 
 
 
 INSIGHTi 
 
FY2024 NDAA: Defense Industrial Base Policy 
Updated January 8, 2024 
Background 
The 
defense industrial base (DIB) is the network of organizations, facilities, and resources that supplies 
the U.S. government—particularly the Department of Defense (DOD)—with materials, products, and 
services for defense purposes. The DIB is large and complex, encompassing private and public entities 
engaged in activities ranging from basic research to the assembly and delivery of complete weapons 
systems (for more information, see CRS Report R4775
1, The U.S. Defense Industrial Base: Background 
and Issues for Congress). Given its role in enabling military operations, the DIB tends to receive 
considerable attention from Congress, particularly as part of the annual defense authorization and 
appropriation process.  
The House and Senate considered an array of DIB-related provisions in their respective bills for a 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (FY2024 NDAA; the House bill was designated 
H.R. 2670 and the Senate bill was designat
ed S. 2226). The enacted FY2024 NDAA
 (P.L. 118-31) modifies and establishes numerous industrial base programs and policies. 
Table 1 summarizes key 
provisions from 
 H.R. 2670 (House-engrossed)
, S. 2226 (Senate-engrossed), and
 P.L. 118-31 (enacted).  
Table 1. Selected Defense Industrial Base Provisions in the FY2024 NDAA 
Selected provisions from
 H.R. 2670, S. 2226, and
 P.L. 118-31 
House-passed (H.R. 2670) 
Senate-passed (S. 2226) 
Enacted (P.L. 118-31) 
Investments and Incentives 
Sec. 853 would direct DOD to 
Sec. 831 i
n S. 2226 is similar to Sec. 
Not adopted. 
establish a public-private partnership 
853 in
 H.R. 2670. 
pilot program that would create 
incentives (including loan guarantees) 
for private equity investment in small 
or nontraditional defense contractors. 
Congressional Research Service 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
IN12221 
CRS INSIGHT 
Prepared for Members and  
 Committees of Congress 
 
  
 
Congressional Research Service 
2 
House-passed (H.R. 2670) 
Senate-passed (S. 2226) 
Enacted (P.L. 118-31) 
Sec. 862 would amend
 10 U.S.C. 
No similar provision. 
Not adopted. 
§4817(d) to allow for use of the 
Industrial Base Fund to support 
recruitment, training, and retention of 
the large surface combatant workforce. 
Sec. 863 would redesignate the 
No similar provision. 
Not adopted. 
Industrial Base Fund as the “Industrial 
Base and Operational Infrastructure 
Fund” and would expand the fund’s 
uses to include strategic/critical 
materials and munitions acquisitions, 
certain infrastructure projects, and the 
acquisition and deployment of 
capabilities and prototypes through 
alternative acquisition pathways 
(including Middle Tier of Acquisition). 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 834 would allow DOD to carry 
Not adopted. 
out a pilot program to provide capital 
assistance to support investment in the 
DIB. Authorized assistance would 
include loans or loan guarantees for 
investors; the direct acquisition of 
equity in eligible entities; and the 
provision of technical assistance. 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 1080 would amend
 50 U.S.C. 
Sec. 1080 adopts the Senate provision.  
§4552(7) to include businesses in 
Australia and the United Kingdom as 
domestic sources for the purposes of 
Title III of the Defense Production Act 
of 1950. This provision would also 
create new reporting requirements 
related to the use of Title III 
authorities. 
Sourcing and Supply Chains 
Sec. 861 would amend
 10 U.S.C. 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 851 adopts the House provision. 
§4811(a) to add a new objective for the 
national technology and industrial base 
(NTIB) requiring that future NTIB 
strategies reduce DOD dependence on 
potential adversary suppliers.  
Sec. 865 would require DOD 
No similar provision. 
Not adopted. 
contractors to disclose the provenance 
of advanced batteries and related 
components. 
  
Congressional Research Service 
3 
House-passed (H.R. 2670) 
Senate-passed (S. 2226) 
Enacted (P.L. 118-31) 
Sec. 866 would prohibit DOD 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 825 adopts the House provision, 
contracting with entities that use 
with amendments to define applicable 
logistics software subject to PRC or 
entities as those that that provide data 
foreign adversary control or influence 
to covered logistics platforms (defined 
and bar certain port authorities from 
as platforms and similar systems 
using such software. 
provided or sponsored by, or affiliated 
with, the PRC or a commercial entity 
under PRC control). It also amends 
Chapter 503 of Title 46 to restrict 
certain port and marine infrastructure 
entities from using covered logistics 
platforms. 
Sec. 867 would direct DOD to 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 856 adopts the House provision. 
establish a pilot program for a private 
entity to analyze and continuously 
monitor DIB supply chains for issues, 
vulnerabilities, and improvement 
opportunities. 
Sec. 868 would require a study by the 
No similar provision. 
Not adopted; however, the conference 
Comptrol er General of DOD supply 
report to accompany H.R. 2670 
chain dependence on foreign sources 
(H.Rept. 118-301) directs the 
for certain end items and components. 
Comptrol er General to provide a 
briefing to the House and Senate 
Armed Services Committees on DOD 
supply chain dependence on foreign 
sources for certain end items and 
components. 
Sec. 869 would establish an enhanced 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 835 adopts the House provision. 
domestic content requirement for 
major defense acquisition programs 
(consistent with that published at
 87 
FR 12780) and require DOD to issue 
rules to determine treatment of 
certain foreign end products under 
certain circumstances. 
Sec. 872 would prohibit DOD’s Office 
No similar provision. 
Not adopted. 
of Strategic Capital from investing in 
entities incorporated under laws of the 
People’s Republic of China or subject 
to the ownership or control of such 
entities. 
Sec. 899B would authorize DOD to 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 245 adopts the House provision. 
establish a critical reserve of long-lead 
items and components to enable 
accelerated delivery of certain 
munitions. 
  
