduced S. 3023, a consolidated FY2022 appropriations bill that
incorporated the defense appropriations bill as Division A, which would have provided 2.7%
more than the request. The Senate committee took no action on the bill or on the associated
explanatory statement, and the Senate took no action on the bill.2
Efforts to craft a compromise funding measure were in progress when Russia invaded Ukraine on
February 24, 2022. Subsequently, Congress passed an omnibus FY2022 appropriation as an
amended version of H.R. 2471. On March 9, 2022, the House approved by a vote of 361-69 the
part of the bill that funds DOD among other agencies. The following day the Senate passed the
bill by a vote of 68-31. President Biden signed the bill on March 15, 2022 (P.L. 117-103). See
Table 1.
Table 1. FY2022 Department of Defense (DOD) Appropriations Act
(in billions of dollars)
FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
FY2022
Committee
Majority-
H.R. 2471
Budget
-reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A
Bill Title
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Department of Defense, FY2022 Appropriations
Military Personnela
157.9
157.5
157.4
157.5
Operation and Maintenance
253.6
254.3
257.8
256.3
Procurement
132.5
134.3
141.5
144.9
Research & Development
112.0
110.4
116.2
119.2

1 The annual Department of Defense Appropriations Act does not provide funding for DOD-related military
construction and family housing programs, Army Corps of Engineers (Civil Works) programs, or the TRICARE for
Life program of medical insurance for military retirees. Funding for military construction and family housing programs
is provided in the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Act. Funding for Army Corps of
Engineers (Civil Works) programs is provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act. Funding for TRICARE for Life is appropriated automatically each year (10 U.S.C. §§1111-1117).
2 Besides the Defense Appropriations Act comprising Division A of S. 3023, the bill contained two additional
divisions: Division B would appropriate $895.0 million to repair storm damage at Navy and Air Force bases; Division
C would provide a net increase of $2.2 billion for overseas humanitarian aid. This report considers only funds
appropriated by Division A, corresponding to the Administration’s budget request falling within the traditional scope of
the annual defense appropriations act.
Congressional Research Service

1

link to page 7 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
FY2022
Committee
Majority-
H.R. 2471
Budget
-reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A
Bill Title
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Revolving and Management Funds
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.0
Defense Health Program and Other
37.9
39.0
38.7
39.8
DOD Programs
Related Agenciesb
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
General Provisions
0.3
-1.4
1.7
-1.3
Total Appropriated by H.R.
697.4
697.1
716.4
719.6
4432 and S. 3023, Division A
TRICARE for Life Accrual Payment
9.3
9.3
9.3
9.3
Total Defense Discretionary
706.7
706.4
725.8
728.9
Appropriations Associated with
H.R. 4432 and S. 3023, Division
A.
Disaster Relief Supplemental
--
--
0.9
0.9
(Division B of P.L. 117-43)
Afghanistan Supplemental
--
--
2.2
2.2
Appropriations Act (Division C of
P.L. 117-43)
Additional Afghanistan Supplemental
--
--
--
4.3
Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division
B of P.L. 117-70)
Grand Total
706.7
706.4
728.9
736.3
Source: CRS analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of
Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021, [table] pp. 382-397; Explanatory Statement for the Department
of Defense Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee
on Oct. 18, 2021, at https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint
explanatory statement to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L.
117-103), Part 1, at https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf;
and Part 2, at https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Notes: Totals may not sum due to rounding. Figures do not include FY2022 supplemental defense
appropriations for Ukraine.
a. Tables in the draft Senate committee report on S. 3023 include, both in the amount requested for Military
Personnel by the Administration and in the amount recommended by the committee, $9.34 bil ion
appropriated as an accrual payment to the so-called TRICARE for Life fund which provides medical
insurance for military retirees. Since this payment is made automatically under a provision of permanent law
(10 U.S.C. §§1111-1117), these funds are not provided by annual defense appropriations acts such as S.
3023, even though this annual TRICARE for Life payment is designated as discretionary funding for purposes
of the congressional budget process.
b. These amounts go to the CIA retirement and disability fund and to the Intelligence Community
Management Account.
Selected Increases
As enacted, the bill added funds to the amounts requested for certain programs that frequently
have received congressional increases in previous defense funding bills. For example:
Congressional Research Service

2

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

 To fund a second Aegis destroyer (in addition to the one ship requested), the bill
added $1.67 billion plus an additional $120 million for components to be used in
the construction of an additional destroyer in the future. The bill also added $1.42
billion for components to be used in constructing an amphibious landing
transport ship and three smaller amphibious landing support ships;
 To accelerate modernization of reserve and National Guard units, the bill added
to the request a total of $3.59 billion;3
 To fund 378 science and technology (S&T) research programs,4 the bill added to
the request a total of $2.75 billion to the budget for research and development
(R&D);
 For 52 medical R&D programs, it added a total of $1.8 billion; and
 To cover higher-than-budgeted fuel costs, it added a total of $1.49 billion.
Selected Offsets
The net budgetary effect of these and other additions to the budget request was offset, in part, by
reductions to other aspects of the request.
Like S. 3023, which also emerged after the collapse of the U.S.-supported government in
Afghanistan, the enacted legislation included none of the $3.3 billion that had been requested for
DOD support of Afghan Security Forces. The enacted legislation also cut from the Army’s
Operation and Maintenance budget request $250 million that the service identified as being
associated with its support of Afghan forces.5
Many of the other funding reductions in the bill reflect conferees’ specific reservations about
particular programs. The committees present other reductions as cost-cutting measures that either
reflect fact-of-life changes or that for some other reason would have no adverse impact on the
programs involved. The enacted legislation makes more than 500 reductions totaling more than
$8.3 billion for which conferees cite explanations such as asserting that the request for a
particular item or activity contains “excess growth” over the prior year’s budget or that the
request does not take into account some delay in contracting for a particular acquisition.6
As has long been typical in previous defense funding bills, this one reduces the amount of new
budget authority required by rescinding $3.3 billion in unspent appropriations for prior fiscal
years and making those funds available to cover some of the costs incurred by the FY2022 bill.

