[House Report 108-491]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 108-491
========================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 4200
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[Including committee cost estimate]
May 14, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 108-491
========================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 4200
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[Including committee cost estimate]
May 14, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Eighth Congress
DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Chairman
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania IKE SKELTON, Missouri
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York LANE EVANS, Illinois
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON, MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts
California SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana JIM TURNER, Texas
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina ADAM SMITH, Washington
JIM RYUN, Kansas LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
KEN CALVERT, California ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut BARON P. HILL, Indiana
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
ED SCHROCK, Virginia SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia STEVE ISRAEL, New York
JEFF MILLER, Florida RICK LARSEN, Washington
JOE WILSON, South Carolina JIM COOPER, Tennessee
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey JIM MARSHALL, Georgia
TOM COLE, Oklahoma KENDRICK B. MEEK, Florida
JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
ROB BISHOP, Utah RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana
MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio TIM RYAN, Ohio
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
PHIL GINGREY, Georgia
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona
Robert S. Rangel, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 1
Purpose.......................................................... 2
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill............................. 2
Summary Table of Authorizations................................ 3
Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 12
Hearings......................................................... 14
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION.................. 14
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 14
OVERVIEW....................................................... 14
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 17
Overview................................................... 17
Items of Special Interest.................................. 20
Airborne communications.................................. 20
Blackhawk helicopter de-icing system upgrade............. 20
Cashworthy crew seats.................................... 20
Modern signal processing unit............................ 20
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 21
Overview................................................... 21
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.................... 24
Overview................................................... 24
Items of Special Interest.................................. 28
Air-droppable, lightweight armored direct fires system... 28
Armor and vehicle protection kits........................ 28
Bradley fighting vehicle integrated management........... 28
M1A2 system enhancement package.......................... 28
M777 lightweight 155 millimeter howitzer................. 29
Ammunition Procurement, Army................................. 29
Overview................................................... 29
Items of Special Interest.................................. 33
Ammunition production base upgrades...................... 33
Conventional munitions demilitarization.................. 33
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 34
Overview................................................... 34
Items of Special Interest.................................. 44
Common system open architecture.......................... 44
Digital soldier.......................................... 44
Distributed common ground system......................... 44
Logistics support vessel................................. 45
Physical security systems................................ 46
Movement tracking system................................. 46
Shortstop electronic protection system................... 46
Small Tugs............................................... 47
Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle......................... 47
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 47
Overview................................................... 47
Items of Special Interest.................................. 52
AN/USC-42 miniaturized-demand assigned multiple access
terminals.............................................. 52
F/A-18E/F shared reconnaissance pod...................... 52
H-1 series modifications................................. 52
Joint primary air training system........................ 53
Metrology and calibration program........................ 53
P-3 series modifications................................. 53
T-45TS and T-48.......................................... 54
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 54
Overview................................................... 54
Items of Special Interest.................................. 58
Close-in weapon system block 1B.......................... 58
Evolved sea sparrow missile.............................. 58
Hellfire II missile...................................... 58
Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle.......................... 59
Tomahawk missile......................................... 59
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps.................. 59
Overview................................................... 59
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 63
Overview................................................... 63
Items of Special Interest.................................. 66
Aft ramp range retriever craft........................... 66
Amphibious assault ship replacement program.............. 66
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 66
Overview................................................... 66
Items of Special Interest.................................. 75
Chemical biological defense for aviation and explosive
ordnance disposal...................................... 75
Complementary acoustic system improvements............... 75
CVN replacement propeller program........................ 75
Envelop protective covers................................ 76
Integrated bridge system................................. 76
Integrated condition assessment system................... 76
Man overboard identification program..................... 76
Multi-climate protection clothing system................. 77
Programmable integrated communications terminal.......... 77
Serial number tracking system............................ 77
Weapons elevator automation.............................. 77
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 78
Overview................................................... 78
Items of Special Interest.................................. 84
Assault breacher vehicle................................. 84
Improved recovery vehicle................................ 84
Marines global command and control systems and integrated
imagery and intelligence analysis system............... 84
Nitrile rubber collapsible storage units................. 84
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 85
Overview................................................... 85
Items of Special Interest.................................. 91
Advanced targeting pod................................... 91
B-1B modifications....................................... 91
C-5 modifications........................................ 92
C-17..................................................... 92
C-17 maintenance training system......................... 92
C-130E engine upgrades................................... 93
F-15 modifications....................................... 93
F-16 air national guard force structure.................. 93
F-16 modifications....................................... 94
KC-767 aerial refueling tanker aircraft.................. 94
Predator unmanned aerial vehicle......................... 96
Senior scout permanent carrier........................... 96
T-38 modifications....................................... 96
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................ 97
Overview................................................... 97
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 99
Overview................................................... 99
Items of Special Interest.................................. 103
Advanced extremely high frequency satellite.............. 103
Evolved expendable launch vehicle........................ 103
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 103
Overview................................................... 103
Items of Special Interest.................................. 110
Combat training ranges................................... 110
Advanced compression of tactical sensor information...... 110
Fixed aircrew standardized seats......................... 110
General information technology........................... 110
Point of maintenance and combat ammunition system
initiative............................................. 111
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 111
Overview................................................... 111
Items of Special Interest.................................. 117
Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 117
Chemical and biological defense procurement program...... 118
Countering improvised explosive devices.................. 119
Guard and Reserve equipment.............................. 119
Indexing of class A mishaps.............................. 119
Joint threat work station, ground signals intelligence
kits................................................... 120
Military specifications for radomes...................... 120
Special Operations Forces binocular goggle system........ 120
Special Operations Forces MH-47 infrared engine exhaust
suppressor............................................. 121
Use of capability-based acquisition...................... 121
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 122
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 122
Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations.......... 122
Subtitle B--Program Matters.................................. 122
Section 111--Multiyear procurement authority for the M777
lightweight 155mm howitzer program....................... 122
Section 112--DDG-51 Modernization Program.................. 122
Section 113--Repeal of Authority for Pilot Program for
Flexible Funding of Cruiser Conversions and Overhauls.... 124
Section 114--Force Protection for Asymmetric Threat
Environment.............................................. 124
Section 115--Allocation of Equipment Authorized by this
Title to be Made on Basis of Units Deployed or Preparing
to Deploy................................................ 124
Section 116--KC-767 Tanker Multiyear Procurement........... 124
Section 117--Other Matters Relating to KC-767 Tanker
Acquisition Program...................................... 125
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 125
OVERVIEW....................................................... 125
Army Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation............... 129
Overview................................................... 129
Items of Special Interest.................................. 140
Advanced amputee treatment research and development...... 140
Advanced battery technology initiative................... 140
Advanced carbon nano technology.......................... 141
Advanced weapons technology.............................. 141
Aerostat joint project office............................ 141
Applied communications and information networking........ 142
Center for rotorcraft innovation......................... 142
Center for tribology..................................... 143
Centers of excellence.................................... 143
Combat vehicle electronics............................... 143
Defense language institute/foreign language center....... 143
Digital array radar technology development............... 144
Electronic flight planning............................... 144
Flexible display initiative.............................. 144
Force XXI battle command brigade and below blue force
tracking system........................................ 145
Future combat systems.................................... 145
Geospatial information decision support for single
integrated air picture................................. 145
Human systems integration................................ 146
Hydrogen proton exchange membrane........................ 146
Information dominance center............................. 147
Institute for creative technologies...................... 147
Integrated communications navigation identification
avionics program....................................... 147
Joint and combined communications test tool product suite 148
JP-8 soldier fuel cell................................... 148
LEAN munitions........................................... 148
Light unmanned aerial vehicle weaponization.............. 148
Light utility vehicle.................................... 149
Lightweight structures initiative........................ 149
Low cost course correction............................... 149
M5 high performance fiber for personnel armor systems.... 149
Medical technology applied research initiative........... 150
Clinical research programs............................. 150
