Nouvelles

Nathan Strout An early version of the Senate's annual defense bill would provide additional funding for space-based sensors capable of detecting and tracking hypersonic weapons, according to a summary released June 11. However, details on the proposal are scant. Congress has become increasingly concerned over the threat posed by hypersonic weapons under development by China and Russia. Too dim to be reliably picked up by current space-based sensors and able to maneuver around terrestrial sensors, hypersonic weapons make much of the current missile warning system obsolete, as it was designed for ballistic missile threats. To counter this threat, the Defense Department has proposed a solution: a proliferated constellation of satellites operating in low Earth orbit. Once a hypersonic threat is detected, the constellation tracks it while passing custody from satellite to satellite as the weapon moves around the globe. This Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor, or HBTSS, will be part of the new National Defense Space Architecture, a proliferated constellation that will eventually be made up of hundreds of small satellites operating primarily in low Earth orbit. The Space Development Agency is overseeing this effort and plans to begin placing its first satellites on orbit in fiscal 2022. The Missile Defense Agency listed HBTSS as an unfunded priority during the prior budget cycle, and ultimately Congress did allocate $108 million to the agency for the program in FY20. Now the Senate Armed Services Committee says it will provide additional funding for the program for FY21, but it has yet to say by how much. The summary also does not note where the funding for HBTSS will go. Determining which agency would be in charge of HBTSS was a source of friction between the Pentagon and Congress in 2019, with the latter pushing for MDA to take primary responsibility for the effort, while the White House claimed it was too early to put one agency in charge. Ultimately, legislation passed by Congress in December directed MDA to be the lead agency for the development and deployment of HBTSS. However, the Missile Defense Agency's proposed FY21 budget transfers HBTSS funding responsibility to the Space Development Agency. At the same time, MDA awarded four $20 million contracts to companies to develop HBTSS prototypes in October. The four companies selected were Northrop Grumman, Leidos, Harris Corporation and Raytheon. The SDA recently issued a request for proposals for wide field of view satellites that references medium field of view satellites which are expected to be launched in 2023. According to SDA Director Derek Tournear, those will be the first space components of MDA's HBTSS. Still, it's unclear whether Congress will endorse moving HBTSS funding responsibility to SDA in FY21. When faced with criticism over that move from legislators at a March hearing, MDA Director Vice Adm. Jon Hill assured them that his agency would remain in charge of sensor development for HBTSS, with SDA providing money to MDA for the effort. Hill said the decision to move the funding was made by Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Michael Griffin SDA is asking for $137 million for space technology development in FY21, which includes funding for space sensor technology. The agency expects to begin placing payloads on orbit in FY22. The budget request does not specifically break out funding for HBTSS. MDA has also asked for $207 million for hypersonic defense. That funding will help the agency develop a regional glide phase weapon system and maturing technologies for future hypersonic defense architectures. It does not include funding specifically for HBTSS, as that has transitioned to SDA. CORRECTION: This story has been corrected to show that the medium field of view satellites are not part of the SDA's wide field of view solicitation. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/06/11/senate-bill-promises-more-funding-for-space-based-hypersonic-defense-but-mum-on-details/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Plans for a Senate-crafted version of the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, a new military fund to boost deterrence against China in the Pacific, is one step closer to becoming law. The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved nearly $6 billion for the fund in its version of the annual defense policy bill, the panel announced Thursday. It authorizes $1.4 billion in fiscal 2021, which would be $188.6 million above the administration's budget request, and $5.5 billion for fiscal 2022. The bill also directs the defense secretary to create a spending plan for all of the funds. “The best way to protect U.S. security and prosperity in Asia is to maintain a credible balance of military power, but, after years of underfunding, America's ability to do so is at risk,” the committee's summary stated. “The FY21 [National Defense Authorization Act] establishes the Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI) to send a strong signal to the Chinese Communist Party that America is deeply committed to defending our interests in the Indo-Pacific. “PDI will enhance budgetary transparency and oversight, focus resources on key military capability