3 These totals include funds that were added to the bill for the National Guard and Reserves Equipment Account
(NGREA) as well as funds added for aircraft, aircraft modifications, and ground vehicles earmarked by the
Appropriations Committees for reserve and National Guard use.
4 S&T projects focus on relatively basic research to develop technologies that could be incorporated into subsequent
research aimed developing deployable hardware. For additional information, see CRS In Focus IF10553, Defense
Primer: RDT&E.
5 For additional background and analysis, see CRS Insight IN11728, The Collapse of the Afghan National Defense and
Security Forces: Implications for U.S. Security Assistance and Cooperation; and CRS Report R46879, U.S. Military
Withdrawal and Taliban Takeover in Afghanistan: Frequently Asked Questions.
6 As House and Senate negotiators craft a compromise version of the bill, the armed services routinely weigh in with a
letter appealing some of the line-item reductions in one or both versions, including some that the committees report as
“fact-of-life” changes. For example, on November 12, 2021, the Navy Department sent the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees an 87-page document objecting to 56 line-item reductions to the Navy budget request made
by one or both of the committees. Department of the Navy, Budgetary Appeal: Conference Appeal, FY22 Defense
Appropriations Bill, November 12, 2021, posted by Politico Pro, November 30, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

3

link to page 9

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Budgetary Context7
Congressional consideration of the FY2022 defense appropriations bill occurred in the context of
concern over a rising federal deficit. In July 2021, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
projected a federal deficit of $3.0 trillion for FY2021, or 13.4% of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP).8 That percentage would be the second-highest since 1945.9 CBO attributed the size of the
projected deficit in part to “the economic disruption caused by the 2020-2021 coronavirus
pandemic and the legislation enacted in response.”10 CBO projects spending will continue to
exceed revenues over the next decade.11 See Figure 1.
From FY2022 to FY2031, CBO projects discretionary defense outlays will increase 23% and
nondefense discretionary outlays 6%; mandatory outlays will increase 40% and net interest
payments on the national debt 198%.12
Figure 1. Outlays by Budget Enforcement Category and Revenues, FY2001-FY2031
(Projected)
(in trillions of nominal dollars)

Source: CRS analysis of Government Publishing Office (GPO), Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2022,
Historical Tables, Table 1.4, “Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits (-) by Fund Group: 1934-2026,” and

7 This section was coordinated with Brendan W. McGarry, Analyst in U.S. Defense Budget, and Megan S. Lynch,
Specialist on Congress and the Legislative Process.
8 Congressional Budget Office, Additional Information About the Updated Budget and Economic Outlook: 2021 to
2031, July 2021, “At a Glance,” p. 2 of the PDF, at https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021-07/57263-
outlook.pdf#page=2.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid., pp. 6, 16; and CBO, Budget and Economic Data, 10-Year Budget Projections, July 2021, Table 1-1, “CBO’s
Baseline Budget Projections, by Category,” and Table 1-4, “CBO’s Baseline Projections of Discretionary Spending,” at
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021-07/51118-2021-07-budgetprojections.xlsx. Outlays refer to money spent by a
federal agency from authority provided by Congress.
12 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 10 link to page 11

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Table 8.1, “Outlays by Budget Enforcement Act Category: 1962-2026,” and Congressional Budget Office, Budget
and Economic Data, 10-Year Budget Projections, July 2021, Table 1-1, “CBO’s Baseline Budget Projections, by
Category,” and Table 1-4, “CBO’s Baseline Projections of Discretionary Spending.”
Notes: 2001 through 2020 reflect OMB amounts; 2021 through 2031 reflect CBO projections.
For historical context, Figure 2 shows defense spending over time in both nominal and constant
FY2022 dollars. The inflation-adjusted line shows the cyclical nature of defense spending during
wartime. The level of defense outlays requested for national defense in FY2022, when adjusted
for inflation, is higher than during the Cold War-era military buildup of the 1980s and lower than
during the height of post-9/11 operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Defense outlays are projected
to remain relatively flat through FY2026.13
Figure 2. National Defense Outlays, FY1940-FY2026 (projected)
(in billions of nominal and constant FY2022 dollars)

Source: CRS analysis of GPO, Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2022, Historical Tables, Table 3.1 and
Table 10.1.
Notes: FY2021 through FY2026 reflect projections. Figures adjusted to constant FY2022 dol ars using GDP
(chained) price index in Table 10.1.
Figure 3 shows defense spending over time as a share of both federal outlays and GDP. Defense
outlays have steadily decreased from peaks of nearly 90% of federal outlays and more than a third
of the overall economy in the 1940s during World War II—to less than 13% of federal outlays and
3.3% of the economy in FY2022.14

13 CRS analysis of GPO, Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2022, Historical Tables, Table 3.1, “Outlays by
Superfunction and Function: 1940-2026,” at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2022-
TAB/xls/BUDGET-2022-TAB-4-1.xlsx; and Table 10.1, “Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the Historical
Tables: 1940-2026,” at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2022-TAB/xls/BUDGET-2022-TAB-11-
1.xlsx.
14 CRS analysis of GPO, Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2022, Historical Tables, Table 3.1, “Outlays by
Superfunction and Function: 1940-2026,” at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2022-
TAB/xls/BUDGET-2022-TAB-4-1.xlsx.
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 11

