The department will now process screening requirements and the force’s Board for Correction of Military Records jointly and employ case managers to speed up the return, according to the release.

“The Department of the Air Force has a resolute commitment to rapidly return affected service members to the ranks,” Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower and Reserve Affairs Honorable Richard L. Anderson said in the statement.

“By running medical certifications and record-correction board actions in parallel rather than sequentially, and establishing dedicated reinstatement case managers as single, proactive points of contact for applicants, we aim to increase the speed and ease of returning former members to service under the DAF COVID-19 reinstatement program,” he continued.

The move comes as the Pentagon struggles to reinstate troops that left service after refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Only 3% of those eligible have opted to return out of the 8,700 service members who involuntarily separated in 2021.

The Pentagon’s 8,700 figure was contested by data from the branches released in late 2022 that showed the number was actually closer to 8,400 service members: 3,717 Marines, 2,041 Navy sailors, 1,841 Army soldiers and 834 Air Force and Space Force members.

The department stated in the release that the updates to the process align with the Department of Defense’s May establishment of a Reinstatement and Reconciliation Task Force that directed all services to identify and remove roadblocks to the reinstatement of affected service members.

The Air Force now allows for medical certifications and board-corrected actions to proceed at the same time, instead of sequentially, removing the average 30-day barrier related to medical clearances, per the release.

Alongside the workflow change, case managers will now serve as points of contact for applicants and are instructed to remove delays caused by missing documents, help members throughout the process and ensure fast reintegration.

The appointment of case managers also allows the Air Force Review Board Agency COVID Reinstatement team to focus solely on finalizing cases, according to the announcement.

Airmen and guardians pursuing a return to service under the January 2025 executive order are subject to these updates, the release states. The expedited program is under a one-year extension that remains open until April 2027, as directed by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

The Pentagon’s Defense Health Agency stood up a registry in July 2020 that was supposed to collect and track all COVID-19 incidents logged into the military health system, and an unidentified contractor was hired to take on the work, according to the DoD Office of the Inspector General report.

And while the accuracy rate of the data was supposed to be at least 90 percent, the IG found errors in 24 of the 25 registry records they reviewed.

As a result, the report warns that any COVID patient data collected is “inaccurate and potentially misleading,” while costing the Pentagon $6.2 million “for registry support services that did not meet the data accuracy requirements,” the report states.

“Without complete and accurate data that represent the DoD patients in the (military health system) who had a COVID-19 event, health care providers may not be able to properly assess and improve COVID-19 treatment and more effectively track the epidemiology of the disease,” the report warns. “A properly designed and executed registry can provide the DoD with real-time information on patient outcomes and can contribute to the research and development of treatments.”

Such data is regularly collected by healthcare organizations to learn more about a particular disease or condition, and is vital for assessing treatments and outcomes, as well as developing best practices for patient care.

The health agency defines a COVID event as a positive test, when a patient is admitted to a military medical facility or when they are required to quarantine, according to the report, and each registry input can have up to 187 “unique data fields.”

Because DoD systems don’t automatically populate data sets like the COVID registry, medical personnel were contracted to review patient records, validate that a COVID event occurred and then enter that patient’s health data into the registry.

But IG officials “identified internal control weakness related to the process to identify and collect (military health system) COVID-19 patient health data, ensure the accuracy of data entered into the COVID-19 Registry, and provide quality assurance and oversight of the registry,” the report states.

DoD officials missed at least 7,213 patients in the military health system who had a COVID event that required entry in the registry, and officials didn’t design or implement a quality assurance surveillance plan to ensure the contractors were hitting the required accuracy rate of at least 90 percent, the report states.

The department also doesn’t have “a consistent and repeatable process for developing and populating patient registries,” the IG notes.

Responding for the Defense Health Agency, the under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness pushed back and “disagreed” that the data entered into the registry was inaccurate, but the IG countered that compliance nurses did not properly follow quality assurance processes.

