HR 8070 Reported in House
FY 2025 NDAA
Last week, the House Armed Services Committee published their report on HR 8070, Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025. The reported bill includes two cybersecurity and two uncrewed aircraft system provision of potential interest here. The Committee completed their final markup of the bill on May 22nd, 2024 and ordered the bill reported favorably by a strongly bipartisan vote of 57 to 1.
The bill’s provisions of potential interest here include:
§902. Executive Agent for Countering Threats Posed by Small Unmanned Aircraft.
§924. Establishment Of the Drone Corps as A Basic Branch of the Army.
§1501. Authority to accept voluntary and uncompensated services from cybersecurity experts.
§1502. Establishment of the Department of Defense Hackathon program.
Cybersecurity Provisions
Section 1501 would amend 10 USC 167b(d) by authorizing the United States Cyber Command to “accept voluntary and uncompensated services from cybersecurity experts”. This is a specific exemption to the restrictions of 31 USC 1342 on accepting such services. The provision would allow Cyber Command to “delegate such authority to the chiefs of the armed forces”.
The Committee’s Report notes (pg 307) that this section “would solidify the legal basis for the United States Marine Corps Cyber Auxiliary [link added] program, as well as enable the other military services to establish their own Cyber Auxiliary programs.”
Section 1502 would require DOD’s Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer to “establish a program (to be known as the ``Department of Defense Hackathon Program'') under which the commanders of combatant commands and the Secretaries of the military departments shall carry out not fewer than four Hackathons each year.” To avoid the §1342 restrictions mentioned above, subsection (c)(1)(C)(i) requires each host to “provide to the participants invited to participate in such Hackathon a per diem allowance.
Subsection (e)(1) defines ‘hackathon’ as “an event carried out under the Program at which employees across the Department of Defense meet to collaboratively attempt to develop functional software or hardware solutions during the event to solve a critical, technical challenge determined by the host”.
Counter UAS Provisions
Section 902 would amend 10 USC Chapter 4 by adding a new section 149b, Executive agent for countering threats posed by small-unmanned aircraft. While this agent’s duties and responsibilities only apply to DOD activities, subsection (e) of this new section would rely on 49 USC 44801 for the definition of ‘counter-UAS system’, ‘unmanned aircraft’, and ‘small unmanned aircraft’. This reliance would make it easier for subsequent requirements for DHS and DOT agents to coordinate their counter-UAS activities with this new agent.
Section 924 would establish the Drone Corps as a basic branch of the US Army under 10 USC 7063(a). The new Corps would be responsible for programs, projects, and activities involving:
Small and medium unmanned aircraft,
Unmanned aircraft systems that include such aircraft, and
Counter-UAS systems.
Again, this is strictly an Army program, but further elevating and centralizing responsibility for drone related technology, training and tactics (including counter-UAS activities) will ensure that technology and tactics will receive additional attention, attention that will ultimately benefit law enforcement counter-UAS operations.
Cyber Discussions in Committee Report
The Committee Report includes the following cyber related discussions that may be of interest here:
Connected Vehicle Cybersecurity Center (pg 50),
Digital literacy at Army (pgs 52-3),
Enhanced environment for Multi-Domain Operations Cybersecurity Testing (pg 54),
Briefing on Cybersecurity Threats to Water Infrastructure (pg 296),
Clarification and Deconfliction of Responsibilities for Cybersecurity Functions within the Department of Defense (pg 298), and
Digital Reserves (pg 301).
While the Committee is primarily interested in tactical vehicle platforms and supporting infrastructure, this discussion more broadly encourages the Army Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC) to (pg 50) “continue to develop solutions and accelerate integrated technology demonstrations in coordination with industry, academia. Such solutions could help industry to develop such technologies for civilian vehicles.
The Committee requires DOD to prepare a report to Congress describing the Department of Defense’s efforts to deter and respond to malicious cyber activities, and the role of the Department in efforts to further strengthen the cyber security of critical infrastructure from adversary disruption. The report would include (Pg 296):
An overview of Department of Defense efforts to deter and respond to cyberattacks against domestic critical infrastructure from malicious actors and potential adversaries,
A description of ongoing and planned Department of Defense coordination and cooperation efforts with appropriate executive agencies in order to assist in securing domestic critical infrastructure, as such activities are described in the National Cybersecurity Strategy Implementation Plan, and
Such other information as the Secretary of Defense deems appropriate.
The Committee discussion on cyber reserves focuses on the military benefit that Active Reservists with relevant military and civilian skills and credentials could bring to providing necessary assistance in addressing those needs, supplementing those who are managing the digital and cybersecurity needs already. The periodic active-duty training and operations of such personnel would also bring benefits to their civilian employers, more than offsetting the cost of their missing time at their main jobs.
Moving Forward
Last week, the House Rules Committee called for potential amendments to HR 8070 with an amendment deadline of close of business on May 31st, 2024. To date there have been 1,259 proposed amendments submitted, 114 of those were submitted after the published deadline. To date there has been no meeting notice published for the Rules Committee to formulate the rule for the consideration of the bill.
Commentary
Normally, the approval of the reported version of the bill by a vote of 57 to 1, a strong show of bipartisan support for the bill, would mean that the bill would be expected to move smoothly through the floor consideration of the bill through a rule with various floor amendments being considered. In the 118th Congress, however, this could mean that the provisions of bill do not adequately target the objectives of the more conservative members of the Republican caucus. In the last year, that has frequently meant that the Rules Committee could not craft a rule for consideration of the bill, or if such a rule was developed, would be effectively vetoed by a small number of Republicans voting no.
The bipartisan support for the current bill, could allow the Leadership to bring the bill to the floor under the suspension of the rules process and depend on a number of Democratic votes to pass the bill. Each time that happens, the support of Speaker Johnson by the Republican fringe is further eroded.