Skip to content
Fiscal Receipts

Depot Maintenance (Non-IF)

NavyRDT&EReconciledPE0702207N
What it is
Depot Maintenance (Non-IF) (0702207N) is a Navy research & development line funded in the Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy account. Its J-book detail breaks the line into 3 projects.
What changed
-$5.43M FY25→26 R-1 TOA · PB2026
Who gets it
No single contractor is published as this line's leader. 1 linked award record is listed below. This line's high-confidence links do not clear the floor for a published concentration index — at least 3 awards across 2 contractor families holding positive obligations, with positive net linked dollars. Why the crosswalk is partial.

Budget figures

FY24 Actuals
$18.0MR-1 TOA · PB2026
FY25 Total
$28.8MR-1 TOA · PB2026
FY26 Request
$23.4MR-1 TOA · PB2026
FY25→26 Change
-$5.43MR-1 TOA · PB2026
Data coverage

FY2026 award data is a partial year — USAspending reports awards on a rolling basis, and this corpus runs through 2026-09-04. why partial FY2026 data? →

Budget trajectory

The program's 3 summary figures for FY24 to FY26, plotted in fiscal-year order: this line ends higher than it starts. The points are the summary cards above, not a separate derivation; the table beside the chart carries each figure with its own citation.
The program's 3 summary figures for FY24 to FY26, plotted in fiscal-year order: this line ends higher than it starts. The points are the summary cards above, not a separate derivation; the table beside the chart carries each figure with its own citation.FY24: $18.0MFY25: $28.8MFY26: $23.4MFY24FY25FY26
Budget trajectory: one row per fiscal year, carrying the summary figure the sparkline plots. Every figure opens its own citation.
Fiscal yearAmount
FY24$18.0M
FY25$28.8M
FY26$23.4M

All series figures: R-1 TOA · PB2026

Decade view

P-1/R-1 workbook TOA basis, shown compact in $B/$M (the workbook records USD thousands); each figure cites its own President's Budget edition

12 fiscal years of this program as published (FY2015–FY2026): a line through the actuals (filled dots), with the enacted (hollow circles) and request (diamonds) markers each edition reported. Read it for direction, not for precision — this program's actuals line falls across the span. The grid below is the same data as text, one cited figure per cell.
12 fiscal years of this program as published (FY2015–FY2026): a line through the actuals (filled dots), with the enacted (hollow circles) and request (diamonds) markers each edition reported. Read it for direction, not for precision — this program's actuals line falls across the span. The grid below is the same data as text, one cited figure per cell.FY2015 actuals — PB2017 editionFY2016 actuals — PB2018 editionFY2017 actuals — PB2019 editionFY2018 actuals — PB2020 editionFY2019 actuals — PB2021 editionFY2020 actuals — PB2022 editionFY2021 actuals — PB2023 editionFY2022 actuals — PB2024 editionFY2023 actuals — PB2025 editionFY2024 actuals — PB2026 editionFY2016 enacted — PB2017 editionFY2017 enacted — PB2018 editionFY2018 enacted — PB2019 editionFY2019 enacted — PB2020 editionFY2020 enacted — PB2021 editionFY2021 enacted — PB2022 editionFY2022 enacted — PB2023 editionFY2023 enacted — PB2024 editionFY2024 enacted — PB2025 editionFY2025 enacted — PB2026 editionFY2017 request — PB2017 editionFY2018 request — PB2018 editionFY2019 request — PB2019 editionFY2020 request — PB2020 editionFY2021 request — PB2021 editionFY2022 request — PB2022 editionFY2023 request — PB2023 editionFY2024 request — PB2024 editionFY2025 request — PB2025 editionFY2026 request — PB2026 editionFY15FY18FY20FY22FY24FY26

The vertical scale does not start at zero: the baseline sits just below this program’s smallest year, so a low point on this line is not a small amount. Read the shape for direction and the grid below for the figures.

● actuals (line)  ·  ○ enacted  ·  ◇ request — gaps are editions the program is absent from, never interpolated.