The IG recommends that DoD set up a policy for developing and populating such registries, and to conduct a review of all military health system registries to verify that the corresponding data is reliable.

The under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness disagreed with eight of the IG’s 12 recommendations for addressing the issue, according to the report, and the IG has requested additional comments from the office within the next month.

The contentious, marathon mark-up before the House Armed Services Committee featured 14-plus hours of escalating partisan fights over the bill, which outlines more than $800 billion in spending priorities and policy changes for the military in fiscal 2024.

Many of the fights mirrored provisions championed by Republicans in the defense appropriations bill unveiled a week earlier, and several lawmakers hinted even more could come in full chamber discussion on the measures expected next month.

“I hope we go far beyond this in the floor debate,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., author of several of the most divisive measures in Wednesday’s mark-up.

Democratic lawmakers on the panel repeatedly blasted the arguments as a waste of time and little more than political posturing for GOP members intent on crafting re-election campaign points.

“It blows my mind that we have been sitting here for hours talking about diversity, equity, and inclusion,” said Rep. Marilyn Strickland, D-Wash. “If the military is going to be successful, it has to evolve with society in the 21st century. We are more diverse and we are more inclusive.”

But they also largely supported the final product, which passed out of committee on a 58-1 vote. Democrats praised the measure as critical to supporting troops and military families, ignoring the problematic provisions in their rounds of late-night celebratory press releases.

The authorization bill includes a host of routine military instructions, including a 5.2% pay raise for troops next January, renewal of dozens of enlistment and re-enlistment bonuses, and financial help for the lowest-ranking service members.

But during committee debate on Wednesday, Republicans added a lengthy list of conservative priorities via party-line votes, moves they say are needed to rein in political posturing by military leaders.

Among the list: banning defense officials from sponsoring drag shows on military bases, eliminating funding for diversity training and diversity-related jobs, banning “critical race theory” at service academies and requiring that parents have more say in how Defense Department schools craft lesson plans.

And even though last year’s authorization bill ended the military’s requirement that troops get vaccinated against COVID-19, Republicans renewed the fight in this year’s bill, demanding financial protections for troops booted out for refusing vaccinations and blocking future similar inoculation requirements.

The moves “are necessary to prevent the Department of Defense from doubling down on the wrongful treatment of our service members,” said Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., during debate over the COVID-19 provisions.

Whether any of the provisions can survive negotiations with the Democratic-controlled Senate remains to be seen. The Senate Armed Services Committee is expected to unveil its draft of the authorization bill later this week.

House appropriators included similar provisions — and a ban on Defense Department abortion assistance — in their budget bill. Senate appropriators have not yet unveiled their plans, but several key Democrats have already publicly decried the House plans.

The policy change came one day before the three-year anniversary of the first confirmed COVID-19 case at a VA medical center.

Over the last 36 months, more than 857,000 individuals affiliated with the VA health care system have contracted the virus, with more than 24,000 deaths.

But case numbers have dropped significantly in recent months, both within the department and across the country. There were fewer than 6,000 active cases across all VA medical facilities on Thursday night, down 17% over the last month and less than half the total from three months ago.

The new masking policy at VA will still require all patients, employees and visitors to wear face masks in certain sensitive areas of health centers, or when local officials determine that higher health protection levels need to be put in place for safety reasons.

However, local leaders will now be allowed to conduct facility risk assessments to “determine if it is appropriate for masking to be optional in certain areas at their facility.” Masking will still be optional in those cases, but not required.

“This new policy will ensure the safety of veterans and VA health care providers, while accommodating individual masking preferences,” Under Secretary for Health Dr. Shereef Elnahal said in a statement.

“We’re trying to be as open as possible to veteran and clinician and staff preferences alike, while aligning with Center for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines.”

As of March 1, some 1,444 VA employees across the health care system were unable to work due to COVID-19 diagnoses. In January 2022, during a peak of the pandemic across America, that number had topped 15,000 (about 4% of the total workforce).