Medium tactical truck development........................ 151
Miniature sensor development for small and tactical
unmanned aerial vehicles............................... 151
Modeling and analysis of the response of structures...... 151
Night vision fusion...................................... 151
Patient monitor with defibrillator....................... 152
Portable and mobile emergency broadband system........... 152
Shadow tactical unmanned aerial vehicle.................. 152
Smart responsive nanocomposites.......................... 152
Space and missile defense architecture analysis program.. 153
Strategic materials strategic manufacturing initiative... 153
Titanium alloy powder.................................... 153
Titanium extraction, mining, and process engineering
research............................................... 153
Unmanned systems initiative.............................. 153
Navy Research, Development, Test & Evaluation................ 154
Overview................................................... 154
Items of Special Interest.................................. 166
Advanced composite structures program.................... 166
Advanced gun system for DD(X) multi-mission destroyer.... 166
Advanced laser diode arrays.............................. 166
Advanced mine detection program.......................... 167
Advanced processor build integration..................... 167
Aegis open architecture.................................. 167
Affordable towed array construction...................... 168
Affordable weapon system................................. 168
Airborne mine neutralization system...................... 169
Airborne reconnaissance systems.......................... 169
AN/BLQ-10 test and support............................... 170
Anti-torpedo torpedo..................................... 170
Automatic radar periscope detection and discrimination... 170
Aviation ship integration center......................... 171
Aviation shipboard information technology initiative..... 171
Biomedical research imaging.............................. 172
Center for critical infrastructure protection............ 172
Claymore marine.......................................... 172
Common submarine radio room.............................. 172
Composite ceramic unmanned underwater vehicle............ 173
Consolidated undersea situational awareness.............. 173
DD(X) multi-mission destroyer............................ 174
Deployable joint command and control..................... 175
Digital modular radio.................................... 176
DP-2 thrust vectoring system............................. 176
Electromagnetic gun program.............................. 176
Embedded national tactical receiver integration with
advanced anti-radiation guided missile................. 177
Emerging/critical interconnection technology............. 177
Enterprise resource planning............................. 178
Enterprise targeting and strike system................... 178
Evolved sea sparrow missile capability for large decks... 178
Formable aligned carbon thermosets....................... 179
Gallium nitride radio-frequency power technology......... 179
Hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier.......................... 180
High temperature superconducting AC synchronous ship
propulsion motor....................................... 180
Hybrid POSS composites development....................... 181
Integrated personnel protection system................... 181
Integrated radar optical surveillance and sighting system 181
Intermediate modulus carbon fiber qualification.......... 182
Interrogator for high-speed retro-reflective
communications......................................... 182
Joint integrated systems technology...................... 183
Joint Strike Fighter..................................... 183
Laser radar data exploitation............................ 183
Littoral combat ship..................................... 184
Littoral support craft-experimental...................... 185
Low acoustic signature motor/propulsor................... 185
Low-cost terminal imaging seeker......................... 186
Low-power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle
processing engines..................................... 186
Marine mammal research program........................... 186
Nanoscience and nanomaterials............................ 187
One megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell demonstrator..... 187
Open architecture warfare systems........................ 187
Open architecture wireless sensors....................... 188
Organ transplant technology.............................. 188
Project M................................................ 189
Rapid deployment fortification wall...................... 189
Real-time precision targeting radar...................... 189
Reduced risk ordnance.................................... 190
Remote ocean surveillance system......................... 190
Ship system component development........................ 191
Spectral beam combining fiber lasers..................... 191
Submarine payloads and sensors program................... 191
Superconducting direct current homopolar motor........... 192
Tactical E-field buoy development........................ 192
Task force anti-submarine warfare........................ 192
Theater undersea warfare initiative...................... 193
Ultrasonic detection equipment........................... 193
VH-XX executive helicopter development................... 194
Virginia class multi-mission modules..................... 194
Virtual at-sea training initiative....................... 195
Wide band gap semiconductor power electronics............ 195
Air Force Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation.......... 195
Overview................................................... 195
Items of Special Interest.................................. 206
Advanced vehicle and propulsion center and engineering
research lab equipment upgrade......................... 206
Advanced wideband signals intelligence geo-processor..... 206
B-2 development.......................................... 206
Blue MAJIC............................................... 207
Cobra Ball............................................... 207
Combat optical receiver for smart and loitering standoff
weapons................................................ 207
Collaborative information technologies................... 208
Common aero vehicle...................................... 208
Defensive electro-optical tracker countermeasures
technologies........................................... 208
Distributed mission interoperability toolkit............. 208
Enterprise availability and cost optimization system..... 208
F-15C/D active electronically scanned array radar........ 209
Global Hawk United States Southern Command demonstration. 209
Global positioning system................................ 210