Decade series values by fiscal year and President's Budget edition: one row per series (actuals, enacted, request), one column per fiscal year. Every figure opens its own citation.
SeriesFY15FY16FY17FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26
Actuals$20.7M$23.4M$37.1M$35.5M$37.0M$46.5M$35.4M$33.9M$25.2M$18.0M
Enacted$24.2M$49.3M$38.2M$46.6M$48.2M$43.1M$35.0M$26.2M$23.2M$28.8M
Request$49.3M$38.2M$36.6M$38.2M$45.2M$36.9M$26.2M$23.2M$28.8M$23.4M

blank = series not published for this year; – = absent from that edition.

Asked vs spent: the PB2017 book requested $49.3M for FY2017; the PB2019 book reported $37.1M as actual total obligation authority — $12.2M below the request. 37.1 − 49.3 = -12.2 USD millions — the compact figures above are rounded for reading.

Program lineage

No predecessor/successor lineage was recorded for this program element — no FY-to-FY transfer into or out of this line was stated in the ingested J-books, and none was inferred from the program structure.

Description

Mission — Depot Maintenance (NON-IF)

3030: A significant portion of the F/A-18 and EA-18G airframe is believed to have additional inherent capability and a life extension is possible for many portions of the airframe. The F/A-18 and EA-18G Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP) is assessing the structural and subsystem conditions of the F/A-18 and EA-18G fleet in order to determine what modifications are necessary to extend the aircraft design life limits to allow it to achieve Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) inventory requirements. This effort is required to be conducted for these airframes and subsystems to ascertain what actions and modifications must be taken to safely operate each system beyond its designed life until the targeted end of service life. Without SLAP and the follow-on Service Life Extension Program (SLEP), aircraft are retired from the USN inventory when a design service life metric is reached. RDTE funds will support aircraft teardown to validate SLAP analysis, identify unknown fatigue areas and assess the aircraft's material condition. 3182: The T-45 aircraft structure is currently fatigue limited to 13,300 flight hours based on initial full-scale fatigue tests. Studies demonstrate that the 13,300-flight hour service life can be extended, with a Service Life Extension Program (SLEP), to 19,800 flight hours, which will support meeting IPP until 2035. A T-45 Structural Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP) was completed in February 2012. In order for the T-45 to meet IPP, it is also necessary to assess the subsystems of the T-45 in their ability to remain viable. In FY13 an initial subsystem assessment, based on the updated fleet aircraft usage spectrum and future predicted training missions of the T-45 aircraft, found 79 dispositions requiring further analysis, teardowns, age explorations, recertification and/or testing. The assessment of the subsystems that make up these 79 dispositions will address all critical subsystems required and their ability to maintain IPP/NTR until 2035, analysis and studies will be conducted to outline improvements, assess manufacturing capabilities, prototype redesign and test of subsystems for trainer aircraft. 3384: MH-60 SLAP is assessing the primary aircraft structure and subsystem condition of the MH-60 fleet in order to evaluate the airframe's ability to meet its designed service life of 10,000 hours. SLAP will determine the efforts necessary to extend the aircraft design life limits to meet CNO operational inventory requirements through FY 2040. The highest flight time MH-60S helicopters are expected to exceed the design life limit in 2027, at which time as many as 30 aircraft per year could be removed from flight status without a SLAP and follow-on SLEP directly impacting Combat Logistics, Surface Warfare (SUW), Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR), Naval Special Warfare (NSW) Support, Airborne Mine Countermeasures (AMCM), and operational capabilities and capacity. The highest flight time MH-60R helicopters are expected to exceed the design life in 2034. MH-60 SLAP is comprised of two distinct assessments: investigative inspections and analysis of fleet assets, which will identify current trends that either prohibit the MH-60 from reaching its design life or the required life based on operational inventory requirements; and forward-looking analysis, which will identify future risks not yet realized on fleet assets. These assessments will consider the fatigue life of airframe structure as well as the health of aircraft subsystems. The airframe structural assessment consists of investigations of the cockpit beams, main gearbox beams/frames, upper deck, engine mount, lower tub, main landing gear, tail landing gear, cargo hook, transition splice and tie-down fittings/structure, tailcone, tail gearbox, intermediate gearbox, stabilator, manufactured joints/splices, and flight controls support structure. The aircraft subsystems assessment will evaluate wiring, engines, rotor brake, hydraulic, flight controls, avionics components and infrastructure, etc., to identify over-and-above inspections, overhaul intervals or replacement schedules to fly beyond the current design limit assumption. Analysis will be further refined, augmented with aircraft, specific system and wiring teardowns, inspections, and tests; data analysis; and development of models and tools, producing results that will continue inform SLEP ECP development. Engineering for design/development will ramp for Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) for a phased SLEP solution. 9999: The industry partner, in conjunction with F-35 Maintenance PMO office, will focus activities in several unique areas intended to improve inter and intra F-35 services, partners and original equipment manufacturing data interoperability as well as organic F-35 data capture and data security. Topic areas include but are not limited to sustainment data interoperability, sustainment data storage, sustainment data flow, physical aircraft data capture and interoperability of data between the F-35 Joint Programming Office (JPO) information systems and U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) organic depot-level maintenance activities. The team will focus its efforts on the following main subject matters: 1. F-35 Maintenance PMO Data Interoperability Software (DIS) Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) Analysis 2. Development of JEDI-X Propulsion Limited Technical Demonstrator at Fleet Readiness Center East (FRCE) 3. Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP) Program Manager Reporting Tool - Fleet Readiness Center Southeast (FRCSE) JUSTIFICATION FOR BUDGET ACTIVITY: This program is funded under OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT because it includes development efforts to upgrade systems that have been fielded or have received approval for full rate production and anticipate funding in the current or subsequent fiscal year.

