 
 
 
 INSIGHTi 
 
FY2022 NDAA: Procurement Authorizations 
February 28, 2022 
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) typically authorizes appropriations for Department of 
Defense (DOD)
 procurement programs in Title I of Division A of the legislation. DOD procurement 
account
s fund the purchase of new equipment and modifications to existing weapons, including ships, 
aircraft, ground combat vehicles, munitions, and other products and services. The Departments of the 
Army, Navy, and Air Force have multiple procurement accounts, including those related to subordinate 
services (i.e., Marine Corps and Space Force). The Procurement, Defense-Wide account supports Special 
Operations Command (SOCOM), the Missile Defense Agency, and other agencies reporting to the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense. Congress typically
 appropriates funding for the National Guard and Reserve 
Equipment Account (NGREA) to procure items for the reserve components. 
Summary of Procurement Authorizations 
President’s Budget Request 
The FY2022 President’s budget request
ed $133.6 billion in discretionary funding for DOD procurement 
programs—$8 billion (6%) less than the enacted FY2021 level. Of this amount
, $132.2 billion fell within 
the scope of the NDAA. In 
a memorandum to DOD employees, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III 
identified among his priorities innovation and modernization, including the divestment of “legacy systems 
and programs that no longer meet our security needs.” In 
an overview of the FY2022 budget request, 
DOD identified $2.8 billion in divestments among the Departments and SOCOM, including certain ships 
(e.g., Ticonderoga-class guided missile
 cruisers a
nd Littoral Combat Ships), aircraft (e.g
., A-10 close air 
support aircraft and KC-10 and KC-135 refueling
 tankers), and other systems. 
House-Passed NDAA 
The House-passed NDAA would have authoriz
ed $147.1 billion for procurement programs—$14.9 billion 
(11.2%) more than the request. The House legislation would have authorized $17 billion in increases to 
the request (i.e., funding beyond the amounts for certain programs requested in the budget or for 
programs not requested in the budget). The net effect of these increases would have been offset by $2.15 
billion in decreases to the request. 
The Biden Administratio
n opposed the House bill’s “restoration of funding to systems that limit DOD’s 
ability to divest or retire lower priority platforms not relevant to tomorrow’s battlefield.”  
Congressional Research Service 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
IN11870 
CRS INSIGHT 
Prepared for Members and  
 Committees of Congress 
 
  
 
 link to page 2 
Congressional Research Service 
2 
SASC-Reported NDAA 
The SASC-reported NDAA would have authoriz
ed $144.1 billion for procurement programs—$11.8 
billion (9.0%) more than the request. The legislation would have authorized $12.4 billion in increases to 
the request. The net effect of these increases would have been offset by $0.6 billion in decreases to the 
request. 
The Administration
 opposed the SASC bill’s restoration of funding for certain “vulnerable and costly 
platforms that no longer meet mission or security needs.” 
Enacted NDAA 
The enacted NDAA authoriz
ed $146.9 billion for procurement programs—$14.7 billion (11.1%) more 
than the request. The legislation authorized $16.4 billion in increases to the request, including for certain 
DOD unfunded priorities. The net effect of these increases was offset by $1.7 billion in decreases to the 
request. Among the accounts with the biggest increases from the request were National Guard and 
Reserve Equipment, ground combat vehicles, ships, and aircraft. Among those with the biggest decreases 
were ammunition. See
 Table 1. 
Table 1. Summary of Procurement Authorizations in the FY2022 NDAA 
(in billions of dollars) 
Account 
Request 
House-passed 
SASC-reported 
Enacted 
Difference (%) 
Aircraft Procurement, Army 
$2.81 
$3.31 
$3.13 
$3.36 
19.6% 
Missile Procurement, Army 
$3.56 
$3.65 
$3.69 
$3.65 
2.5% 
Weapons & Tracked 
$3.88 
$4.72 
$4.53 
$4.70 
21.1% 
Combat Vehicles, Army 
Procurement of 
$2.16 
$2.44 
$2.44 
$2.46 
13.8% 
Ammunition, Army 
Other Procurement, Army 
$8.87 
$8.93 
$8.88 
$8.99 
1.3% 
Aircraft Procurement, Navy 
$16.48 
$19.61 
$19.18 
$19.8 
20.2% 
Weapons Procurement, 
$4.22 
$4.13 
$4.34 
$4.13 
-2.0% 
Navy 
Procurement of 
$0.99 
$0.98 
$1.03 
$0.90 
-8.7% 
Ammunition, Navy & 
Marine Corps 
Shipbuilding & Conversion, 
$22.57 
$28.42 
$25.12 
$27.28 
20.9% 
Navy 
Other Procurement, Navy 
$10.88 
$11.03 
$11.52 
$11.17 
2.7% 
Procurement, Marine Corps 
$3.04 
$3.62 
$3.72 
$3.62 
19.0% 
Aircraft Procurement, Air 
$15.73 
$17.47 
$18.6 
$18.13 
15.3% 
Force 
Missile Procurement, Air 
$2.67 
$2.57 
$2.67 
$2.58 
-3.5% 
Force 
Procurement of 
$0.80 
$0.79 
$0.80 
$0.71 
-10.1% 
Ammunition, Air Force 
Other Procurement, Air 
$25.25 
$25.79 
$25.73 
$25.75 
2.0% 
Force 
  
Congressional Research Service 
3 
Account 
Request 
House-passed 
SASC-reported 
Enacted 
Difference (%) 
Procurement, Space Force 
$2.77 
$2.77 
$2.80 
$2.79 
0.7% 
Procurement, Defense-
$5.55 
$5.89 
$5.88 
$5.92 
6.8% 
Wide 
National Guard & Reserve 
$0.00 
$0.95 
$0.00 
$0.95 
n/a 
Equipment 
Total 
$132.21 
$147.06 
$144.05 
$146.88 
11.1% 
Source: CRS analysis of funding tables in
 H.Rept. 117-118, p. 346; S.Rept. 117-39, p. 378; and explanatory statement 
accompanying the FY2022 NDA
A (P.L. 117-81) in the 
Congressional Record, December 7, 2021
, p. H7362. 
Notes: Totals may not sum due to rounding. Dol ars rounded to nearest hundredth; percentages rounded to nearest 
tenth. "Difference (%)" column is the percentage difference between enacted and requested amounts. 
Selected Increases and Decreases 
Among the largest line-item increases for procurement programs in the enacted NDAA from requested 
amounts, in terms of dollar value, were  
  
$2.9 billion for the Navy to procure two mor
e DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers 
(for a total of three ships);  
  
$1.1 billion for the Air Force to modify
 F-35A fighter aircraft to the Block 4 
configuration (also called Continuous Capability Development and Delivery, or C2D2);  
  
$950 million for the Departments to buy National Guard and Reserve Equipment; 
  
$889 million for the Navy to procure 
12 F/A-18E/F fighter attack aircraft; and 
  
$749 million for the Navy to procure nine mor
e V-22 tilt-rotor aircraft (for a total of 17 
aircraft). 
Among the largest line-item decreases, in terms of dollar value, were  
  
$263.5 million for the Army to procure next-generation night vision devices (mostly for 
the Integrated Visual Augmentation System, or IVAS); 
  
$180 million for the Navy to procure three fewer auxiliary vessels (i.e., used commercial 
cargo ship
s on reserve for military sealift); 
  
$87.1 million for the Navy to modify the RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missile (ESSM), 
a surface-to-air missile for ship defense; 
  
$76 million in advance procurement funding for the Navy to procure a
 TAO-205 John 
Lewis-class oiler in a future fiscal year; and 
  
$75.5 million for the Air Force’s Joint Direct Attack Munition 
(JDAM), a GPS guidance 
kit for bombs. 
Limitations on Divestments of Certain Aircraft, Ships 
Various provisions in the enacted NDAA limited DOD’s ability to divest certain aircraft and ships, either 
by prohibiting the use or limiting the availability of funds for their retirement or inactivation, or by 
establishing minimum inventory requirement
s. Section 134 prohibited the use of funds for the retirement 
of A-10 aircraft;
 Section 137 limited the number of KC-135 tankers available for retirement; 
and Section 
138 established a minimum inventory requirement for tactical airlift aircraft (e.g
., C-130 cargo aircraft). 
Section 1018 prohibited the use of funds for the retirement of Mark VI patrol boats
 and Section 1019 
limited the availability of funds for the retirement or inactivation of cruisers.
  
Congressional Research Service 
4 
F-35 Affordability Targets and Transfer of Program Responsibilities 
Section 141 of the enacted NDAA required the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy to limit their F-35 
inventory beginning in FY2029 unless they meet certain affordability targets
. Section 142 required the 
Secretary of Defense to transfer “all functions relating to the management, planning, and execution of 
sustainment activities for the F-35 aircraft program from the F-35 Joint Program Office” to the 
aforementioned service secretaries. 
Cost Estimate for B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP) 
Section 135 of the enacted NDAA limited the availability of a percentage of funding for the Air Force’s 
B-52 Commercial Engine Replacement Program
 (CERP), an effort intended to replace the TF33 engines 
on the B-52H bomber fleet, until the Secretary of Defense submits a report to the congressional defense 
committees on a cost estimate for the program. 
 
 
Author Information 
 Brendan W. McGarry 
   
Analyst in U.S. Defense 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. 
 
IN11870 · VERSION 1 · NEW