Congressional Research Service 
4 
House-passed (H.R. 2670) 
Senate-passed (S. 2226) 
Enacted (P.L. 118-31) 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 216 would direct DOD to 
Not adopted. 
establish a program within the National 
Security Agency (NSA) to develop and 
maintain standards and requirements 
to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, 
and availability of commercial-off-the-
shelf microelectronics acquired by 
DOD. This provision would also create 
a Microelectronics Assurance 
Executive Agent and direct DOD to 
meet certain contracting requirements 
for application-specific integrated 
circuits.  
No similar provision. 
Sec. 835 would amend
 10 U.S.C. 
Not adopted; however,
 H.Rept. 118-
§4864(a) to add traveling wave tube 
301 directs the Under Secretary of 
and traveling wave tube amplifiers 
Defense to provide a briefing on the 
(TWTA) to the list of items that must 
state of the TWTA industrial base to 
be procured from the NTIB. 
the congressional defense committees. 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 866 would establish an enhanced 
Not adopted. 
domestic content requirement for 
Navy shipbuilding programs. For the 
purposes of the Buy American Act 
(41 
U.S.C. §§8301-8305), this provision 
would require 65% of the costs of 
manufactured articles, materials, or 
supplies procured for shipbuilding to 
derive from mining, production, or 
manufacturing activities conducted in 
the United States. This proportion 
would rise to 75% in 2028 and 100% in 
2033. 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 901 would codify in statute 
Sec. 903 adopts the Senate provision.  
DOD’s Office of Strategic Capital. 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 907 would direct DOD to 
Not adopted. 
establish a pilot program to assess and 
mitigate certain impacts of adversarial 
capital flows into defense-related 
industries. This provision would 
authorize analysis of capital flows, 
coordination and outreach relating to 
investment decision-making, securing 
vital tangible and intangible assets, 
capital assistance to certain entities, 
and improving analytical tools and 
practices.  
Sec. 1415 would state that it is U.S. 
Sec. 1057 would direct DOD to 
Sec. 1414 adopts the House provision. 
policy to expand secure sources of 
develop a strategy to reduce the 
supply of critical minerals, and direct 
reliance of DOD’s critical mineral 
DOD to develop a strategy to reduce 
supply chains on certain foreign 
the reliance of DOD’s critical mineral 
sources, with the goal of achieving 
supply chains on certain foreign 
independence from such sources by 
sources, with the goal of achieving 
2035. 
independence from such sources by 
2035. 
  
Congressional Research Service 
5 
House-passed (H.R. 2670) 
Senate-passed (S. 2226) 
Enacted (P.L. 118-31) 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 1707 would direct DOD to 
Sec. 1513 adopts the Senate provision. 
establish a pilot program to enable the 
NSA Cybersecurity Col aboration 
Center to work with U.S. 
semiconductor manufacturers to 
improve the cybersecurity of their 
supply chains.  
Competition and Consolidation 
Sec. 137 would direct the Navy to 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 126 adopts the House provision, 
ensure that no government-operated 
with an amendment restricting the 
drydock can compete for private 
provision’s scope to contracts awarded 
sector non-nuclear surface ship 
in San Diego. 
maintenance contracts (unless a 
determination of insufficient private 
sector competition is made pursuant 
to 10 U.S.C. §2466). 
Sec. 873 would require GAO to 
No similar provision. 
Not adopted; however,
 H.Rept. 118-
conduct a study evaluating the extent 
301 directs the Assistant Secretary of 
and impact of consolidation, 
Defense for Industrial Base Policy to 
competition, and anticompetitive 
develop a merger and acquisition 
behavior within the defense industry. 
(M&A) impact model and provide 
briefings to the House and Senate 
Armed Services Committees. 
No similar provision. 
Sec. 832 would require the parties to 
Sec. 857 adopts the Senate provision. 
certain corporate transactions covered 
under Section 7A of the Clayton Act 
(15 U.S.C. §18a) to provide DOD with 
the same information they are 
currently required to provide to the 
Department of Justice or the Federal 
Trade Commission.  
Source: CRS analysis of the House-engrossed text of
 H.R. 2670, the Senate-engrossed text of
 S. 2226, P.L. 118-31, and 
the conference report to accompan
y H.R. 2670 (H.Rept. 118-301).  
Discussion 
Congress has long evinced interest in the DIB’s ability to support strategic objectives and meet military 
requirements. In the context of geopolitical developments such as intensifying U.S. competition with 
China and Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, some Members have questioned whether the nation’s 
defense suppliers are well-positioned to supply DOD with the weapons, munitions, and other equipment 
necessary to prevail in a great power conflict. 
The enacted FY2024 NDAA addresses numerous congressional priorities relating to the DIB. Provisions 
relating to investment and related incentives reflect the views of some Members that the industrial base 
lacks adequate productive capacity and access to capital. Provisions relating to sourcing and supply 
chains reflect concerns about DOD dependence on foreign suppliers (especially those controlled or 
influenced by potential adversaries) and other vulnerabilities within existing supply chains, as well as 
congressional interest in the economic impact of increasing procurement from domestic sources. Finally, 
those provisions relating to competition and consolidation reflect concerns about the structural 
composition and overall economic health of the DIB. 
  