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Figure 3. National Defense Outlays as Share of Total Federal Outlays and GDP,
FY1940-FY2026 (projected)
(in percentages)

Source: CRS analysis of GPO, Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2022, Historical Tables, Table 3.1.
Notes: FY2021 through FY2026 reflect projections.
Selected Military Personnel Issues
End-Strength
As enacted, the legislation is to fund a force of 1.35 million military personnel from the active
components and 799,500 members of the reserve and National Guard components. Compared
with the budget request, this amounts to increases in active component personnel of 720 in the
Navy and 926 in the Air Force. See Table 2.
Table 2. FY2021-22 Military Personnel End-Strength: H.R. 4432 and S. 3023, Div. A
FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Committee-
Majority-
H.R. 2471
FY2021
FY2022
reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A

actual
request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Active Forces

Army
485,900
485,000
485,000
485,000
485,000
Navy
347,800
346,200
346,200
346,200
346,920
Marine Corps
181,200
178,500
178,500
178,500
178,500
Air Force
333,475
328,300
328,300
328,300
329,226
Space Force
--
8,400
8,400
8,400
8,400
Total, Active Force
1,348,375
1,346,400
1,346,400
1,346,400
1,348,040
Congressional Research Service

6

link to page 12 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Committee-
Majority-
H.R. 2471
FY2021
FY2022
reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A

actual
request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Reserve and National Guard Forces (Selected Reserve)a
Army Reserve
189,800
189,500
189,500
189,500
189,500
Navy Reserve
58,800
58,600
58,600
58,600
58,600
Marine Corps
Reserve
38,500
36,800
36,800
36,800
36,800
Air Force Reserve
70,300
70,300
70,300
70,300
70,300
Army National
Guard
336,500
336,000
336,000
336,000
336,000
Air National Guard
108,100
108,300
108,300
108,300
108,300
Total, Selected
Reserve
802,000
799,500
799,500
799,500
799,500
Grand Total,
2,150,375
2,145,900
2,145,900
2,145,900
2,147,540
Military Personnel
Source: CRS analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of
Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense
Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct.
18, 2021, at https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint
explanatory statement to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L.
117-103), Part 1, at https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf;
and Part 2, at https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Notes:
a. The Selected Reserve are, in general, those units and individuals who train for at least one weekend per
month in addition to one two-week period per year. See CRS In Focus IF10540, Defense Primer: Reserve
Forces.
Military Pay Raise
The enacted legislation funds a 2.7% increase in military basic pay, as proposed by the
Administration. This would match the annual increase in the Employment Cost Index (ECI), a
Labor Department survey of wages and salaries in private industry.15
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
The enacted legislation provided a total of $539.6 million—nearly 40% more than was
requested—for programs intended to reduce the incidence of sexual assault in the armed forces
and to deal with its consequences.16 Additions to the original $388.3 million request comprise:
 $97.0 million (spread across a dozen appropriations accounts) to implement the
recommendations of a DOD Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military that
was set up in March of 2021 at the direction of President Biden;

15 For background, see CRS In Focus IF10260, Defense Primer: Military Pay Raise.
16 For background, see CRS Report R44944, Military Sexual Assault: A Framework for Congressional Oversight.
Congressional Research Service

7

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

 $47.0 million for DOD’s Special Victim’s Counsel office, that provides
confidential legal assistance to victims of sexual assault; and
 $7.5 million for the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response organization in the
Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Selected Defense Health Program Issues
Proposed Defense Health Agency (DHA) Reorganization
For the third year in a row, the enacted legislation did not fund a request to continue a
reorganization of the Defense Health Agency that was mandated by the FY2017 NDAA (P.L. 114-
328), and subsequent legislation codified in 10 U.S.C. §§1073c-1073d. The plan would
streamline DOD medical operations by shifting uniformed military personnel from major medical
centers toward more direct combat-support functions. Civilian medical personnel would replace
some of those military members in staffing military medical facilities and some military
dependents and retirees would be required to obtain treatment from non-DOD medical facilities
with costs to be covered by DOD’s TRICARE system.17
The enacted bill, like the precursor bills in the House and Senate, denied the $104.5 million
requested to hire civil service and contract employees to replace military personnel in the DOD
medical facilities billets.18 In its report on H.R. 4432, the House committee said it did not
recommend the funds, “given the continued lack of details regarding the quality and availability
of care for beneficiaries, as well as a negative impact on readiness that may be caused by an
unnecessary or potentially dangerous shedding of military medical providers.”19
The House committee also ordered the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to
provide to the congressional defense committees a report on DOD’s response to a May 2020
report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which warned that dependents and
retirees in some areas might encounter a shortage of quality civilian health care providers.20
Selected Readiness Issues
PFAS Pollution Remediation21
The enacted legislation provided $1.51 billion for environmental remediation at current and
former military bases, nearly half again as much as the $1.03 billion budget request for those
activities. Of the $486.5 million the bill added to the amount requested, $210.0 million is
intended to speed up DOD cleanup efforts aimed at groundwater contamination by certain highly

17 For background, see CRS In Focus IF11273, Military Health System Reform, and CRS In Focus IF11458, Military
Health System Reform: Military Treatment Facilities.
18 See H.Rept. 117-88, p. 333; and Explanatory Statement accompanying the Senate Appropriations Committee-version
of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022, p. 219, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF.
19 H.Rept. 117-88, pp. 332-333.
20 Ibid.
21 For background and additional analysis, see CRS Report R45986, Federal Role in Responding to Potential Risks of
Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS).
Congressional Research Service

8

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

toxic chemicals, collectively referred to as PFAS, which were widely used as a fire-fighting
agent.
Red Hill (Hawaii) Fuel Depot Leak
The enacted legislation provided a total of $686.4 million to deal with the effects of water
pollution from the Navy’s Red Hill bulk fuel depot, which consists of 20 massive fuel tanks with
a capacity of more than 200 million gallons of ship and aircraft fuel buried in a hillside
overlooking Pearl Harbor, a few miles northwest of downtown Honolulu. The World War II-era
facility sits over Honolulu’s aquifer and occasional fuel leaks and spills have been a source of
concern over the risk of water contamination.
On March 7, 2022, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced that Red Hill’s fuel inventory
would be moved elsewhere and the facility closed.22
Environment and Climate Change Issues
The enacted legislation provided $150.0 million, as requested, for DOD’s Readiness and
Environmental Protection Integration (REPI) program, which provides for land and wildlife
conservation activities on land to provide buffers for military installations against flooding and
real estate development that might impinge on military operations.
The House committee report expressed concern about the effects on DOD operations of climate
change, including the already observed rise in sea-level and recurring flooding. It also expressed
concern that DOD “is contributing to this crisis as a large consumer of fossil fuels and producer
of greenhouse gases.”23 The panel directed the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on DOD’s
use of fossil fuels during FY2021 including a summary of efforts to prioritize missions that would
reduce fossil fuel consumption and of investments in technologies intended to increase fuel
efficiency.24
The House committee also directed the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on plans to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, by installation. In its report on the bill, the committee said it “expects
the Department of Defense to integrate considerations of climate impacts into all aspects of
military planning and funding.”25
The House committee noted that federal energy management requirements currently apply only to
the portion of DOD’s energy consumption used by fixed installations and non-combat vehicles,
amounting to 30% of the department’s annual energy consumption. It ordered the department to
report on the implications of applying those requirements to operational forces, which account for
the balance of its energy usage.26

22 DOD, “Statement by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on the Closure of the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage
Facility,” March 7, 2022, at https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2957825/statement-by-secretary-
of-defense-lloyd-j-austin-iii-on-the-closure-of-the-red/.
23 H.Rept. 117-88, p. 100.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid., pp. 105-06.
26 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 15 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Selected Acquisition Issues
Strategic Nuclear Forces
With relatively minor reductions, the enacted legislation funded the Administration’s budget
request to continue across-the-board modernization of the U.S. triad for long-range nuclear
weapon delivery. As requested, the bill included the initial increments of procurement funding for
the B-21 long-range bomber and for the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD), a new
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) slated to replace the 1970s-vintage Minuteman III (see
Table 3).
The legislation also funded, with relatively minor cuts, continued development of those systems
and the Long-Range Stand-Off Weapon (LRSO), an air-launched cruise missile planned to
replace the 1980s-vintage air-launched cruise-missile (ALCM) carried by some U.S. bombers.
The legislation provided the requested funds for Columbia-class ballistic missile-armed
submarines. This included $3.0 billion of estimated $14.0 billion cost of the first of a planned
fleet of 12 ships and $1.64 billion for advance procurement of components intended for use in 11
subsequent ships of that class.27
Strategic Nuclear Forces
For background and additional analysis, see CRS In Focus IF10519, Defense Primer: Strategic Nuclear Forces, and CRS
Report RL33640, U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues.
Ship-launched Nuclear Cruise Missile
The House committee-reported bill would have denied the Administration’s request for $5.2
million to begin development of a ship-launched, nuclear-armed cruise missile. The enacted
legislation included those funds.
Table 3. Selected Strategic Nuclear Weapons Systems
(in millions of dollars)
Senate
FY2022 Defense
Committee
Appropriations
House
Majority-
Enacted
Program
Committee
drafted bill
H.R. 2471 Div.
(relevant CRS
Appropriation
FY2022
-reported
S. 3023, Div.
C, Part A
report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
A
(P.L. 117-103)
B-21 Bomber
Procurement
108.0
108.0
108.0
108.0
(R44463)
R&D
2,872.6
2,872.6
2,872.6
2,872.6
Bomber Upgrades
Procurement
135.4
139.5
127.8
127.8
(R43049)
R&D
889.0
821.6
875.0
817.6

27 CBO projects that first Columbia-class submarine will cost $14.5 billion and that the average cost of the 11 later
ships will be $7.5 billion (all amounts in FY2021 dollars). For additional background, see CRS Report R41129, Navy
Columbia (SSBN-826) Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Program: Background and Issues for Congress. See H.Rept.
117-88, pp. 183, 187; and Explanatory Statement accompanying the Senate Appropriations Committee-version of the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022, pp. 107, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF.
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 17 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Senate
FY2022 Defense
Committee
Appropriations
House
Majority-
Enacted
Program
Committee
drafted bill
H.R. 2471 Div.
(relevant CRS
Appropriation
FY2022
-reported
S. 3023, Div.
C, Part A
report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
A
(P.L. 117-103)
Columbia-class Ballistic
Procurement
4,647.0
4,604.8
4,777.0
4,777.0
Missile Sub (R41129)
R&D
296.2
308.7
306.2
311.2
Trident II (D-5) Sub-
Procurement
1,144.4
1,120.2
1,144.4
1,120.2
launched Missile Mods
R&D
177.1
149.9
162.6
187.0
Ground-Based Strategic Procurement
10.9
8.9
8.9
8.9
Deterrent (new ICBM)
(RL33640)
R&D
2,553.5
2,531.6
2,553.5
2,553.5
Long-Range Standoff
R&D
Weapon (new air-
609.0
581.0
609.0
599.0
launched cruise missile)
Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement
to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Precision Strike Weapons
As enacted, the legislation generally supported the requests for funds for each of the Armed
Forces to develop and begin deploying several kinds of non-nuclear-armed, precision-strike
missiles with ranges of between 100 miles and more than 1,000 miles (see Table 4). These
include ballistic and cruise missiles as well as hypersonic weapons: maneuverable missiles that
travel at speeds of at least five times the speed of sound (Mach 5 or more than 3,800 mph).
Hypersonic Weapons
For background and additional information, see CRS Report R45811, Hypersonic Weapons: Background and Issues
for Congress; and CRS In Focus IF11991, The U.S. Army’s Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW).
Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (Air Force)
Like the precursor bills in the House and Senate, the enacted defense legislation sought to
facilitate congressional oversight by approving separate amounts to fund development of two
types of air-launched, hypersonic missiles that the Air Force had included in a single R&D budget
line labelled “Hypersonic Prototyping.” The legislation provided:
Congressional Research Service