High accuracy network determination system............... 210
Identification of time critical targets.................. 210
Integrated cooling and power system magnetic bearing
technology............................................. 211
Integrated control for autonomous space systems.......... 211
Intelligent free space optical satellite communication
node................................................... 211
Joint surveillance target attack radar system blue force
tracking and combat identification..................... 211
KC-10 global air traffic management development.......... 212
Lightweight modular support jammer....................... 212
Metals affordability..................................... 212
Next generation bomber program........................... 213
Operationally responsive launch.......................... 213
Satellite simulation toolkit............................. 214
Satellite tool kit technical integration concept of
operations for tactical satellite...................... 214
Space-based infrared system.............................. 214
Space-based radar........................................ 215
Space cadre.............................................. 215
Space situational awareness initiative................... 215
Streaker small launch vehicle............................ 215
Transformational satellite communications................ 216
Ultra short pulse laser technology....................... 216
Upper stage engine technology............................ 216
Wideband gapfiller system................................ 216
Worldwide infrastructure security environment............ 217
Defense-Wide Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation....... 217
Overview................................................... 217
Items of Special Interest.................................. 228
Accelerating transition and fielding of advanced
technologies for emerging critical operational needs... 228
Advanced metal casting technology........................ 229
Advanced sensor applications program..................... 229
Advanced tactical laser program.......................... 229
Anti-radiation drug and trials program................... 230
Asymmetric protocols for biological defense.............. 230
Ballistic missile defense................................ 231
Advanced concepts...................................... 231
Boost defense segment.................................. 231
Core................................................... 231
Midcourse defense segment.............................. 232
Post Ramos Project..................................... 232
Products............................................... 232
Sensors................................................ 232
System interceptor..................................... 233
Technology............................................. 234
Terminal defense segment............................... 234
Business management modernization program................ 234
Chemical/biological defense research, development, test
and evaluation program............................... 235
Accelerating the research, development, and acquisition
of medical countermeasures against biological warfare
agents............................................... 235
Chemical/biological defense basic research initiative.. 236
Chemical/biological defense applied research initiative 237
Chemical/biological defense advanced technology
development initiative............................... 237
Joint biological point detection system................ 237
Joint service lightweight standoff chemical agent
detector............................................. 237
Connectory for rapid identification of technology
resources.............................................. 238
Counter-terrorism technology support..................... 238
Defense advanced research projects agency................ 238
Defense science and technology funding................... 240
Expanding the role of small businesses in the defense
acquisition process.................................... 241
High-speed/hypersonic reusable demonstration............. 242
Horizontal fusion........................................ 242
Implementation of defense biomedical countermeasures..... 243
Man portable air defense system defense program.......... 243
Measures and signatures intelligence consortium.......... 244
Medical free electron laser.............................. 244
Multi-wavelength surface scanning biologics sensor....... 244
National Defense University technology pilot program..... 245
Nuclear weapons effects applied research................. 245
Operationally responsive satellite....................... 246
Smart machine platform initiative........................ 246
Space and missile defense command simulation center...... 246
Special operations advanced technology development....... 247
Special operations technology development................ 247
Stimulated isomer energy release......................... 248
Tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination of
SYERS-2 data........................................... 248
Use of research and development funds to procure systems. 248
Walrus................................................... 249
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 250
Overview................................................... 250
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 252
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 252
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations............... 252
Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology..... 252
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 252
Section 211--Future Combat Systems Program Strategy........ 252
Section 212--Collaborative Program for Research and
Development of Vacuum Electronics Technologies........... 253
Section 213--Annual Comptroller General Report on Joint
Strike Fighter Program................................... 254
Section 214--Amounts for United States Joint Forces Command
to be Derived Only from Defense-wide Amounts............. 254
Section 215--Authority of Director of Defense Research and
Engineering to Award Prizes for Advanced Technology
Achievements............................................. 255
Section 216--Space Based Radar............................. 255
Section 217--Mark-54 Torpedo Product Improvement Program... 255
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense........................ 255
Section 221--Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense
Capabilities............................................. 255
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 256
OVERVIEW....................................................... 256
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 290
Budget Request Adjustments--Readiness........................ 290
Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities......... 291
Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan....................... 291
