FY2024 NDAA: Department of Defense Acquisition Policy
INSIGHTi
FY2024 NDAA: Department of Defense
Acquisition Policy
Updated January 16, 2024
Introduction
The Defense Acquisition System (DAS) is the process through which the U.S. Department of Defense
(DOD) develops and buys goods and services from contractors. The process is based on statute and
regulation. The process involves numerous activities, including design, engineering, construction, testing,
deployment, sustainment, and disposal of items purchased from a contractor. This product provides an
overview of selected acquisition-related provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2024, which was enacted on December 22, 2023. (FY 2024 NDAA; P.L. 118-31) For more
background on defense acquisitions, see CRS Report RL34026, Defense Acquisitions: How DOD
Acquires Weapon Systems and Recent Efforts to Reform the Process.
Legislative Proposals
Congress may incorporate provisions related to the defense acquisition process or individual acquisition
programs in multiple titles in an NDAA. A recurring NDAA title (i.e., Title VIII of Division A) typically
addresses acquisition policy, acquisition management, and related matters. In general, Congress uses the
NDAA to establish or disestablish, amend, or direct a study of elements of, and processes related to,
defense acquisitions. For example, the FY2022 NDAA established a commission to study the
effectiveness of the department’s Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE)— an
internal strategic planning process for allocating resources among the military departments, defense
agencies, and other components.
The FY2024 NDAA includes multiple provisions pertaining to acquisition policy, including those related
to capability development, DOD contracting, and that may mitigate foreign influence over DOD
contractors. Table 1 below summarizes selected provisions.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12225
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Table 1. Selected Acquisition Policy Provisions in the FY2024 NDAA
House-Passed H.R. 2670
Senate-Passed S. 2226
Enacted (P.L. 118-31)
DOD’s Capability Development Process
No similar provision.
Sec. 802 proposed to require DOD to
Sec. 811 adopts the Senate provision
develop a “streamlined” and
with amendments including requisites
modernized capability development
for the DOD requirements
requirements process, aligned with the
management process that “maximize
Adaptive Acquisition Framework, by
the use of commercial products or
2025.
commercial services.”
Sec. 803 proposed to require the
No similar provision.
Sec. 806 adopts the House provision
military services to designate a
with amendments including requiring
“Principal Technology Transition
that the Principal Technology
Advisor” to support service secretaries
Transition Advisor “develop policies
with the transition of new technologies
and processes for promoting to small
from research and development to
business concerns … and
fielding. This would include interfacing
nontraditional defense contractors …
with relevant DOD innovation
opportunities to license intellectual
organizations and program managers.
property developed by the
Department.”
No similar provision.
Sec. 803 proposed to give the Director Sec. 807 adopts the Senate provision
of the Strategic Capabilities Office
and requires that SCO Director’s staff
(SCO) the authority to conduct
include a “senior contracting official.”
acquisition activities, including the
who shall have the authorities
authority to negotiate memoranda of
described in the Senate-passed version.
agreement with DOD components and
military departments to procure
capabilities, equipment, and services on
behalf of SCO.
Sec. 851 proposed to require DOD to
No similar provision.
Not adopted.
launch a pilot program to conduct
competitions to procure and field
“attritable systems that solve urgent
operational needs.”
No similar provision.
Sec. 811 proposed to give Combatant
Sec. 843 adopts the Senate provision.
Commanders rapid and streamlined
contracting authorities for certain
time-sensitive and urgent situations.
DOD Contracting
Sec. 804 proposed to require DOD to
No similar provision.
Not adopted.
launch a pilot program to determine
whether certain contractors that
unsuccessful y protest a contract bid
loss should be required to reimburse
DOD for the costs to the government
of conducting the protest.
No similar provision.
Sec. 806 proposed to require a DOD
Sec. 875 adopts the Senate provision.
study on the feasibility and advisability
of establishing a default commercial
determination for the products and
services acquired by DOD.
Congressional Research Service
3
House-Passed H.R. 2670
Senate-Passed S. 2226
Enacted (P.L. 118-31)
No similar provision.
Sec. 815 proposed to exempt all
Sec. 827 adopts the Senate provision.
software contracts and subcontracts
from Earned Value Management (EVM)
requirements in the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS), and would raise the dol ar
threshold for EVM requirements.
No similar provision.
Sec. 817 proposed to require DOD to
Sec. 874 adopts the Senate provision
launch a pilot program providing higher with amendments including requiring
progress payment rates to incentivize
that DOD develop incentive criteria
contractors to meet certain criteria,
for the pilot program.
including meeting small business
subcontracting goals and adhering to
delivery schedule.
Sec. 844 proposed to amend the Small
Sec. 862 adopts the Senate provision.
Business Act to provide measures to
encourage DOD contractors to
provide more timely payments to
subcontractors.
Mitigating Foreign Influence in DOD Contracting
Sec. 808 proposed to require
Sec. 812 proposed to amend 10 U.S.C.
The House provision was not adopted.
contractors providing consulting
4871 to add additional restrictions and
Sec. 823 adopts Sec. 812 of the Senate-
services to DOD to disclose any
procedures for preventing covered
passed NDAA.
previous contracts or financial awards
persons or entities from contracting
from covered entities, including entities with DOD.
Sec. 812 adopts Sec. 819 of the Senate-
with connections to the governments
passed NDAA, with additional
of the People’s Republic of China or
definitions included.
the Russian Federation, as well as
Sec. 819 proposed to increase
several entity lists maintained by the
statutory requirements to confirm that
Department of Commerce.
contractors do not have conflicts of
interest, including contracts, with
covered foreign entities, including
entities with connections to the
governments of the People’s Republic
of China or the Russian Federation.
Contractors found to have conflicts of
interest with covered entities would be
subject to additional surveillance.
Source: CRS analysis of legislation on Congress.gov.
Discussion
DOD’s Capability Development Process
Some defense experts and policymakers have argued for a need for DOD to improve and/or accelerate its
acquisition processes for new, innovative technologies.
Several provisions in the FY2024 NDAA aim to modify acquisition processes, delegate authorities and
responsibilities, and create new organizations to improve both how DOD develops capabilities and the
speed at which such capabilities are developed and fielded.
Congressional Research Service
4
DOD Contracting
DOD contracting is a longstanding issue of interest for Congress. Media coverage in 2023 concerning
DOD contract pricing and subcontractor cash flow has generated congressional interest in the topic.
The FY2024 NDAA contains several provisions related to DOD contractor transparency and adherence to
regulation.
Mitigating Foreign Influence in DOD Contracting
Some Members of Congress have expressed interest in preventing adversarial governments from having
financial and other ties to DOD contractors, particularly after DOD identified China as the “pacing
challenge” (i.e., the challenge against which to “pace” armed forces development) as well as department
efforts to prevent foreign ownership, control, and influence (FOCI) in its supply chain.
Such interest is reflected in FY2024 NDAA provisions that increase reporting requirements regarding
FOCI and increase restrictions on contractors found to have FOCI risk.
Author Information
Alexandra G. Neenan
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.
IN12225 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED