The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) approved its annual defense policy bill on June 5 following an extensive markup session. The session resulted in the addition of numerous amendments, including provisions impacting the U.S. Air Force’s airborne battle management capabilities and broader military equipment maintenance policies.
One significant amendment, introduced by Representative Rob Wittman (R-Va.), aims to prohibit the Air Force from retiring any E-3 Sentry aircraft through fiscal year 2027. This measure seeks to safeguard the service’s critical airborne warning and control system (AWACS) capabilities. The amendment also mandates that the Air Force provide a detailed schedule for the procurement, fielding, and achievement of initial and full operating capability milestones for the E-7 Wedgetail aircraft, which is designated as the E-3’s successor.
The E-3 Sentry, often referred to as AWACS, has been a foundational asset in the Air Force’s fleet since the 1970s. These aircraft are instrumental in providing airborne command and control, as well as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, to U.S. and allied forces globally.
However, Air Force leadership has increasingly expressed concerns regarding the E-3’s operational relevance and structural integrity. The aircraft’s capabilities are considered outdated compared to those of potential adversaries, and the aging airframes present growing maintenance challenges, making it progressively difficult to keep the fleet operational. These concerns prompted the Air Force to contract with Boeing for the development and production of a replacement fleet, the E-7 Wedgetail.
The fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) previously included a provision that prohibited the Air Force from retiring or mothballing any of its then-16 E-3s. Representative Wittman’s amendment to the proposed fiscal year 2027 NDAA extends this prohibition through 2027.
Additionally, Wittman’s amendment revises the minimum number of E-3s the Air Force is required to maintain, lowering it from 16 to 15. This adjustment likely reflects the substantial damage sustained by an AWACS aircraft during a reported Iranian missile and drone strike on a base in Saudi Arabia in March. The amendment further stipulates that the Air Force Secretary must outline specific spending plans for the E-7 program.
The amendment also includes requirements for the Air Force to certify that its transition plan from E-3s to E-7s will not result in any degradation of airborne early warning, battle management, and command and control capabilities essential for combatant commanders. Furthermore, Congress seeks confirmation from the Air Force that any proposed E-3 retirements will not create operational gaps, reduce mission availability, or diminish responsiveness to combatant commanders’ needs.
Defense Department’s “Right to Repair”
In another significant development, the House Armed Services Committee adopted an amendment introduced by Representative Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.) aimed at enhancing the Defense Department’s authority to repair and maintain its own equipment.
In a June 5 statement, Representative Goodlander asserted that the amendment establishes a “clear default framework” for the military to acquire the necessary technical data and repair rights to sustain complex defense systems. She described the proposal, which empowers military personnel with the tools and information to repair their equipment, as both “common sense and deeply American.”
“For decades, our military has been forced to operate under a broken system that makes even routine repairs unnecessarily difficult, threatens readiness, and costs taxpayers billions of dollars,” Goodlander stated. “This amendment cuts red tape, closes loopholes, and helps ensure our warfighters can do the jobs we’ve asked them to.”
The adopted “right-to-repair” amendment would automatically grant the Defense Department rights to use technical data, computer software, or software documentation. This automatic grant would only be overridden if a contractor could clearly and convincingly demonstrate a legitimate reason for restricting those rights.
The amendment also mandates that the Pentagon prepare a report examining the feasibility of a “clawback” mechanism. This mechanism would allow the military to recover excess payments made to contractors in instances where improper restrictions on data or software rights were found to have been in place.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program has frequently been cited as a prominent example illustrating the military’s challenges in establishing its “right to repair.”
During the nascent stages of the F-35 program, the Pentagon made a strategic decision to have manufacturer Lockheed Martin conduct the majority of the jet’s maintenance, believing it would be more cost-effective. Consequently, the military did not require Lockheed Martin to provide comprehensive technical data essential for the military to conduct its own repairs on the aircraft.
This decision has since been a source of significant regret within the military. Former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall famously referred to the lack of data rights on the F-35 as “acquisition malpractice.”
A September 2023 report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) criticized the F-35 program’s contractor-led sustainment processes, noting their sluggishness. The report attributed this, in large part, to the government’s incomplete access to technical data from Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors. GAO officials at a depot repair facility reported that maintenance manuals for some critical parts were “ambiguous and rarely are detailed enough” to facilitate repairs.
The GAO report concluded that this situation meant personnel at the depots “not only cannot fix the part, but they cannot learn and understand how to fix the part,” severely impeding maintenance capabilities.
Representative Goodlander’s statement highlighted the advocacy of top military officials, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach. Both leaders have publicly supported a military “right-to-repair” policy, emphasizing its potential to foster cost savings, reduce reliance on contractors, and enhance overall readiness.
“Our military leaders have been remarkably clear: they need the ability to repair and maintain their own equipment,” Goodlander stated. “Congress should listen to them.”
Why This Matters
The amendments to the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act addressed by the House Armed Services Committee carry significant implications for U.S. national security, military readiness, and defense spending.
The debate surrounding the E-3 Sentry and E-7 Wedgetail transition underscores a critical challenge for modern air forces: balancing the need to maintain essential capabilities with the imperative to modernize against evolving threats. Airborne battle management, command and control, and intelligence gathering provided by AWACS aircraft are indispensable for coordinating complex air operations, protecting U.S. and allied forces, and maintaining air superiority. Prohibiting E-3 retirements without a firm E-7 delivery schedule reflects congressional concern over potential capability gaps that could leave the U.S. military vulnerable. A delay in the E-7’s operational readiness, combined with the continued aging and diminishing availability of the E-3 fleet, could impact the Air Force’s ability to respond effectively to global crises and maintain a strategic advantage against peer adversaries. This also highlights the broader tension between military leadership’s desire to retire older, costly-to-maintain assets and congressional insistence on retaining proven capabilities until replacements are fully mature.
The “right to repair” amendment addresses a fundamental issue in military procurement and sustainment: the high cost and operational inefficiencies resulting from over-reliance on defense contractors for equipment maintenance. Forcing contractors to provide comprehensive technical data and repair rights could significantly enhance military readiness by enabling uniformed personnel to perform more repairs in-house, reducing downtime for critical systems like the F-35. This increased autonomy could lead to substantial cost savings for taxpayers by reducing expensive contractor service fees and strengthening military logistics chains, particularly important in dispersed or contested environments where contractor access might be limited. Furthermore, it fosters a deeper understanding of complex systems within the military, improving problem-solving capabilities and potentially informing future acquisition strategies. The F-35’s experience serves as a stark warning, illustrating how initial acquisition decisions regarding data rights can have long-term negative impacts on readiness and cost-effectiveness. This amendment signifies a move towards greater government control over the lifecycle of its defense assets, aiming for a more resilient and cost-efficient military force.
Collectively, these congressional actions reflect ongoing efforts to ensure the U.S. military remains capable and efficient in a complex global security landscape, balancing immediate operational needs with long-term modernization goals and fiscal responsibility.