11

link to page 18 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

 $190.1 million of the $200.1 million requested to continue development of a
scramjet-powered cruise missile28 designated Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile;
and
 $318.7 million—$80.4 million more than was requested—to continue
development of a rocket-powered missile designated Air-Launched Rapid
Response Weapon (ARRW) with the additional funds directed to increase testing
of the weapon.
Citing test failures, conferees eliminated from the enacted bill the request for $160.9
million to begin ARRW procurement.
Table 4. Selected Precision Strike Systems
(in millions of dollars)
FY2022
Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Committee-
Majority-
H.R. 2471
Program
Appropriation FY2022
reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A
(relevant CRS report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Ballistic Missiles
Procurement
166.1
166.1
166.1
166.1
Precision Strike
Missile (PRSM) [Army] R&D
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
Mobile Medium-Range
Missile [Army]
R&D
286.5
286.5
286.5
286.5
Hypersonic Weapons
Conventional Prompt
Strike [Navy]
(R41464)
R&D
1,372.3
1,275.4
1,266.3
1,324.1
Long-Range
Hypersonic Weapon
[Army] (IF11991)
R&D
300.9
300.9
310.4
315.4
Air-Launched Rapid
Procurement
160.9
116.9
80.4
0.0
Response Weapon
(ARRW) [Air Force]a
R&D
238.3
238.3
238.3
318.7
Hypersonic Attack
R&D
Cruise Missile [Air
Force]
200.1
190.1
190.1
190.1
Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement
to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at

28 Rockets carry an oxygen source to support the combustion of their fuel whereas cruise missiles need carry only the
fuel, since they take in oxygen from their operational environment. Thus, to strike targets at any given range, cruise
missiles can be smaller than rocket powered weapons, allowing them to be carried by smaller aircraft.
Congressional Research Service

12

link to page 19 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Notes:
a. The budget request included funding for ARRW and Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile in a single line
labelled “Hypersonic Prototyping.” The House and Senate committees each recommended funding the two
programs in separate lines at the amounts requested.
Anti-Missile Defense
In general, the enacted legislation supported, with minor reductions, the funding requested to
continue fielding anti-ballistic missile defenses including both a system of long-range interceptors
designed to protect U.S. territory against ICBMs and shorter-range THAAD and Aegis systems
designed to protect U.S. forces and allies abroad against shorter-range missiles (see Table 5).
“Layered” Homeland Defense
Conferees on the bill challenged a DOD plan to integrate the two types of systems into a “layered
defense” of U.S. territory. Under this plan, the longer-range defensive missiles would be
backstopped by THAAD and Aegis systems that would engage attacking missiles that penetrated
the initial defense. On grounds that the Administration had not adequately justified the plan, the
enacted bill cut a total of $250.0 billion from various missile defense R&D projects.
Pacific Defenses
The enacted legislation added to the request a total of $149.1 million to accelerate DOD efforts to
deploy anti-missile defenses in the Pacific. The request included a total of $118.3 million to
develop and begin fielding defenses on Guam, the U.S. territory closest to China and North
Korea. The bill added a total of $80 million to accelerate the project, but partly offsets that
increase by cutting $5.1 million on grounds that DOD had not informed Congress about
important details of the project.
The legislation also added $75.0 million to continue work on a long-range missile tracking radar
in Hawaii. DOD postponed work on the project in 2020, partly because of local opposition in
Hawaii. DOD had requested no funds for the radar in FY2022.
Iron Dome for Israel
Section 8142 of the enacted legislation provided $1.0 billion to replenish Israel’s arsenal of Tamir
interceptor missiles for its Iron Dome anti-rocket defenses, which were heavily used in May 2021
during an 11-day war between Israel and Hamas, the U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist
Organization that exercises de facto control over Gaza.29 The Iron Dome Supplemental
Appropriations Act (H.R. 5323), passed by the House on September 23, 2021, would have
appropriated the same amount for that purpose, as would have the version of the FY2022 defense
appropriation bill drafted by the Senate Appropriations Committee’s majority caucus.
These funds are in addition to the $108.0 million the enacted defense bill provided, as requested,
to buy Iron Dome systems for U.S. use.