VA officials said masking requirements will be unchanged in chemotherapy units, acute inpatient medical/surgical units, intensive care units, post-transplant units, dialysis units and other high-risk areas.

Masking will also be required at all times for individuals with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infections or other respiratory issues. VA recommends checking policies before traveling to any facility.

“It’s very important that our service members follow orders when they are lawful, and there are thousands that did not,” Gilbert Cisneros Jr., Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel, told members of the House Armed Services Committee. “The services are going through a process to review those cases to make a determination what needs to be done.”

The potential additional dismissals are the latest controversy surrounding the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, which has been a target of conservative lawmakers almost since it was put in place nearly two years ago.

It drew immediate condemnation from Republicans on the congressional panel, who accused defense officials of trying to circumvent a law rescinding the vaccine mandate, which was passed late last year.

“What’s the point of getting into these cases?” said Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., chairman of the committee’s military personnel panel. “You’re still punishing them for not taking the vaccine.”

From August 2021 to January 2023, all active-duty service members were required to receive vaccinations against the fast-spreading coronavirus variants in an effort to maintain force readiness and health.

Defense Department leaders said about 16,000 individuals refused that order without making any requests for exemption or accommodation. About 8,400 were separated from the services as a result.

Last week, service leaders were instructed to rescind all COVID-19 vaccination policies by March 17, per a congressional mandate. That included undoing any existing restrictions or pending separations on troops who refused the shots.

Cisneros said that individuals who had pending exemption requests would have their cases cleared and settled. But individuals who simply refused the vaccines, even after repeated warnings, could still run afoul of other regulations that may warrant additional punishment.

Those decisions will be made by the individual services.

Under Secretary of the Air Force Gina Ortiz Jones said that officials are looking at cases to ensure that “other aggravating factors, such as misconduct” aren’t involved.

“If the adverse action is tied solely to refusal of the vaccine, then the Air Force Personnel Center is taking steps now to remove that adverse action in their files,” she said.

Army and Navy leaders at the hearing said they are conducting similar review processes.

“Each of these cases has to be evaluated on its own individual merits,” said Under Secretary of the Army Gabe Camarillo. “There may be numerous violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or other areas in which to look at disciplinary procedures.”

Defense officials did not offer any timeline for when that work may be finished. Republican lawmakers said they would look at additional steps to ensure more troops are not separated because of the rescinded policy.

They did note that the vaccine refusals make up a small fraction of the total force, and said they hope that most service members continue to get the COVID-19 vaccines even without the mandate.

Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers on the panel said they hope to reinstate all dismissed individuals to the armed forces with full benefits and back pay. Cisneros said officials are not looking into any such move at the present.

From early 2020 to the end of 2022, 96 service members, 36 military family members, 417 Defense Department civilian employees and 141 defense contractor employees died of complications related to COVID-19.

House lawmakers introduced the proposal last summer in recognition of “gaps” that appeared in GI Bill benefits at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in America in spring 2020. The measure was approved by the Senate on Dec. 20 and finalized by the House on Dec. 22.

The main issue is how VA education benefits are paid out to students who attend college classes remotely, rather than in-person.

Students using the Post-9/11 GI Bill — the most popular veterans education benefit — receive money for tuition as well as a monthly housing stipend. Individuals enrolled in traditional in-person classes receive the full financial benefit, while students in online-only classes are granted just half of that housing stipend.

The difference between half of a housing stipend and the full payout can range from a few hundred dollars to nearly $2,000, since the payouts depend on the location of the student and school.

When the coronavirus pandemic forced colleges to shift courses from physical classrooms to internet meeting rooms in spring 2020, nearly all students were reclassified as online-only, triggering a reduction in their housing benefits.

That prompted a flurry of legislative activity, with lawmakers including new authorities for the VA secretary in a series of emergency pandemic bills.