Congressional Research Service 
6 
Investments and Incentives 
The enacted FY2024 NDAA designates businesses performing under a U.S. contract in Australia and the 
United Kingdom as domestic sources for the purposes of Title III of
 the Defense Production Act of 1950 
(DPA). This makes them eligible to receive loans, loan guarantees, purchase commitments, equipment, 
and related U.S. government assistance intended to expand defense production capacity 
(Sec. 1080; 
previously, such assistance had been limited to businesses located in the United States and Canada). 
The House and Senate-engrossed bills for an FY2024 NDAA contained other provisions relating to DIB 
investments and incentives that were not included i
n P.L. 118-31. H.R. 2670 would have expanded use of 
the Industrial Base Fund—which currently supports industrial base monitoring and expansion, as well as 
efforts to address urgent operational needs and supply chain vulnerabilities—to include support for the 
large surface combatant workforce 
(Sec. 862) as well as certain material and munition acquisitions, 
infrastructure projects, and “alternative acquisition pathways” 
(Sec. 863). S. 2226 would have authorized 
a pilot program to provide capital assistance (including loans, loan guarantees, and the direct acquisition 
of minority equity) as a means of increasing investment in the DIB
 (Sec. 834). Both bills also would have 
established a public-private partnership program to incentivize private equity investment in small or 
nontraditional defense businesse
s (H.R. 2670 Sec. 853 and S. 2226 Sec. 831). 
Sourcing and Supply Chains 
The enacted FY2024 NDAA requires DOD’
s National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB) strategy to 
aim at reducing U.S. dependence on services, supplies, or materials from potential adversarie
s (Sec. 851), 
prohibits DOD from contracting with entities using adversary-controlled logistics software 
(Sec. 825), 
and directs DOD to use government and commercial tools to analyze certain supply chains 
(Sec. 856), 
statutorily establishes an enhanced
 ‘Buy American’ requirement for major defense acquisition programs 
(Sec. 835), authorizes a critical reserve of certain long-lead munition item
s (Sec. 245), and statutorily 
establishes the Office of Strategic Capital 
(Sec. 903; DOD initially created the Office of Strategic Capital 
in 2023 without reference to Congress). Finally, it requires a DOD strategy to achieve critical mineral 
supply chain independence 
(Sec. 1414) and establishes a pilot program for cybersecurity partnerships 
with U.S. semiconductor manufacturers 
(Sec. 1513). 
The House and Senate bills contained other provisions relating to sourcing and supply chains that were 
not adopted.
 H.R. 2670 would have required DOD contractors to disclose the provenance of advanced 
batteries
 (Sec. 865) and prohibited DOD’s Office of Strategic Capital from investing in PRC companies 
(Sec. 872). S. 2226 would have established a program to develop and maintain standards for commercial 
microelectronics acquired by DOD
 (Sec. 216), restrict eligible sources of traveling wave tubes to the 
N
TIB (Sec. 835) and enhanced the domestic content requirement for Navy shipbuilding programs 
(Sec. 
866). It would have also established a pilot program to assess and mitigate adversarial capital flows into 
the DIB 
(Sec. 907).  
Competition and Consolidation 
The enacted FY2024 NDAA directs the Navy to prevent government drydocks from competing with 
private drydocks for non-nuclear surface ship maintenance contracts in San Diego, absent a determination 
of insufficient private sector competition 
(Sec. 126). It also requires major defense suppliers involved in 
corporate transactions requiring notification of, and the provision of information to, antitrust authorities 
(pursuant t
o 15 U.S.C. §18a) to provide the same notification and information concurrently to DOD
 (Sec. 
857).
  
Congressional Research Service 
7 
The House bill contained a provision requiring a Government Accountability Office study on 
consolidation, competition, and anti-competitive behavior among defense contractors that was not 
adopted 
(Sec. 832). 
 
 
Author Information 
 Luke A. Nicastro 
   
Analyst in U.S. Defense Infrastructure Policy  
 
 
 
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. 
 
IN12221 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED