Text of Senate Amendment 6609

On 2026-07-13, Senator David McCormick (R-PA) delivered a floor speech titled "Text Of Senate Amendment 6609" in the Senate.

Text of Senate Amendment 6609

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 113 (Monday, July 13, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 113 (Monday, July 13, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S3801-S3803] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6609. Mr. McCORMICK submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the appropriate place in title XVI, insert the following: Subtitle __--Unmanned System Command and Control Integration Assessment SEC. __1. SHORT TITLE. This subtitle may be cited as the ``Unmanned System Command and Control Integration Assessment Act of 2026''. SEC. __2. ASSESSMENT OF UNMANNED SYSTEM COMMAND AND CONTROL FRAMEWORKS. (a) Assessment Required.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Chief Information Officer, Joint Interagency Task Force 401, the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency, the Commander of Joint Interoperability Test Command, and the Secretaries of the military departments, commence a comprehensive assessment of open-architecture, unmanned system command and control frameworks with demonstrated operational effectiveness. (b) Scope of Allied and Partner System Review.--The assessment commenced under subsection (a) shall review each of the following allied and partner country unmanned systems command and control frameworks and may include such additional frameworks as the Secretary determines appropriate: (1) Ukraine's Delta battlefield management and unmanned aircraft systems coordination system, including an analysis of its technical architecture, its operational effectiveness in contested environments, the interoperability and integration lessons learned from its deployment that are applicable to United States Armed Forces unmanned aircraft systems command and control operations, and its cybersecurity resilience under active electronic warfare and cyber attack. (2) Israel's Multiple Drone Operating System, including an analysis of its technical architecture, its demonstrated operational effectiveness in managing simultaneous civilian, commercial, and military unmanned aircraft systems operations, the interoperability and integration lessons learned from its deployment that are applicable to United States Armed Forces unmanned aircraft systems command and control operations, and its cybersecurity and emergency prioritization mechanisms. (c) Elements of Assessment.--The assessment commenced under subsection (a) shall address, at a minimum, each of the following elements: (1) Architectural analysis, including-- (A) a comparative analysis of the technical architectures of the unmanned systems command and control frameworks reviewed, including data formats, communication protocols, interface standards, and software design approaches; (B) an evaluation of the degree to which each framework employs open-architecture and modular open-systems architecture principles; and (C) an identification of the architectural characteristics most associated with operational effectiveness, adaptability, and resilience in contested environments. (2) Unmanned systems tier compatibility, including-- (A) an evaluation of each framework's capacity to manage all unmanned systems within a single integrated command and control environment; (B) an identification of the technical and doctrinal barriers to command and control interoperability across unmanned systems s within a single framework; and (C) a recommendation for the minimum capability requirements a Department unmanned systems command and control framework must meet to support effective employment of unmanned systems across all in a joint operational environment. (3) Interoperability with existing Department systems, including-- (A) a detailed assessment of the compatibility and interoperability requirements for integrating an open- architecture unmanned system command and control framework with current and future Department command and control modernization, as designated by the Secretary at the time of the assessment; (B) an identification of the interface standards, data translation requirements, and technical integration pathways that would be necessary to achieve such interoperability; and (C) an assessment of the risks associated with integration, including cybersecurity risks arising from connecting an open-architecture system to existing classified networks. (4) Cybersecurity and future-proofing, including-- (A) an assessment of the cybersecurity posture of each framework reviewed, including its resilience to electronic warfare, Global Positioning System denial, communications jamming, and software-based cyber attack in active contested environments; (B) a recommendation for a cybersecurity standards framework or updates to the Risk Management Framework of the National Institute of Standards and Technology applicable to a Department unmanned system command and control system that-- (i) is based on the Cybersecurity Framework 2.0, published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and applicable special publications of the Institute, and is designed to incorporate updated guidance from the Institute without requiring legislative action; (ii) incorporates a comprehensive supply chain risk management strategy; (iii) implements robust data-centric security controls, including end-to-end data encryption, data tagging for automated policy enforcement, and accredited cross-domain solutions to prevent compromise between classification levels and to enable secure data interoperability with mission partners; (iv) establishes vulnerability disclosure and patch management standards enabling timely response to newly identified threats without requiring system-wide redesign; and (v) specifies a recurring review cycle of not less than once every 18 months to update cybersecurity standards as the National Institute of Standards and Technology and other relevant standards bodies publish new guidance, without requiring legislative action; and (vi) mandates alignment with Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA), ensuring all data, applications, assets, and services are managed with the assumption that the network is already compromised; (C) an assessment of how the architecture of the framework can accommodate future unmanned systems technologies, including autonomous systems, artificial intelligence-enabled targeting and deconfliction, swarming capabilities, and beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations, without requiring full system replacement; and (D) a recommended technology refresh cycle and associated governance process for keeping a Department unmanned system command and control framework current with advancing technology and evolving threats. (5) Tactical adaptability and field-level flexibility, including-- (A) an assessment of the mechanisms within each framework reviewed that enable tactical-level operators and commanders to modify, adapt, or extend command and control functionality without depending on centralized software updates or acquisition processes, drawing on documented examples from the conflict in Ukraine where unmanned aircraft systems tactics evolved within weeks in response to adversary countermeasures; (B) a recommended design approach for a Department framework that preserves appropriate security and safety controls while enabling tactical-level customization, including through the use of application programming interfaces, modular software components, and operator- accessible configuration tools; and (C) an assessment of the doctrinal, training, and organizational changes required to enable and sustain field- level innovation within a structured command and control architecture. (6) Classification and technology transfer, including-- [[Page S3802]] (A) an assessment of the classification implications of a Department unmanned system command and control framework, including recommendations for which components may operate at unclassified levels to maximize interoperability with allied and commercial systems, and which must be classified; (B) an assessment of the technology transfer and foreign military sales implications of the frameworks reviewed, including intellectual property and national security considerations associated with adopting or adapting systems developed by or with foreign partners; and (C) recommendations for information-sharing arrangements with other United States Government organizations, allies, and partner nations that would facilitate ongoing exchange of unmanned systems command and control lessons learned and technical standards. (7) Implementation roadmap, including-- (A) a recommended phased implementation approach for developing and fielding a Department unmanned system command and control framework, including recommended near-term pilot programs or exercises that could demonstrate technical feasibility and operational utility; (B) an estimate of the resources, including funding, personnel, and acquisition authorities, required to develop and field the recommended framework; and (C) an identification of existing Department programs, platforms, and acquisition vehicles that could serve as the basis for or be accelerated by an unmanned system command and control capability. SEC. __3. INDEPENDENT ADVISORY PANEL. (a) Establishment.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish an independent advisory panel (in this section referred to as the ``P