Mission — FA-18 SLAP

The F/A-18 and EA-18G Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP) is assessing the structural and subsystem conditions of the F/A-18 and EA-18G fleet in order to determine what modifications are necessary to extend the aircraft designed life limits to allow it to achieve Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) inventory requirements. The goal of the F/A-18 and EA-18G SLAP program is to identify critical structures and components that can achieve the extended service life limit goals. SLAP consists of structural investigations of the main landing gear, arresting hook and catapult back-up structures, vertical tails, wings and fuselage. A second effort is to evaluate the subsystem components (hydraulics, wiring, actuators, etc.) to identify over and above inspections, overhaul intervals or replacement schedules to fly past design life limits. The current life limits for the F/A-18 E/F are 6,000 Flight Hours (FH), 2,250 catapults/arrestments (Cat/Traps) and 15,750 total landings; EA-18G are 7,500 FH, 2,550 CAT/Traps and 17,850 total landings. The F/A-18 SLAP program of record states the SLAP goals as 10,000 FH, 2,917 Cat/Traps and 18,750 total landings. The EA-18G SLAP program of record states the SLAP goals as 12,000 FH, 3,500 Cat/Traps and 22,500 total landings. The primary objective of F/A-18 and EA-18G SLAP is to determine if the stated SLAP goals are feasible and to determine what modifications are required, if applicable, to extend the airframe. An increase in total landings and flight hours would allow the F/A-18 and EA-18G aircraft to operate for a prolonged period of time in order to meet CNO inventory requirements. The requirements are integrated with the Joint Strike Fighter planned introduction to ensure mission readiness. This effort is required to be conducted for these airframes and subsystems to ascertain what actions and modifications must be taken to safely operate each system beyond its designed life until the targeted end of service life.