They included the ability to adjust housing payouts, work-study programs and other facets of the education benefits. VA officials credited them with preventing hardship for more than 60,000 students over the last few years.

But those authorities expired last June, after most colleges and universities had resumed normal operations.

The new bill allows for similar moves by VA officials in the future “if an individual is negatively affected by an emergency situation.”

Such a move would require a declaration by the president that the country faces a national emergency, or a similar legal determination.

Veterans groups have voiced support for the measure as a way to ensure VA officials can more quickly help students and their families in the future. President Joe Biden is expected to sign the measure into law in coming days.

The legislation — which outlines $817 billion in spending priorities for the Department of Defense in fiscal 2023 — was passed by the House last week and has advanced out of Congress for more than six decades.

But this year’s version came later than usual because of still unresolved issues with congressional appropriations and political wrangling on Capitol Hill.

Whether President Joe Biden will sign the measure into law is still unclear. The White House has objected to the rollback of the coronavirus vaccine mandate in recent days, saying the shots are still needed to ensure military readiness and force health.

But the president and senior administration officials have not said whether they would consider a veto over the provision.

Congressional Republicans had threatened to block the authorization bill if a repeal of the vaccine mandate — put in place one year ago — wasn’t included. They have argued that the requirement hurts recruiting and retention, and is unnecessary given the good health and young age of most service members.

“In our country, the number of new service members joining is at a record low,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said at a press conference shortly before passage of the NDAA.

“Every single branch has struggled to meet their recruiting goals. … [The military] has already fired more than 8,400 active-duty service members for not getting the COVID-19 shot.”

Both House and Senate Democrats dropped their objections to the vaccine repeal in order to advance the rest of the authorization bill, viewed as must-pass legislation annually.

It includes a host of specialty pay and bonus renewals, provisions for new program starts, and outlines an array of equipment purchase priorities.

It also has includes an annual military pay raise of 4.6% for 2023, the largest boost troops have seen in the last 20 years.

For junior enlisted troops, the 4.6% hike would mean about $1,300 more next year in take-home pay. For senior enlisted and junior officers, the hike equals about $2,500 more. For an O-4 with 12 years’ service, it’s more than $4,500 in extra pay.

The $817 billion topline for military spending is about $45 billion above what the White House requested in its budget proposal last spring. Both Republicans and Democrats argued that the extra funds are needed to counter rising inflation and ensure force readiness.

Lawmakers approved $800 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and granted the Pentagon emergency procurement powers to bolster high-priority munitions production to refill U.S. stockpiles sent to Ukraine.

The bill includes $32.6 billion to increase the U.S. naval fleet, including funds for 11 battle force ships. For the Army, it authorizes funding increases for the CH-47 heavy-lift helicopter, the UH-60 Blackhawk medium-lift helicopter and the MQ-1 Gray Eagle drone.

The final bill includes a requirement for the U.S. Navy to maintain 31 operational amphibious ships, despite opposition from the White House.

And the bill allows the Air Force to begin retiring the A-10 Warthog after previous congressional opposition. The bill also authorizes funding for five more F-35A aircraft as well as F-22 modernization.

If the president signs the authorization bill into law, the Defense Department will still need an appropriations bill from Congress to actually receive the funding to carry out the spending priorities.

House and Senate leaders announced earlier this week they have an agreement on the framework for that budget bill, and expect to unveil the details in coming days.

But they have also warned that if an agreement isn’t finalized by early next week, they could opt to simply extend current government funding levels through September 2023 in an effort to prevent a government shutdown.

Such a move would give Pentagon leaders nearly 8% less in available funds than they anticipated for the rest of fiscal 2023, forcing them to make cuts across training and modernization programs.

Reporter Bryant Harris contributed to this story.

