As the House is set to take up the fiscal year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) this week, the White House has detailed its opposition to a slate of provisions in the bill to include continuing the sea-launched nuclear cruise missile program (SLCM-N) and authorizing early funding for one amphibious ship.

Over 1,500 amendments were proposed to the House’s version of the FY ‘24 NDAA, with the Rules Committee meeting on Tuesday to determine which will be considered during debate on the floor later this week.

U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. James Hecker, Air University commander and president, greets President Biden on May 3 at Maxwell AFB, Ala., before Biden’s visit to Lockheed Martin’s Troy, Ala., plant that builds Javelin anti-tank missiles (U.S. Air Force Photo)

The House Armed Services Committee on June 22 voted to advance its $886 billion FY ‘24 NDAA (Defense Daily, June 22). 

The Senate Armed Services Committee has also approved its own $886 billion version of the bill, with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) including that he hopes to “move this quickly” in a ‘Dear Colleague’ letter sent out on Sunday evening (Defense Daily, June 23). 

The White House’s statement of administration policy released on Monday notes it “strongly supports” enactment of the NDAA, while outlining concerns with an array of provisions in the House’s version of the bill.

The Biden administration reiterated its opposition to continued funding for the SLCM-N program, which it said “has marginal utility and would impede investment in other priorities,” after HASC adopted a provision to its NDAA for the Navy to establish a program of record for the new weapon.

“Further, deploying SLCM-N on Navy attack submarines or surface combatants would reduce capacity for conventional strike munitions, create additional burdens on Naval training, maintenance, and operations, and could create additional risks to the Navy’s ability to operate in key regions in support of our deterrence and warfighting objectives,” the White House wrote.

The president’s FY ‘24 budget request didn’t include funding for SLCM-N, similar to previous years, with the administration including an argument also made by some Democrats on HASC that the U.S. already has capabilities to achieve a similar deterrent effect, citing the W76-2 low-yield submarine-launched ballistic missile warhead and future Long-Range Standoff Weapon among others.

“Further investment in SLCM-N would divert resources and focus from higher modernization priorities for the U.S. nuclear enterprise and infrastructure,” the White House wrote.

The administration also said it’s “disappointed” the bill authorizes $600 million less than the $32.9 billion requested for shipbuilding, specifically citing the $1.5 billion cut to AS(X) next-generation submarine tender replacement program and the decision to add $750 million procurement of one San Antonio-class PPD-17 Flight II amphibious transport dock ship, the LPD-33.

HASC, as well as SASC, included authorizing funds for LPD-33 in each of their bills after the Navy did not include the ship in its FY ‘24 budget request and after the Marine Corps commandant included the platform at the top of the Marine Corps’ unfunded requirements list (Defense Daily, March 21).

Gen. David Berger, who retired as Marine Corps Commandant on Monday, said last month that HASC and SASC’s support for funding the one LPD-33 in their respective versions of the NDAA sends a “powerful signal” as congressional appropriators work through FY ‘24 spending bills (Defense Daily, June 27). 

Jay Stefany, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition, has said that given the most recent LPD is being procured in FY ‘23 the next one does not need to be purchased until FY ‘25 to keep an optimal production pace (Defense Daily, March 29).

The White House also said it strongly opposes the bill’s $550.6 million reduction to the Air Force’s Next-Generation Air Dominance program, which it said would “would delay the Engineering and Manufacturing Development contract award, reduce industry staffing on the current contracts and require deferral of other related efforts planned in FY 2024.”

The administration also said it opposes the $1.1 billion cut to the Navy’s classified F/A-XX next generation fighter program, a 70 percent reduction from the service’s request, adding it “leaves the acquisition strategy unexecutable.”

Monday’s note also pushes against the House NDAA’s plans to limit funds for retiring B83-1 nuclear gravity bombs, create a Space National Guard and shutter the Pentagon’s Office of Cost Estimate and Program Evaluation (CAPE).

“The dissolution of CAPE would lead to negative consequences as the secretary [of defense] would be left without the analysis necessary to build a strategy-driven budget across the Joint Force. CAPE provides independent, fact-based evaluation of competing resource requests from across the department and executes critical cross-cutting, joint strategic analysis,” the White House wrote. 

The White House also noted opposition to the bill’s provisions related to service members discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine and reversing Pentagon initiatives related to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, which were GOP-led amendments adopted along party lines during HASC’s markup last month.