FY2025 NDAA: Countering Uncrewed
Aircraft Systems
September 6, 2024
Background
Congress has expressed concerns about the threats posed by uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS, commonly
known as drones) to U.S. military personnel and defense installations at home and abroad, as well as an
interest in the ability of the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to detect and mitigate UAS threats. DOD
is developing, acquiring, and fielding defensive counter-UAS weapon systems, as in those systems that
are able to locate, identify, track, and intercept adversary drones. The House-passed and Senate Armed
Services Committee (SASC)-reported National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (NDAA,
H.R. 8070 and S. 4638, respectively) include provisions relating to DOD’s authority to conduct counter-
UAS operations and DOD’s policies and practices for countering drones. This product provides an
overview of selected provisions in H.R. 8070 and S. 4638 related to DOD’s ability to defend against
drones and of proposed funding authorizations for selected DOD counter-UAS programs.
Legislative Proposals
The House-passed FY2025 NDAA contains two legislative provisions directly related to counter-UAS,
while the SASC-reported bill contains seven (see Table 1). Both bills also contain legislative provisions
that are more distantly related to counter-UAS, such as those provisions pertaining to general air defense
capabilities and other technologies, which are not addressed in this product because counter-UAS is not
their primary concern.
In addition to the legislative provisions in the House-passed and SASC-reported bills, the House Armed
Services Committee (HASC) and SASC included items of special interest (ISIs) in the committee reports
on H.R. 8071 and S. 4638 that addressed counter-UAS. For example, both HASC and SASC included an
ISI directing DOD officials to brief the committees on aspects of “low-cost” counter-UAS capabilities.
Both committees further directed DOD officials to provide a briefing on “AI-enabled, combat-validated
UAS defeat capabilities.” Unlike enacted provisions of law, directive report language is not legally
binding, though agency officials typically regard it as a congressional mandate.