Mission — T-45 SLAP

The T-45 Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP) is assessing the structural and subsystem conditions of the T-45 fleet in order to determine what modifications are necessary to extend the aircraft designed life limits to allow it to achieve Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) inventory requirements. The goal of the T-45 SLAP program is to identify critical structures and components that can extend the aircraft designed service life to support IPP and Naval Flight Officer Training Requirements (NTR) until 2035. This initial subsystem assessment, based on the updated fleet aircraft usage spectrum and future predicted training missions of the T-45 aircraft, found 79 dispositions requiring further analysis, teardowns, age explorations, recertification and/or testing. The assessment of the subsystems that make up these 79 dispositions will address all critical subsystems required and their ability to maintain IPP/NTR until 2035, analysis and studies will be conducted to outline improvements, assess manufacturing capabilities, prototype redesign and test of subsystems for trainer aircraft. The current life limits for the T-45 is 13,000 Flight Hours (FH). The T-45 SLAP program of record states the SLAP goals is 19,800 FH. This effort is required to be conducted for these subsystems to ascertain what actions and modifications must be taken to safely operate each system beyond its designed life until the targeted end of service life.

Mission — MH-60 SLAP

MH-60 SLAP is assessing the primary aircraft structure and subsystem condition of the MH-60 fleet in order to evaluate the airframe's ability to meet its designed service life of 10,000 hours. SLAP will determine the efforts necessary to extend the aircraft design life limits to meet Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) operational inventory requirements through FY 2040. The highest flight time MH-60S helicopters are expected to exceed the design life limit in 2026, at which time as many as 30 aircraft per year could be removed from flight status without a SLAP and follow-on Service Life Extension Program (SLEP). The highest flight time MH-60R helicopters are expected to exceed the design life in 2034. MH-60 SLAP is comprised of two distinct assessments: investigative inspections and analysis of fleet assets, which will identify current trends that either prohibit the MH-60 from reaching its design life or the required life based on operational inventory requirements; and forward-looking analysis, which will identify future risks not yet realized on fleet assets. These assessments will consider the fatigue life of airframe structure as well as the health of aircraft subsystems. The airframe structural assessment consists of investigations of the cockpit beams, main gearbox beams/frames, upper deck, engine mount, lower tub, main landing gear, tail landing gear, cargo hook, transition splice and tie-down fittings/structure, tailcone, tail gearbox, intermediate gearbox, stabilator, manufactured joints/splices, and flight controls support structure. The aircraft subsystems assessment will evaluate wiring, engines, rotor brake, hydraulic, flight controls, avionics components and infrastructure, etc., to identify over-and-above inspections, overhaul intervals or replacement schedules to fly beyond the current design limit assumption. Assessment findings will be used to determine the technical requirements for a future SLEP. FY 2026 budget requests funds to continue the SLAP analysis and engineering development that needs to occur to extend the useful life of the MH-60S and ramp the SLAP effort on the MH-60R, to include high-time fleet aircraft detailed inspections/assessments until transition to Future Vertical Lift-Maritime Strike (FVL-MS). Design and development engineering will utilize data from fatigue life assessment, inspection intervals, component replacement intervals, and other strategies to develop the Engineering Change Proposals (ECP's) for the phased MH-60S SLEP solution, and modifications to current maintenance practices.

Justification

Accomplishments & Planned Programs (4)

F/A-18 SLAP

The current design life limits do not support USN inventory requirements. Funding supports assessing the structural and component condition of the F/A-18 fleet in order to determine what modifications are necessary to extend the aircraft designed life limits to allow it to achieve CNO inventory requirements.

EA-18G SLAP

The current design life limits do not support USN inventory requirements. Funding supports assessing the structural condition of the EA-18G fleet in order to determine what modifications are necessary to extend the aircraft designed life limits to allow it to achieve CNO inventory requirements. The EA-18G SLAP leverages lessons learned from the F/A-18 A-F SLAP in order to achieve efficiencies in continuity of operations.

T-45 SLAP

The current design life limits do not support USN inventory requirements. Funding supports development, integration, test, and certification of a Subsystem SLAP to determine modifications necessary to extend service life.

MH-60 SLAP

The current design life limits do not support United States Navy inventory requirements to bridge to a follow-on program procurement. The MH-60S will begin reaching conditional 10,000 hour service life limits in 2027 and the MH-60R in 2034. No full-scale fatigue test or comprehensive structural analysis was performed during initial development. Funding will support assessing the structural and subsystem condition of the MH-60 fleet in order to determine what modifications are necessary to extend the aircraft designed life limits to bridge that gap.

Budget line items(workbook-cited)

P-1/R-1 workbook Total Obligation Authority basis (USD thousands) · PB2026.

Exhibit R-1

AccountOrgTypeAmount
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY24 Actuals$18.0M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY25 Enacted$28.8M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY25 Total$28.8M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY26 Disc. Request$23.4M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY26 Total$23.4M

Budget Details(R-2/P-40 facts)

J-book detail basis (R-2/P-40, USD millions) · PB2026 — a different accounting basis from the P-1/R-1 workbook TOA above; where the two disagree, the reconciliation strip under Budget figures shows both.

Wider than this screen — swipe the table sideways for the remaining fiscal-year columns.

ProjectAll Prior YearsFY24 ActualsFY25 TotalFY26 BaseFY26 Request
Program Element$412.8M$18.0M$28.8M$23.4M$23.4M
3030: FA-18 SLAP$295.9M$6.16M$6.40M$2.80M$2.80M
3182: T-45 SLAP$48.9M$0$484.0K$14.8M$14.8M
3384: MH-60 SLAP$68.0M$11.9M$21.9M$5.78M$5.78M

Follow the dollar

No follow-the-dollar view — none of this program's high-confidence awards records a positive obligation at any place of performance (flows cover 312 of 1,938 programs). why coverage is partial? →

Related awards

Award linkage is shown for 32 of 200 profiled companies — high- and medium-confidence USAspending matches, each row labeled; medium is the weaker evidence. why partial award coverage? →

RecipientPIIDConfidence
THE BOEING COMPANYN0001920D0051high

Contractor concentration

No concentration index is published for this line. This line's high-confidence links do not clear the floor for a published concentration index — at least 3 awards across 2 contractor families holding positive obligations, with positive net linked dollars. An index below that floor is a fact about the sample, not about the market. Whatever further links this line carries are medium-confidence, and what each medium evidence path does and does not establish is set out in the methodology. Both bases are in the downloadable warehouse.

Lobbying mentions

4 mentions from the Senate LDA disclosure database.

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERSDepot|Maintenance2026matched 2+ title words

Support IAM Programs (F-35, F-15, C-130, DDG-51, VA subs, F-135) in FY 2027 Appropriations H.R. 4016 Support IAM…

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERSDepot|Maintenance2025matched 2+ title words

Support IAM Programs in FY 2026 Appropriation (F-35, F-15, C-130, DDG-51, VA Subs) H.R. 4016 Support Workers at Ft.…

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERSDepot|Maintenance2025matched 2+ title words

Support IAM Programs (F-35, F-15, C-130, DDG-51, VA subs, F-135) in FY 2026 Appropriations H.R. 4016 Support IAM…

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERSDepot|Maintenance2025matched 2+ title words

Support IAM Programs (F-35, F-15, C-130, DDG-51, VA subs, F-135) in FY 2026 Appropriations H.R. 4016 Support IAM…

Oversight

Department-level designation (not specific to this program)

GAO lists 5 high-risk areas for DOD as a whole. That designation covers the department, not Depot Maintenance (Non-IF). No program-specific GAO finding for this line is in the ingested data. See the DOD oversight record.

Program dossier

No research dossier for this program — dossiers cover 50 of 1,938 programs, the largest fully J-book-detailed lines by FY2026 requested dollars. why no dossier here? →

Primary sources

Open any budget figure for its exact receipt. Verified line items lead with the highlighted government PDF; original spreadsheets download with their budget edition and exhibit in the filename.

Budget totals · TOA sources

Detailed budget justification

The related TOA spreadsheets above use a different accounting basis from R-2/P-40 detail. Their amounts are not assumed to match these detailed sources.