In a call with medical directors and providers across the country Thursday, Vice Adm. (Dr.) Vivek Murthy, who oversees the U.S. Public Health Service, said the country is in “such a better place” with the virus than in recent years. But he also cautioned that coronavirus remains a threat, and said health care officials need to reinforce that message to the public.

“There are millions who are eligible for the [newest] vaccine and who have not yet received it,” he said. “And I’m particularly concerned about the elderly and those who are at higher risk because of other medical conditions.

“When we look at the people who are dying from COVID-19, they predominantly tend to be those who are older. … So this makes it all the more important for our elderly patients that we reach out to ensure they get the updated vaccine.”

Despite dramatic drops in COVID-19 cases across America in the past year, Murthy said officials are still seeing about 400 deaths a day from complications related to the virus.

Active COVID-19 cases within the VA health care system have increased significantly in recent weeks. As of Wednesday night, there were nearly 12,000 cases spread across 135 VA medical centers.

That’s up more than 30% in the past two weeks and 70% above levels in mid-November.

“We’re also starting to see hospitalizations creep up across the country,” VA Under Secretary for Health Dr. Shereef Elnahal told staff on Thursday’s call.

“COVID is still with us.”

Earlier in the week, Elnahal said that less than 40% of elderly veterans in the VA health care system have gotten the bivalent COVID-19 vaccines in recent months — “a number we think is still too low.”

The White House has spent recent weeks encouraging all Americans to get the updated vaccine, to include partnering with state health officials and groups like Major League Baseball to spread word about how to make an appointment for the vaccines.

But veterans are seen as a particularly vulnerable population, both due to their age — more than half of all veterans in America today served before 2001 — and the potential for other health complications that could make them more susceptible to health complications.

Almost 3% of all confirmed COVID-19 cases within the VA health care system — about 23,500 individuals — have resulted in a patient’s death. Nationwide, the rate is about 1%.

Earlier on Thursday, the White House announced plans to make more coronavirus test kits available free to Americans and expand resources for individuals to make appointments for the new vaccines.

“We are seeing the shift from a virus that dominated our lives to a virus that we can manage,” Murthy said. “And that’s what we need to continue doing going forward.”

The Department of Health and Human Services has more than 70,000 locations nationwide for Americans to receive free COVID-19 booster shots. A full list is available through its vaccine web site.

Veterans can also contact any VA medical center to learn about vaccine availability and distribution policies. The department has administered more than 4.7 million vaccines since late 2020.

During a briefing with reporters, Pentagon spokesperson Sabrina Singh said vaccination is still a military readiness issue, and said a repeal could be harmful to the health of the armed forces.

“What is important to the readiness of the force is getting the vaccine,” she said.

“So, yes, it would impact the readiness of the force. You’re more prone to getting COVID-19 … and we certainly know that the vaccine will save your life.”

One day after congressional leaders approved a repeal of the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate in their final draft of the annual defense authorization bill, officials across the executive branch bashed Republicans for jeopardizing the health and welfare of service members by forcing the move.

But the administration’s main foe in the fight appears to be House Democratic leaders, who are labeling the policy outdated and inconsistent and said they are comfortable with ending it.

“As we are here in December 2022, does that August 2021 [vaccine] policy still make sense?” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., said during a speech before the House Rules Committee defending the authorization bill. “We don’t believe that it is, and I don’t believe that it is.”

The rift among Democratic Party leaders comes just days after the White House announced a new six-week push to get more Americans inoculated with the latest bivalent COVID-19 vaccine, which they say will help curb serious side effects from the lingering virus.

In the 33 months since the pandemic began in America, more than 98 million cases of the virus have been recorded, and more than 1 million individuals have died from complications related to the virus, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Those totals include 451,600 cases among military members and 96 deaths. Administration officials ordered all troops to be vaccinated starting in fall 2021, calling it an issue of military readiness and public safety.

The policy was immediately controversial among conservative lawmakers, who decried the lack of flexible exemptions for individuals with religious or other objections.