29 For background, see CRS Report R44245, Israel: Background and U.S. Relations in Brief and CRS Report RL33222,
U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel. This funding for Israeli use is in addition to the $108.0 million the House and Senate bills
would have provided, as requested, to procure Iron Dome systems for U.S. use.
Congressional Research Service

13

link to page 20 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Table 5. Selected Anti-missile Defense Systems
(in millions of dollars)
FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Committee-
Majority-drafted
H.R. 2471
Program
Appropriation FY2022
reported
bill
Div. C, Part A
(relevant CRS report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Mid-Course Defense
R&D
805.6
800.6
736.0
786.5
System
Improved Mid-Course
R&D
1,059.4
1,059.4
1,058.4
1,017.5
Defense (new
interceptor and radar)
Defense of Guam
R&D
78.3
62.4
138.3
112.4
Procurement
40.0
0.0
80.0
80.0
Hawaii radar
R&D
0.0
75.0
41.0
75.0
Israeli Cooperative
Procurement
62.0
62.0
62.0
62.0
Programs
R&D
300.0
300.0
300.0
300.0
Terminal Defense
Procurement
251.5
251.5
380.7
380.7
(THAAD and Patriot)
R&D
310.6
246.1
266.3
247.1
Aegis Ballistic Missile
Procurement
696.0
696.0
868.7
868.7
Defense
R&D
892.7
788.0
800.0
793.9
Iron Dome (for U.S.)
Procurement
108.0
108.0
108.0
108.0
Iron Dome (for Israel) Procurement
0.0
0.0
1,000.0
1,000.0
Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement
to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Space Programs
The enacted legislation provided, with some relatively small reductions, the funding requested for
the largest of DOD’s space-related acquisition programs (see Table 6). These include the GPS III
navigation satellite system, a new generation of missile tracking satellites designated Overhead
Persistent Infra-Red (OPIR), and the National Security Space Launch program, which uses three
kinds of rockets to launch relatively large satellites for DOD and U.S. intelligence agencies.
Next Generation Missile Tracking Satellite (OPIR)
The enacted legislation provided $2.34 billion of the $2.45 billion requested to continue
developing a satellite network that would use infra-red sensors to track long-range missiles. The
system, intended to replace the current network of SBIRS satellites, would include some satellites
in geo-stationary orbits, other satellites in polar orbits, and ground-based control systems.
Congressional Research Service

14

link to page 21 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Following the pattern set by the bill introduced in the Senate, the enacted legislation provided the
funds in four separate amounts, apportioned among the two types of satellites, the ground
systems, and an additional amount. In the explanatory statement accompanying the bill
introduced in the Senate, the Appropriations Committee’s majority directed the Air Force to
present future budget requests separately for each of the three components of the program to
facilitate closer congressional oversight.
Table 6. Selected Defense Space Systems
(in millions of dollars)
FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Program
Committee-
Majority-
H.R. 2471
(relevant CRS
Appropriation FY2022
reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A
report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
National Security
Procurement
1,337.3
1,337.3
1,307.4
1,327.3
Space Launch
R&D
221.5
184.6
294.5
201.5
Global Positioning
Procurement
688.2
681.6
677.7
939.6
System
R&D
1,121.5
1,121.5
1.086.2
1092.2
SBIRS missile
Procurement
154.5
154.5
154.5
154.5
detection satellite,
and fol ow-on
R&D
2,451.3
2,451.3
2,127.8
2,338.9
Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; and Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations
Bill, Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF.
Ground Systems
The enacted legislation generally supported the Army’s plan to modernize its suite of ground
combat vehicles. It provided (with relatively minor reductions) the funds requested to upgrade
Bradley and Stryker armored troop carriers and added to the budget request funds to accelerate
upgrades to Abrams tanks and Paladin self-propelled howitzers (see Table 7).
It also funded the request to begin production of a relatively lightweight tank (designated the
Mobile Protected Firepower system) that could be deployed with infantry units more easily than
the 70-ton Abrams. The bill provided, with minor reductions, the funds requested to continue
developing a new infantry fighting vehicle (designated the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle)
to succeed the Bradley.
IVAS Night Vision System
The conference report slowed the Army’s plan to begin equipping tens of thousands of front-line
troops with wearable night vision viewers that also could display targeting crosshairs and
navigation information, like the heads-up display (HUD) of a fighter plane. In March 2021, the
Army contracted with Microsoft to spend up to $21.9 billion over 10 years to procure this
Congressional Research Service

15

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Integrated Visual Augmentation Systems (IVAS), based on the firm’s HoloLens augmented
reality goggles.30
The enacted legislation cuts $448.9 million from the Army’s request for $853.9 million to buy
more than 29,000 IVAS units in FY2022 and barred the Army from spending more than 85% of
the amount provided until the system completed operational testing. In the accompanying
explanatory statement, conferees said the bill added $55.5 million to the Army’s R&D account for
IVAS because the system had encountered “recent developmental challenges and increased
testing requirements.”
The Army had announced in October 2021 that it was slowing the pace at which it planned to
issue IVAS to troops.31
Table 7. Selected Ground Combat Systems
(in millions of dollars)
FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Committee-
Majority-
H.R. 2471
Program
Appropriation FY2022
reported
drafted bill
Div. C, Part A
(relevant CRS report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
M-1 Abrams tank upgrade Procurement
981.3
960.3
1,156.3
1,145.8
Bradley Fighting Vehicle
Procurement
461.4
440.4
472.8
460.4
Mod
Stryker Combat Vehicle
Procurement
1,005.0
956.0
977.399999
1,082.8
Mod
Paladin 155 mm. Self-
Procurement
446.4
526.2
662.9
662.9
propelled Howitzer
(R46721)
Next Generation Combat Vehicles
Mobile Protected
Procurement
287.0
287.0
287.0
287.0
Firepower [light tank]
(IF11859)
Optionally Manned
R&D
225.1
201.6
202.4
202.3
Fighting Vehicle [Bradley
Replacement] (R45519)
Short-range antiaircraft, anti-rocket defenses (R46463)
Indirect Fire-Protection
Procurement
25.3
19.1
25.3
19.1
Capability, Increment 2
R&D
233.5
221.0
162.8
182.3
M-SHORAD
Procurement
331.6
331.6
331.6
331.6