gaps, reassure U.S. allies and partners, and bolster the credibility of American deterrence in the Indo-Pacific.” Though not all details of the fund were immediately made public, SASC Chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., and ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., previously said they would sponsor a measure to enable U.S. military operations in the region, beyond supporting new weapons platforms. Defense Secretary Mark Esper has said China is his department's top adversary, but said Congress has worked to sharpen the Pentagon's spending and focus in the region. The PDI would follow the form of the multiyear European Deterrence Initiative, which has consumed $22 billion since its inception after Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. Congress will have to internally negotiate the final dollar amount for PDI and what those funds would buy, but House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., and ranking member Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, have expressed support for the idea. Though the Senate's approach differs, Thornberry has also proposed spending $6 billion―all in FY21―on priorities that include air and missile defense systems as well as new military construction in partner countries; Smith hasn't released his own plan. Once approved by the full Senate, its version of the NDAA would be reconciled with the House's version, which the HASC is expected to make public late this month before it goes through markup July 1 and advances to the House floor. With an eye on China beyond the PDI, the SASC bill also encourages the Air Force to establish an operating location in the Indo-Pacific region for F-35A fighter jets and to allocate “sufficient resources and prioritize the protection of air bases that might be under attack from current or emerging cruise missiles and advanced hypersonic missiles, specifically from China." There are also a number of provisions aimed at safeguarding America's technology and industrial base from Chinese intellectual property theft and “economic aggression,” according to the summary. The bill would also require reports from the Pentagon on how to mitigate the risks from vendors like Chinese telecom firms Huawei and ZTE when basing U.S. troops overseas. The SASC summary said its proposed PDI would: Increase lethality of the joint force in the Pacific, including by improving active and passive defense against theater cruise, ballistic and hypersonic missiles for bases, operating locations and other critical infrastructure. Enhance the design and posture of the joint force in the Indo-Pacific region by transitioning from large, centralized and unhardened infrastructure to smaller, dispersed, resilient and adaptive basing; increasing the number of capabilities of expeditionary airfields and ports; enhancing pre-positioning of forward stocks of fuel, munitions, equipment and materiel; and improving distributed logistics and maintenance capabilities in the region to ensure the sustainment of logistics under persistent multidomain attack. Strengthen alliances and partnerships to increase capabilities, improve interoperability and information sharing, and support information operations capabilities with a focus on countering malign influence. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/11/senate-panel-oks-6-billion-military-fund-to-confront-china/

DEFENSE Des missions sans GPS pour l'armée de l'Air gr'ce à Sodern et Safran E&D Sodern, filiale d'ArianeGroup et leader mondial des viseurs d'étoiles pour satellites, et Safran Electronics & Defense, filiale de Safran, développent un système de visée stellaire diurne et nocturne pour avions militaires. Ce système permettra aux forces armées françaises de s'affranchir de toute dépendance au GNSS (GPS et Galileo), qui pourrait être brouillé ou leurré lors de combat à haute intensité. «La France est pionnière de cette technologie et pourrait être, à terme, la première nation disposant d'une telle capacité opérationnelle», explique Jean-Marc Espinasse, le directeur de la stratégie et de l'innovation chez Sodern, dans La Tribune. «On croit vraiment à son apport capacitaire, qui va donner une vraie supériorité opérationnelle à nos forces lors de combat à haute intensité», ajoute-t-il. Sélectionnés en 2016 par la DGA et par l'Agence d'Innovation Défense (AID), les deux entreprises ont mis au point un démonstrateur, qui fonctionne déjà au sol, après une campagne d'essais réalisée fin 2019. Une campagne d'essais en vol est prévue à l'automne. Le système pourrait être opérationnel sur un avion de l'armée française (Rafale, A400M, MRTT...) d'ici à cinq ans, selon Jean-Marc Espinasse. Outre les avions, d'autres porteurs comme les navires, les drones voire les véhicules terrestres sont envisageables. La Tribune et Air & Cosmos du 12 juin

Des chercheurs américains spécialisés dans l'Intelligence Artificielle projettent de créer un avion de combat autonome capable d'abattre un avion de chasse piloté par un humain. L'US Air Force devrait organiser un tel combat en juillet 2021, selon Air Force Magazine. L'Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) travaille depuis 2018 sur un système automatisé basé sur des techniques d'Intelligence Artificielle qui puisse prendre le dessus sur un avion de chasse piloté par un humain lors d'un combat air-air. La technologie du projet, baptisé «Bigmoon shot», s'appuie sur le deep machine learning. Air Force Magazine et L'Usine Nouvelle du 12 juin

By: Usman Ansari ISLAMABAD — The Pakistani government's restrictions on the defense industry are stifling potential and must go, according to the president of the trade body Pakistan Aerospace Council. PAeC is a collective of aerospace, defense and high-tech electronics enterprises that aims to internationally raise the profile of Pakistani industry. Its leader, Haroon Qureshi, heads the defense engineering and electronics company East West Infiniti. In a June 3 post on the PAeC website, Qureshi said Pakistan's private, high-tech manufacturers have the potential to help establish a more ambitious local aviation industry by acting as suppliers to and manufacturers of components and systems used by Western counterparts. However, this is hampered by government restrictions that demand permission prior to even design work. Without these restrictions, Qureshi believes the private sector could “leap-frog, especially with electronics of the future.” Citing the success of private space companies in the United States, Qureshi said if the Pakistani government frees the high-tech private sector to “innovate and do what the private industry thinks is feasible and viable,” those businesses would not use public funds and probably generate income for the government through taxes. In response to PAeC's comments, the Ministry of Defence Production told Defense News the government recognizes and actively promotes the importance of “indigenization and cooperation between the private sector and the defense-related industry.” However, it denied there are stifling constraints on the private sector, saying the market meets both domestic and export demand, but because of “international obligations/treaties, especially the measures taken to counter terrorism, certain limitations have to be observed.” Nevertheless, the ministry added, “measures are under deliberation to further facilitate the private sector in forthcoming defense production policy,” including the creation of a unit for so-called one-window operations — an approach meant to shorten the lengthy bureaucratic process. It also cited recent supplier and vendors exhibitions as well as a defense production seminar to promote cooperation among private businesses. The government is also preparing a “Defence Offset Policy" to encourage the private sector to absorb the “latest defense and dual-purpose technologies,” the ministry said. But author, analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad Brian Cloughley said Qureshi's concern has existed for years, and the government's regulations are driven by security fears. “Whenever private industry wants to get involved in any aspect of defense production, the security people and bureaucrats in the defense system roll out objections, based mainly on the possibility of leakage of technical information and thus jeopardy of ‘national security,' ” he said. “It's been a real headache, and I continue to be surprised that the private sector has continued its efforts for so long.” Despite the government's efforts, Shehzad Ahmed Mir, managing director of the private defense company Bow Systems, remains unconvinced. “While MoDP lives in a self-pleasing, make-believe cocoon devoid of market realities, similar companies created much later in the West are literally thriving financially and technologically today simply because their respective governments gave them subsidies, export incentives, financial support, etc., compared to our government that drowns their ambitions in [no objection certificates], taxation whirlpools, bureaucratic hurdles, etc.,” he said. “So by the time — and if at all — MoDP comes out with any good news for the private sector, there won't be anyone credible around to jubilate on it.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/06/10/pakistans-private-industry-clashes-with-government-over-regulations/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The Pentagon is facing billions of dollars in pandemic-related claims, which may force it to dip into modernization and readiness accounts if Congress doesn't backfill the money, the department's top acquisitions official said Wednesday. Testifying at the House Armed Services Committee, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord reaffirmed the Pentagon's commitment to request supplemental appropriations from Congress, beyond its fiscal 2021 budget of $740 billion. It's been seven weeks since Department of Defense officials first publicly disclosed a request was coming; that request is currently sitting with the White House Office of Management and Budget. The defense industry claims are expected to be covered by Section 3610 of the coronavirus relief package, among other provisions, Lord said. To give an idea of the scope, one of the major prime contractors told the DoD it and its suppliers could claim as much as $1 billion. Under Section 3610, the Pentagon and other agencies can reimburse suppliers for expenses to keep workers employed. Under other provisions, contractors can seek reimbursement for leave and DoD-directed purchases of personal protective equipment, cleaning, and costs associated with spacing out workers in factories. “The department does not have the funding to cover these costs,” Lord said, which she later said were “in the lower end” of “double-digit billions of dollars.” Lord affirmed the Defense Department would need Congress to pass supplemental appropriations beyond its fiscal 2021 budget during an exchange with HASC ranking member Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. “Otherwise these contractors are going to have to eat several billion dollars, which could well come at their employees' expense, which this was supposed to help to begin with,” Thornberry noted. “There's a choice there,” Lord said. “Whether we want to eat into readiness and modernization ― and slow down modernization or readiness on an ongoing basis ― or whether we want to remedy the situation in the next six months or so ... and continue to have the ready forces we need for our national security.” Though some House Democrats have expressed reservations about the size of the Pentagon's budget request, HASC Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chairman Joe Courtney, D-Conn., expressed support, saying: "The intent of Congress needs to be followed up on with an appropriation.” Courtney called on the DoD to provide Congress the data underlying its request, when the request actually arrives on Capitol Hill, saying it would foster conversation among lawmakers. The Pentagon has rough calculations, but contractors have not yet filed claims, Lord said, because Congress has not drafted an appropriations bill. She speculated the full extent of the issues will emerge over time. “I believe they are concerned that they'll get a one-time shot and want to make sure what the entire situation is,” she said. “We believe we understand the lower end of the number.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/10/defense-industrys-covid-costs-could-tank-dod-modernization-plans/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The Army's Improved Turbine Engine Program is facing a “critical” stretch which will determine whether testing on the engine will occur on time or be delayed, thanks to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, a pair of Army officials said Wednesday. Patrick Mason, the program executive officer for Army aviation, and Brig. Gen. Walter Rugen, the director for future vertical lift inside Army Futures Command, said that the service has finished its component critical design review (CDR) process, and has moved on to its full program CDR, a key milestone before moving into testing. However, “given COVID and all of the factors that have gone on with COVID,” the plan to have the full CDR done during second quarter has been pushed to third quarter, Mason said at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation. ITEP is “the number one watch item we've had across the future vertical lift portfolio for COVID impacts,” Mason said, because “hardware needs to be coming in the latter part of this year so we can test at the component level, assemble into the engine, and then go to first engine test.” “So that's going to be critical over the next month to two months, to see where we stand on hardware deliveries with that, and then whether or not we will reach first engine test at the time that we had originally stated,” he said, noting the plan is for engine tests to proceed in 2021. Mason also noted that the delay is less dramatic than it may seem, because the original plan for ITEP called for the full CDR to be completed in the fourth quarter of this year; the Army felt it was ahead of schedule enough to shift that target to second quarter, until COVID caused the delay. In other words, CDR being completed in Q3 still means the program is ahead of its original baseline. General Electric Aviation won the $517 million award for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase in February 2019. The requirements included developing a 3,000 shaft horsepower engine that reduces fuel consumption by 25 percent and increases service life by 20 percent compared to the legacy T700 currently used in the Army's AH-64 Apache and UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters. In addition to replacing the engines on those two leacy platforms, ITEP is expected to power the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, or FARA design. For the heavier future rotorcraft known as the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft, or FLRAA, the Army is looking at a heavier engine design, although the companies competing for the design will have the ability to pick their own engine designs as part of their pitches. “We really think the efficiencies there with a two engines strategy across all of Army aviation's tactical fleet would be a powerful way to go at both readiness and affordability concerns,” said Rugen. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/06/10/the-next-few-months-are-critical-for-the-armys-new-helicopter-engine/

By: David B. Larter , Joe Gould , and Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — U.S. President Trump ordered a review of the country's requirements for icebreaking capabilities in the Arctic and Antarctic regions, with the goal of getting a fleet in place by 2029, according to a memo released Tuesday. The memo was directed at the Defense, State, Commerce and Homeland Security departments, as well as the Office of Management and Budget. Much of it directs work already in progress — including building a fleet of at least three heavy icebreakers — but says the remaining ships not under contract should be reviewed for what can be done to maximize their utility in the frozen poles. The memo calls for “an assessment of expanded operational capabilities, with estimated associated costs, for both heavy and medium [polar security cutters] not yet contracted for, specifically including the maximum use of any such PSC with respect to its ability to support national security objectives.” That assessment is due in 60 days. Trump's directive to assess the current plan to field an Arctic maritime capability over the next decade is the latest sign that the administration is increasingly concerned about Russian and Chinese activity in the northern region, which could threaten America's interests in crucial chokepoints, such as the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap. In April 2019, the U.S. Coast Guard announced it had signed a $746 million contract with VT Halter Marine of Pascagoula, Mississippi, for the detailed design and construction of its first polar security cutter — the first of the heavy icebreakers. And with the fiscal 2021 budget submission now before Congress, the Coast Guard says it can fully fund a second polar security cutter, according to a Congressional Research Service report. But the memo calls for a review of what the appropriate mix of ships should be for an Arctic fleet, suggesting that some changes to the three planned medium polar security cutters could be on the table. The memo asks for “use cases in the Arctic that span the full range of national and economic security missions (including the facilitation of resource exploration and exploitation and undersea cable laying and maintenance) that may be executed by a class of medium PSCs, as well as analysis of how these use cases differ with respect to the anticipated use of heavy PSCs for these same activities." “These use cases shall identify the optimal number and type of polar security icebreakers for ensuring a persistent presence in both the Arctic and, as appropriate, the Antarctic regions,” he memo continues. It also raises the possibility of nuclear-powered icebreakers, currently only operated by Russia, which would give the polar security cutter more persistent presence in the Arctic, since it would not need to refuel. The memo also calls for the study to identify two basing locations in the United States for its ice-hardened fleet, as well as two international locations. A study mandated by last year's National Defense Authorization Act mandated that the Defense Department study locations for a port in the Arctic. Furthermore, given that the Coast Guard has a lone operational heavy icebreaker, the 44-year-old Polar Star, the memo calls for the agencies to identify potential vessels that could be leased as a stop-gap measure. The 2029 date set by Trump corresponds with the year that both the Coast Guard's current ice breakers, the medium icebreaker Healy and the heavy icebreaker Polar Star are slated to be out of service. Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, a forceful advocate on the Senate Armed Services Committee for directing more resources toward the Arctic, said the memo would “add weight” to ongoing efforts to build up America's presence in the Arctic. “Our adversaries are well ahead of the United States when it comes to Arctic infrastructure,” Sullivan said in a statement. “We have one heavy and one medium functioning Polar-class icebreakers, while Russia has more than 50. “I have fought for five years to bring Arctic issues to the forefront, including in the FY19 NDAA to authorize the building of six such icebreakers and my bill, the Strategic Arctic Naval Focus Act, to develop the capabilities and basing locations needed to support persistent presence in the Arctic.” While the president's memo appeared to catch regional observers by surprise, its content lines up with the administration's rhetoric on the region, said Erik Brattberg, director of the Europe Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “The Trump administration has shown a greater interest in Arctic issues in recent years, driven especially by China's growing presence in the region,” Brattberg said. “While America's allies and partners in Northern Europe would welcome a greater U.S. presence in the Arctic, they are also wary of the region becoming increasingly marked by zero-sum, great power competition between the U.S., Russia and China.” Leasing icebreakers If the U.S. were to lease icebreakers for missions such as the annual breaking out of the National Science Foundation's research facility in Antarctica, McMurdo Station, three nations seem most likely to be able to fill the niche: Canada, Finland and Sweden. All three have rare excess icebreaker capacity, and all three would likely welcome the business. Finland, whose industry claims to have “designed about 80 percent of the world's icebreakers” and produced “about 60 percent” of the world's fleet, has hoped to break into the American market for years. The leasing opportunity could provide a foothold for Helsinki, although issues may arise with the U.S. Jones Act that may complicate the act of America outright buying a Finnish-made icebreaker. The law is meant to provide stability to the U.S. maritime industry by supporting domestic business. “The White House announcement will likely be music in the ears of Finland, which has been trying to sell or lease icebreakers to the U.S. for years,” Brattberg said. It is also possible that Sweden and Finland — two European Union, non-NATO states that have close relations — could try to create some form of joint offering for America's needs. The U.S. has leased icebreakers for the McMurdo mission from Sweden and Russia as late as 2012 — just prior to the souring of relations between the West and Russia over the latter's annexation of Crimea. But such an arrangement often limits how the vessel can be used under the terms of the lease. In 2017, a study by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine mandated by Congress the year before, concluded that leasing icebreakers was not a viable path for the Coast Guard. “Chartering (an operating lease) is not a viable option,” the study found. “The availability of polar icebreakers on the open market is extremely limited. (The committee is aware of the sale of only one heavy icebreaker since 2010.) U.S. experience with chartering a polar icebreaker for the McMurdo resupply mission has been problematic on two prior charter attempts. “Chartering is workable only if the need is short term and mission specific. The committee notes that chartering may preclude USCG from performing its multiple missions.” In the Coast Guard's own 2019 environmental impact study for the Polar Security Cutter program, the service concluded that there were no vessels available to lease that would “substantially meet” the operational requirement for its icebreaking needs. Furthermore, any lease would need to be such that the Coast Guard provide the manning, training and equipping of the vessel — assuming all the costs — while still paying for the privilege of having it, making such an arrangement a financially dubious prospect. Frozen flashpoint The White House's decree comes in the context of a larger refocusing of national attention to the Arctic, as warming waters and melting ice open more time-efficient shipping routes and give nations greater access to natural resources that may have once been cost-prohibitive to reach. Russia in particular has made clear to the international community that it has core economic interests there and will defend them, even building icebreakers with cruise missiles and deck guns to patrol frozen waters. The country, with 7,000 miles of Arctic coast, sees the region as both a security liability and a key to its long-term economic success. President Vladimir Putin in 2017 put estimates of the mineral wealth in the region at $30 trillion. In a February hearing before the congressional Transportation and Maritime Security Subcommittee, the State Department's deputy assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, Michael Murphy, testified that Russia's military buildup in the Arctic threatens the United States' and NATO's northern flank. Although Russia has cooperated on oil spill response and search-and-rescue missions, the U.S. views the country's moves with suspicion, especially in the establishment of an Arctic base and the installation of coastal missile batteries, early warning radars and air defenses, Murphy said in testimony. “The Russian military buildup in the Arctic has implications beyond its waters,” he said. “From a geostrategic perspective, the Arctic and the North Atlantic are inextricably linked. The Arctic provides Russian ships and submarines with access to a critical naval chokepoint: the GIUK gap that plays an outsized role in NATO's defense and deterrence strategy. Underwater trans-Atlantic cables also run through this area." “In short, NATO's northern flank must once again command the attention of the United States and its allies,” he added. Similar to its concerns for freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, which has become a flashpoint in Sino-U.S. relations, the U.S. is taking issue with Russia's attempt to force shippers to use Russian pilots and pay for use of the Northern Sea Route, which runs through Russia's exclusive economic zone. Russia has heavily invested in icebreakers to keep the Northern Sea Route open for as long as possible each year, and therefore the country views it as something of a toll road. “Russia's restrictions on the freedom of navigation in the Northern Sea Route are inconsistent with international law,” Murphy said. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/09/trump-memo-demands-new-fleet-of-arctic-icebreakers-to-be-ready-by-2029/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― A key House Democrat will propose a billion-dollar pandemic response and preparedness fund in the annual defense policy bill, Defense News has learned. The bill would help boost production of key medical equipment sought by states amid the country's fight against the coronavirus pandemic. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., will include the measure in his committee's version of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act as a means to strengthen the Department of Defense and the country's ability to respond to a potential COVID-19 resurgence and other future infectious diseases, according to a House aide familiar with the proposal. The proposal comes as Smith and other Democrats have criticized President Donald Trump as neither sufficiently marshaling American industry to produce medical equipment like swabs, masks and ventilators, nor coordinating with states on their needs. Still, Trump has partially invoked the Defense Production Act, and the Pentagon has had a central role awarding millions of dollars in contracts to address shortages for these items. “Looking forward, I intend to include in this year's National Defense Authorization Act an effort to proactively look beyond the response to COVID-19 and increase preparedness and resilience for future pandemics,” Smith said in prepared remarks for Wednesday's HASC hearing on the DoD's efforts to mitigate the effects of the coronavirus pandemic. The U.S. military, Smith said, “has a unique ability to lead” in efforts to ramp up domestic production of key equipment, “given its experience in acquisition and stockpile management that has already been a deep resource to the federal government response.” At that hearing, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord is expected to testify that the DoD's Joint Acquisition Task Force has executed $284 million of a planned $312 million for medical resources ― and that there have been challenges in reducing America's dependence on overseas suppliers. “Reconstituting domestic production or creating new production that shifted offshore years ago often requires capital equipment expenditures, retooling, and re-training of the workforce,” Lord said in her prepared testimony. “It can be months before a supplier is fully capable of producing components or end-items at scale, and these timelines are taken into account when reviewing projects to ensure production increases align to prospective needs of medical items.” Major elements of Smith's proposal will aim to strengthen the small business supply chain for essential gear like personal protective equipment; improve the DoD's ability to rapidly acquire and manufacture response supplies using the organic industrial base; and increase DoD research funding for infectious disease detection, treatment and response technologies. Details of the proposal are expected to be released publicly with the bill in late June. The billion dollars for the fund would come from unspecified, “lower priority accounts” in the NDAA, the aide familiar with the proposal told Defense News. (The House and Senate are each expected to propose a $740 billion bill, in line with the most recent bipartisan budget agreement.) “The monies in this fund were identified through routine reviews of [the president's fiscal 2021] budget requests. The COVID crisis has made clear the need for a more aggressive effort to prepare for and enhance resilience in the face of future pandemics,” the aide said. “The approximate $1 billion is less than one-seventh of a percent of the overall DoD budget [request].” If passed into law, the legislation would seem to hand the Defense Department a mission of supporting domestic health care, which falls outside of its traditional responsibilities, said Todd Harrison, a defense budget analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It's not been a core area for DoD, but the reason people tend to turn to DoD in times like this is the military has the manpower and logistics infrastructure to mobilize and bring a lot of people to a problem very quickly: Do contact tracing, do testing, set up field hospitals,” Harrison said. “Plus, the NDAA is a must-pass piece of legislation every single year, so if you want something funded, you put it in and it will at least get a vote.” The Trump administration has been criticized for a delayed response to the outbreak and a lack of organization in providing tests and medical supplies. Smith, who steers the House version of the NDAA, has telegraphed for weeks that he might pursue action. He has already sent Trump a letter, signed by himself as well as House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., calling for a clear federal strategy to procure medical supplies and the aggregation of the country's needs. “100,000 deaths in the U.S. from #COVID19,” Smith said in a May 27 tweet. “Yet we still do not have an adequate national testing plan. We are still failing to use the full force of the Defense Production Act to produce the supplies we need.” On July 1, HASC is expected to mark up its version of the NDAA. The Senate Armed Services Committee this week began closed-door consideration of its version of the NDAA, which is typically reconciled with the House's bill. Because the NDAA is the authorization bill, Congress would have to follow suit in appropriations bills for Smith's forthcoming pandemic response and preparedness proposal to receive funding. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/10/defense-bill-to-include-billion-dollars-for-pandemic-response-and-preparedness/