Opponents of the vaccine have argued that because the vaccine is not overwhelmingly effective at preventing COVID-19 infection, and President Joe Biden has said publicly that the pandemic is “over,” there is no longer a need to mandate vaccination.

They also question the medical need for widespread vaccinations against COVID-19, noting that the virus generally produced its worst symptoms in the elderly and infirm, two groups that are not typically in the active-duty military force.

Service members are required to stay up-to-date on more than a dozen vaccinations, including those that haven’t seen a major outbreak in decades. The annual flu vaccination is required, for example, despite influenza posing the biggest threat to children and the elderly.

More than 8,000 active-duty individuals have been dismissed for vaccine refusal so far this year. Although that total is a small fraction of the full force, critics have charged that under the current strained recruiting environment, such dismissals are foolish.

Now it appears that some Democratic leaders in Congress — but not all — agree with that charge.

“The policy requiring that service members be vaccinated was absolutely the right policy,” Smith said on Wednesday. “It saved lives, and it made sure our force was as ready as it possibly could be in the face of the pandemic. …

“But right now the policy says if you got that first round of shots [months or years ago], then you’re good. And If you didn’t, you’re not. So, I think it’s time to update the policy.”

Smith’s support (which carries with it the backing of senior Democratic leaders in the chamber) comes after House and Senate Republicans in recent days had vowed to block the defense authorization bill — seen as must-pass policy annually — if a vaccine mandate repeal was left out of the measure.

But Senate Democrats appeared ready to fight for the policy up until last weekend, when Smith said publicly that changes to the policy were up for debate in negotiations.

When the compromise legislation was announced Tuesday night, it contained language requiring the Defense Department to “rescind the mandate that members of the Armed Forces be vaccinated against COVID-19″ within 30 days of the bill’s passage.

“We continue to believe that repealing the vaccine mandate is a mistake,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters Wednesday morning. “Making sure our troops are ready to defend this country and prepared to do so remains the president’s priority, and the vaccine requirement for COVID does just that.

“But Republicans in Congress have obviously decided that they’d rather fight against the health and well-being of those troops, instead of protecting them.”

Republican leaders celebrated the inclusion of the repeal amid the Democratic infighting.

In a statement, House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., called the move “a victory for our military and for common sense.” Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., said the move “takes care of our troops” and will help with future recruiting efforts.

Meanwhile, when asked if he was frustrated by the vaccine language in the authorization bill, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed, D-R.I., said simply “that’s the nature of a compromise bill.”

He noted that nearly 97% of the armed forces are fully vaccinated now, and most took the shots without complaint. He also noted that the language in the bill “requires the end of the mandate, but it doesn’t restrict the Defense Department going forward,” suggesting that troops could face different COVID-19 vaccine requirements in the future.

House and Senate Democrats omitted from the compromise bill demands from Republican lawmakers that all troops who were dismissed under the vaccine policy be reinstated with back pay.

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., the expected incoming chairman of the House Armed services Committee, said he plans to revisit that issue next year. Smith said he remains firmly against it.

“The service members who refused to [get vaccinated] and were discharged from service, that’s the way it has to work,” he said. “Orders are not optional in the military.

“And if Congress expresses the opinion that they are, I cannot imagine anything that would more significantly undermine the good order and discipline of our military.”

The House is expected to pass the authorization bill by the end of the week, with the Senate taking up the measure soon after.

Administration officials would not say whether the vaccinate mandate repeal was onerous enough to warrant a veto of the entire defense bill. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Wednesday that officials “would let the process happen” on Capitol Hill and make a veto decision when the bill arrives for the president’s signature.

The $858 billion plan (which includes roughly $817 billion in Department of Defense spending) also includes plans for a 4.6% pay raise for troops starting next month and nearly $19 billion in extra funding to deal with extra inflation costs on construction, fuel prices and other military purchases

House lawmakers are expected to pass the measure by the end of the week, setting up a Senate vote next week. If it passes both chambers, it could be signed into law by the president before the end of the month, continuing a six-decade streak of advancing the legislation into law.