30 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr., “IVAS: Microsoft Award by Army Worth Up to $21.9 Billion,” Breaking Defense, March
31, 2021, at https://breakingdefense.com/2021/03/ivas-microsoft-award-worth-up-to-21-9b/.
31 Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology, “Statement on the
Integrated Visual Augmentation System,” October 18, 2021, at
https://www.army.mil/article/251258/joint_asa_alt_and_afc_statement_on_the_integrated_visual_augmentation_syste
m.
Congressional Research Service

16

link to page 23 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement
to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Shipbuilding Programs
Following the pattern set by the Armed Services and Appropriations Committees in recent years,
the enacted legislation funds the construction of more ships than were requested in the budget.
The legislation added an Aegis destroyer, an underway refueling tanker, and two ships designed
to support amphibious landings (see Table 8).
Citing concern over China’s naval modernization efforts, the congressional defense committees
repeatedly have expressed support for the Navy’s desire to enlarge the fleet to something
substantially more than 300 ships. The committees also have not objected to the Navy’s desire to
shift to a more-distributed fleet architecture, based on a larger number of smaller ships. At the
same time, the committees have expressed frustration at the lack of an updated force-level goal
and an up-to-date 30-year shipbuilding plan.32 They also have pushed back on some of the Navy’s
plans for acquiring new ship types, citing cost growth, schedule delays, and technical problems
experienced by certain shipbuilding programs.33
Navy Shipbuilding Plans
For additional background and analysis, see CRS Report RL32665, Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans:
Background and Issues for Congress.
Budgetary “Maneuvers” and Destroyers
In the explanatory statement accompanying the enacted bill, conferees asserted that the FY2022
budget request “continues a trend by the Navy to submit budgets to the Congress that deliberately
underfund programs deemed by the Navy to be critical, with the expectation that the
congressional appropriations committees will restore funds for these programs.”
The immediate focus of the conferees objection was that the Navy requested funds to buy one
DDG-51-class Aegis destroyer in FY2022—thus breaking an existing contract that would require
funding for two ships—while simultaneously listing the second destroyer as the top priority on its
list of unfunded priorities.34

32 For more information, see CRS Report RL32665, Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and
Issues for Congress.
33 Ibid.
34 Department of Defense (DOD) unfunded priorities generally refer to reports submitted to Congress pursuant to
United States Code provisions (10 U.S.C. §222a and 10 U.S.C. §222b) listing military programs, activities, or mission
requirements that were not included in the President’s annual budget request but that the department would fund with
additional appropriations. For FY2022, DOD identified $23.85 billion in unfunded priorities, according to CRS
analysis of the documents. For additional information, see CRS In Focus IF11964, Defense Primer: Department of
Defense Unfunded Priorities.
Congressional Research Service

17

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

The legislation added to the request $1.66 billion for a second destroyer plus $120 million to buy
components that would support procurement of an additional DDG-51 in FY2023 or some other
future fiscal year.
Frigates
With a relatively minor reduction, the enacted legislation provided the funds requested for the
third of a projected 20-ship class of frigates—warships smaller than destroyers and intended to
operate against less heavily armed adversaries. Designated the Constellation-class, the ships are
based on an Italian-French designed class of frigates already in service for other navies. The
explanatory statement accompanying the bill in the Senate cautioned the Navy against
prematurely beginning to build the frigates in a second shipyard before resolving the technical
and production issues that often arise with the construction of a new class of ships.35
Unmanned Vessels
The enacted legislation is generally supportive of Navy plans to acquire various types of
unmanned vessels. However, it cut from the request—on grounds that it was premature—$42
million to integrate missile launchers into the largest of the unmanned surface ship designs.
Table 8. Selected Ship Programs
(in millions of dollars)
Senate
FY2022 Defense
House
Committee
Appropriations
Program
Appropriation
FY2022
Committee-
Majority-
Enacted
(relevant CRS report)
Type
request
reported
drafted bill
H.R. 2471
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
Div. C, Part A
( P.L. 117-103)
Ford-class aircraft
Procurement
2,368.5
2,349.9
2,368.5
2,349.9
carrier
(RS20643)
Carrier refueling and
Procurement
2,522.3
2,331.3
2,510.5
2,490.5
modernization
Virginia-class attack
Procurement
6,369.6
6,434.3
6,434.2
6,339.6
submarine
(RL32418)
Aegis destroyer
Procurement
2,016.8
3,334.8
3,796.0
3,796.0
Frigate
Procurement
1,157.0
1,157.0
1,090.9
1,090.9
Fleet Oiler (R43546)
Procurement
744.2
688.2
668.2
1,463.8
Expeditionary Sea
Procurement
0.0
0.0
577.0
577.0
Base
Expeditionary Fast
Procurement
0.0
0.0
590.0
590.0
Transport
Light Amphibious
R&D
13.2
13.2
13.2
13.2
Warship (R46374)

35 Ibid., pp. 107-08.
Congressional Research Service

18

link to page 24 FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Next Generation
R&D
27.8
24.3
21.2
24.3
Logistics Ship
(IF11674)
Large Unmanned
R&D
144.8
102.8
71.7
102.8
Surface Vehicle
(R45757)
Large Unmanned
R&D
88.1
81.4
57.0
66.7
Undersea Vehicle
(R45757)
Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement
to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.
Aircraft Systems
The enacted legislation generally supported the Administration’s aircraft budget plus additions
that continue certain congressional initiatives in recent years: acquiring additional F/A-18s for the
Navy and additional Black Hawk helicopters and C-130 transport planes for reserve and National
Guard units (see Table 9).
Aircraft Procurement Plans
For background and additional analysis, see CRS In Focus IF10999, Defense’s 30-Year Aircraft Plan Reveals New
Details.
The enacted legislation provided $9.77 billion for procurement of 85 F-35 fighters (plus
modifications to planes already purchased). Three versions of the aircraft are used by the Navy,
Marine Corps, and Air Force. This is the first time since Congress acted on the 2015 budget that
the annual appropriations bill did not fund more F-35s than requested.
Whereas the Administration proposed ending procurement of the F/A-18E/F, the enacted
legislation added to the budget $900 million to buy 12 additional aircraft.
As has been routine for years, the legislation added funds for non-requested aircraft to equip
reserve and National Guard units. The bill added $211.0 million for nine Black Hawk helicopters
for the National Guard, $429.2 million for four C-130s for the Air Force Reserve, and $1.80
billion for 16 C-130s for the Air National Guard.
Table 9. Selected Aircraft Systems
(in millions of dollars)
FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Program
Committee-
Majority-drafted
H.R. 2471
(relevant CRS
Appropriation FY2022
reported
bill
Div. C, Part A
report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
Procurement
9,971.0
9,819.6
9,667.3
9,769.5
Congressional Research Service

19

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

FY2022 Defense
Senate
Appropriations
House
Committee
Enacted
Program
Committee-
Majority-drafted
H.R. 2471
(relevant CRS
Appropriation FY2022
reported
bill
Div. C, Part A
report)
Type
Request
H.R. 4432
S. 3023, Div. A
(P.L. 117-103)
F-35 Joint Strike
R&D
2,053.3
2,053.3
1,707.3
2,173.3
Fighter and mods
(RL30563)
F-15 mods
Procurement
1,719.0
1,610.6
1,592.0
1,581.1
R&D
469.8
469.8
458.8
469.8
F-18 Hornet and
Procurement
1,200.2
2,001.6
1,180.8
2,029.8
mods
F-22 mods
Procurement
424.7
364.7
340.4
407.9
R&D
647.3
647.3
647.3
647.3
Next-Generation R&D
1,524.7
1,524.7
1,524.7
1,524.7
Air Dominance
(NGAD)
(IF11659)
KC-46 tanker
Procurement
2,380.3
2,325.3
2,209.0
2,289.0
(RL34398)
UH-60 Black
Procurement
942.5
949.2
942.5
949.2
Hawk
AH-64 Apache
Procurement
814.9
804.9
789.9
779.2
CH-47 Chinook
Procurement
163.7
333.7
163.7
333.4
Source: CRS analysis of Department of Defense Budget Justification Books, FY2023 (see Appendix); Also, CRS
analysis of H.Rept. 117-88, House Appropriations Committee, Report to Accompany Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (H.R. 4432), July 15, 2021; Explanatory Statement for the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill,
Fiscal Year 2022, committee print released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 18, 2021, at
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DEFRept_FINAL.PDF; and the joint explanatory statement
to accompany the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division C of P.L. 117-103), Part 1, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part1.pdf; and Part 2, at
https://docs.house.gov/bil sthisweek/20220307/BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-C_Part2.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

20

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Appendix.
Tables 4-10 of this report summarize the amounts requested by the Administration, recommended
by the House and Senate, and agreed to in the enacted version for procurement and/or research
and development (R&D) regarding selected weapons programs in each of several broad
categories (e.g., missile defense, ground combat). The funding data for these selected programs is
drawn from 17 procurement appropriation accounts and five R&D accounts that are components
of the DOD budget. Each of those accounts is further subdivided into “line items”—dozens of
them in some procurement accounts, and hundreds of them in most of the R&D accounts.
The official DOD labels of some line items may not correspond to the names that commonly are
used to refer to programs in the course of congressional deliberations. Moreover, funding for a
single program may be spread across several line items. In addition, R&D funding for a particular
program may be only one of several projects funded by a single line item.
Selection of the budget lines to be included in the totals for any program listed in any of the tables
is based on CRS analysis. For further information concerning any specific instance, congressional
staff may consult relevant CRS products listed in the tables or any of the following CRS analysts.
CRS Experts: Defense Appropriations Issues
Issue
CRS analyst
e-mail
phone
Military Personnel/End-strength
Lawrence Kapp
lkapp@crs.loc.gov
7-7609
Military Personnel/Compensation
Lawrence Kapp
lkapp@crs.loc.gov
7-7609
Military Personnel/Social Issues
Kristy Kamarck
kkamarck@crs.loc.gov
7-7783
Defense Health Care
Bryce Mendez
bhmendez@crs.loc.gov
7-1577
Pol ution/Environmental Issues
David Bearden
dbearden@crs.loc.gov
7-2390
Precision Strike Weapons
John Hoehn
jhoehn@crs.loc.gov
7-9074
Missile Defense
Stephen McCall
smccall@crs.loc.gov
7-9760
Defense Space Systems
Stephen McCall
smccall@crs.loc.gov
7-9760
Ground Combat Systems
Andrew Feickert
afeickert@crs.loc.gov
7-7673
Naval Warfare Systems
Ron O’Rourke
rorourke@crs.loc.gov
7-7610
Military Aviation Systems
John Hoehn
jhoehn@crs.loc.gov
7-9074

Congressional Research Service

21

FY2022 Defense Appropriations Act: Context and Selected Issues

Author Information

Pat Towell

Specialist in U.S. Defense Policy and Budget

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
R47154 · VERSION 1 · NEW
22