With pressure mounting to get a budget in place, Congress finally rushed through passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) just before the holidays, and hope to push through an appropriations bill before the Jan. 15 deadline.

Not surprisingly, with so little time to work on the bill, Congress decided not to quibble on spending for the majority of programs and agreed to most of what the president requested on the defense side. However, there are always hot-button defense programs that Congress and the Pentagon can’t resist battling over, and this year’s budget is no exception.

In this special report, we highlight five programs in particular that have a lot riding on congressional ink in fiscal 2014, and just what the passage of the NDAA means for them.

MSF13-0082Super Hornet production not going anywhere — Up until the passage of the NDAA, all but one of the four defense committees — the Senate Armed Services Committee — had added $75 million to force the Navy to continue buying F/A-18E/F Super Hornets next year over concerns about a growing strike fighter shortfall in the coming years. With the passage of the NDAA, the SASC conceded to the HASC, and the $75 million remained in the final version of the act. In its fiscal 2014 budget submission, the Navy wanted to shut down production of the Super Hornet for good after Congress added planes last year, relying on a vigorous and expensive life extension program for aging F/A-18A-D Hornets as well as the arrival of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to keep the gap from ballooning. Congress, however, is clearly not at all confident in what it regards as a rather hopeful plan fraught with risks. With both committees on the appropriations side adding the same amount of funding in their bills, it doesn’t look like the Navy is going to be successful in ending Super Hornet production anytime soon.

523a2574ad5b9-f-35a(Mostly) full funding for the F-35 — After countless years of headaches, frustration, and ballooning costs, the development of the F-35 has been relatively quiet in recent years — and Congress isn’t eager to upset the apple cart, making only minor adjustments to the program in the NDAA for the second year in a row. The act, which only trims a small amount from Air Force F-35A procurement and Marine Corps F-35 research and development, also repealed some reporting requirements, but did call for keeping a watchful eye on the program as it continues through an extremely sensitive phase — software development. The appropriations committees opted to make deeper cuts in their bills, but they were mostly cosmetic as well, cutting no aircraft.

523a2574b09b4-lakota1House, Senate compromise on UH-72 — The authorizers reached a grand compromise on the Army’s hot-button UH-72A Lakota Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) program. The Republican-led HASC rebuffed the Pentagon’s move to shut down the program with a final buy of 10 aircraft this year, adding 21 aircraft and $115.1 million to its version of the bill. The Democratic-led SASC, however, sided with the president and made no changes. Ultimately, the two sides met in the middle and agreed on buying 20 helicopters for an additional $75 million in the NDAA. It’s unclear, however, if this move will satisfy UH-72 proponents, or if it will merely be the precursor to another fight next year, especially since the HASC had penciled in more Lakota procurement in fiscal 2015 and the Army is dead-set on closing out the program sooner rather than later. There’s also the question of what the appropriators will do, although they also appear to approve of greater Lakota production, with House appropriators adding 21 aircraft and Senate appropriators adding 10 in their bills.

120319-N-RO948-107Incrementally fund Virginia-class, or not? — The NDAA includes an increase of $492 million over the $2.93 billion the Navy requested for two Virginia-class attack submarines. Authorizers didn’t include language discussing the boost in funding, but the House Appropriations Bill passed in July suggests that lawmakers are at odds with the Navy over the question of incremental funding of the sub: the Navy wants to spread out spending on the vessels to relieve strain on its already swollen shipbuilding budget, but House appropriators wrote in their bill that they are reluctant to incrementally fund acquisition programs, especially in the case of the Virginia-class program where 18 subs have been fully funded before this year. Despite an apparent alignment between the NDAA and House appropriators on this issue, however, there are some major differences between the various bills. For one thing, Senate appropriators signed off on the Navy’s proposal without altering funding, and House appropriators added nearly double the extra funding — $950 million — as the NDAA. Therefore, it remains to be seen whether the final appropriations bill will fully fund or incrementally fund the program, and how closely the bill will resemble the NDAA’s halfway increase.

abramsMoney keeps flowing for Abrams tanks — For yet another year, the Army is asking Congress to refrain from shelling out funds for upgrades to M1 Abrams tanks, and for yet another year, it has fallen on deaf ears — so far. The NDAA includes $90 million to keep production humming at the Abrams production facility in Lima, Ohio, despite the Pentagon’s argument that the plant isn’t in danger even with reduced domestic spending due to a strong international market. Ohio lawmakers have fought hard to protect Abrams funding, arguing that the work is needed to keep the plant open, and it appears they have secured the backing of the rest of Congress. The battle isn’t over yet, as even though Senate appropriators added the same amount of money in their bill, House appropriators made no change to the president’s budget. However, the House bill states that while there are no funds provided for Abrams production, the committee will “continue to monitor Army force structure changes and the resulting impact on the required number of M1A2 tanks.” Such language, coupled with the passage of the NDAA and support of extra funding from Senate appropriators, suggest that there is a strong chance money will continue to flow from Washington, D.C. to Lima, Ohio.