Although the authorization bill is considered must-pass legislation annually, this year’s deliberations have dragged on for months.

For the second consecutive year, the Senate did not pass its own version of the bill, opting instead to make adjustments to the House-passed version from this summer rather than taking amendment votes on their own military policy priorities.

And in recent days, numerous Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate threatened to oppose the measure unless it included language dumping the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

President Joe Biden and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin both defended the vaccine requirement this week as necessary for military health and readiness. Whether the president may veto the final legislation because of the provision’s inclusion remains unclear.

So far this year, more than 8,000 active-duty service members have been dismissed from the ranks for refusing the vaccine. The vast majority of troops have agreed to the shots.

Opponents have argued that because most troops are young and fit, and because the military is in the midst of a recruiting crisis, the vaccine mandate is discouraging some potential recruits and forcing others out of the ranks.

The authorization bill language does not include any language mandating troops dismissed for refusing the vaccine to be reinstated, another demand of conservative lawmakers.

Personnel matters

The $817 billion topline for military spending is about $45 billion above what the White House requested in its budget proposal last spring. Included in that extra money are a host of personnel and equipment priorities that lawmakers say are needed to counter inflation and ensure force readiness.

The 4.6% pay raise included in the authorization bill will be the largest troops have received in 20 years.

For junior enlisted troops, the 4.6% hike would mean about $1,300 more next year in take-home pay. For senior enlisted and junior officers, the hike equals about $2,500 more. For an O-4 with 12 years’ service, it’s more than $4,500 in extra pay.

The measure also includes language allowing service officials flexibility in housing stipends in high-cost regions of the country, in an effort to blunt the effects of high inflation on military families.

It expands the new Basic Needs Allowance from 130% of the federal poverty line as a baseline for help to 150%, and even higher in certain circumstances.

And along with reauthorization of a host of existing recruitment bonuses and specialty pays, the measure includes “targeted recruitment incentives to ensure the military can meet its recruiting and retention needs.”

Other priorities

The bill also pushes back against the Biden administration’s efforts to cancel the sea-launched cruise missile nuclear development program by authorizing its continuation.

The White House has argued that the move would undermine other missions of the attack submarine without doing much to enhance deterrence. But bipartisan opponents in both the House and the Senate have maintained it provides a low-yield and flexible option to fill a gap in the nuclear triad.

Beyond that, the bill authorizes $32.6 billion to increase the U.S. naval fleet, including for 11 battle force ships. For the Army, it also authorizes funding increases for the CH-47 heavy lift helicopter, the UH-60 Blackhawk medium lift helicopter and the MQ-1 Gray Eagle drone.

It also allocates $2.7 billion to procure new munitions. This is in part to backfill equipment sent to Ukraine but also designed to generally expand production capacity going forward.

Notably, it waives some restrictions for Pentagon contracts on munitions to Ukraine or to increase the Defense Department’s critical munitions stockpile.

And the measure provides $1 billion to more than double the National Defense Stockpile — the U.S. strategic reserve of critical minerals — after years of depletion, highlighting congressional efforts to decrease Chinese influence in the U.S. defense supply chain.

The bill also authorizes funding for five more F-35A aircraft as well as F-22 modernization. It does allow the Biden administration to proceed with plans to retire the A-10 aircraft, a move that Congress has long opposed.

Even with apparent agreement on the authorization bill, lawmakers will still need to pass an appropriations bill for fiscal 2023 in order for the Defense Department to get and spend the money outlined in the $817 billion policy measure. Government agencies have been operating off a temporary budget since Oct. 1, the start of fiscal 2023.

The House and Senate have until Dec. 16 to pass a full year budget or another budget extension or risk a partial government shutdown. Chamber leaders have said they are hopeful to announce a compromise on those spending issues in the next few days.