[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 101 (Wednesday, July 8, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1665-E1666]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          EARMARK DECLARATION

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. JOHN SULLIVAN

                              of oklahoma

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 8, 2009

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam Speaker, consistent with House Republican Earmark 
Standards, I am submitting the following earmark disclosure and 
certification information for one project authorization request that I 
made and which was included within the text of H.R. 2647--National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.
  Project: High Density Power Conversion and Distribution Equipment
  Project Amount: $5 million
  Account: Research and Development--Navy.
  Legal Name of Requesting Entity: L-3 Westwood Corporation
  Address of Requesting Entity: 12402 East 60th Street Tulsa, OK 74146.
  Description of Request: Navy power switchboard technology has 
remained essentially the same for nearly 50 years. This technology is 
passed largely on past Navy applications (with lower power needs) and 
commercial practices (which are less volume and weight sensitive). The 
Navy's power needs (e.g., sensors, weapons, house loads) have escalated 
and the newest power architecture designs have added additional 
concerns (e.g., higher frequencies), but the size and weight of the 
power distribution equipment are still limited. The inline switchboard 
technology simplifies the switchboard arrangement to greatly decrease 
size, weight, and lifecycle cost. In summary, this will provide the 
Navy with technology that will result in $0.25M/per year per destroyer/
cruiser in maintenance savings plus an additional $1 million per ship 
in overhaul savings. Additional savings are estimated in size and 
weight at 50 tons per ship and a space savings of 1000 sq.ft. Fuel 
savings due to the decreased weight are anticipated to be significant 
given the cost of fuel.

[[Page E1666]]



                          ____________________