Paralyzed Veterans of America.............................. 291
Spare Engines.............................................. 291
Working Capital Funds...................................... 292
Information Technology Issues................................ 292
Overview................................................... 292
Information Technology Specific Reductions................. 293
Enterprise Resource Planning Program--Army National Guard 294
Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network................. 294
Navy Marine Corps Intranet................................. 295
Other Matters................................................ 295
Core Logistics Capability.................................. 295
Fire Emergency and Services Program........................ 296
Jinapsan Beach Properties in Guam.......................... 296
Moving Household Goods--Families First..................... 296
New Mexico Training Range Initiative....................... 297
Tents...................................................... 297
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 297
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 297
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding............. 297
Section 302--Working Capital Funds......................... 297
Section 303--Other Department of Defense Programs.......... 297
Section 304--Reimbursement of Members of the Armed Forces
Who Purchased Protective Body Armor during Shortage of
Defense Stocks of Body Armor............................. 297
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions......................... 298
Section 311--Report Regarding Encroachment Issues Affecting
Utah Test and Training Range, Utah....................... 298
Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues....................... 298
Section 321--Simplification of Annual Reporting
Requirements Concerning Funds Expended for Depot
Maintenance and Repair Workloads......................... 298
Section 322--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement
Concerning Management of Depot Employees................. 298
Section 323--Public-Private Competition for Work Performed
by Civilian Employees of Department of Defense........... 298
Section 324--Public-Private Competition Pilot Program...... 299
Section 325--Sense of Congress on Equitable Legal Standing
for Civilian Employees................................... 299
Section 326--Competitive Sourcing Reporting Requirement.... 299
Subtitle D--Information Technology........................... 300
Section 331--Preparation of Department of Defense Plan for
Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6................ 300
Section 332--Defense Business Enterprise Architecture,
System Accountability, and Conditions for Obligation of
Funds for Defense Business System Modernization.......... 300
Section 333--Establishment of Joint Program Office to
Improve Interoperability of Battlefield Management
Command and Control Systems.............................. 301
Subtitle E--Readiness Reporting Requirements................. 301
Section 341--Annual Report on Department of Defense
Operation and Financial Support for Military Museums..... 301
Section 342--Report on Department of Defense Programs for
Prepositioning of Material and Equipment................. 302
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 302
Section 351--Extension of the Arsenal Support Program
Initiative............................................... 302
Section 352--Limitation on Preparation or Implementation of
Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan..................... 302
Section 353--Procurement of Follow-On Contracts for the
Operation of Five Champion-Class T-5 Tank Vessels........ 303
Section 354--Sense of Congress on America's National World
War I Museum............................................. 303
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 303
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 303
Study of High Demand Low Density Military Units and
Personnel................................................ 303
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 304
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 304
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces............... 304
Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength
Minimum Levels........................................... 304
Section 403--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized
to be on Active Duty for Operational Support............. 304
Section 404--Accounting and Mangement of Reserve Component
Personnel Performing Active Duty or Full-Time National
Guard Duty for Operations Support........................ 304
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 305
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............ 305
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
Support of the Reserves.................................. 305
Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual
Status).................................................. 306
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2005 Limitation on Number of Non-
Dual Satus Technicians................................... 306
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 306
Section 421--Military Personnel............................ 306
Section 422--Armed Forces Retirement Home.................. 307
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 307
OVERVIEW....................................................... 307
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 308
Civilianization or Contracting Out of Military Chaplain
Positions................................................ 308
Curricula for Post-conflict Resolution..................... 308
Federal Voting Assistance Program.......................... 308
Joint Advertising and Market Research...................... 309
Meeting Department of Defense Requirements for Personnel
with Foreign Language and Regional Expertise............. 310
National Program for Citizen Soldier Support............... 310
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 311
Subtitle A--General and Flag Officer Matters................. 311
Section 501--Length of Service for Service Chiefs.......... 311
Section 502--Repeal of Requirement that Deputy Chiefs and
Assistant Chiefs of Naval Operations Be Selected from
Officers in the Line of the Navy......................... 311
Section 503--Increase in Age Limit for Deferral of
Mandatory Retirement for Up to 10 Senior General and Flag
Officers................................................. 311
Section 504--Increased Flexibility for Voluntary Retirement
for Military Officers.................................... 311
Section 505--Repeal of Requirement that No More than 50
Percent of Active Duty General and Flag Officers be in
Grades Above Brigadier General and Rear Admiral (Lower
Half).................................................... 312
Section 506--Revision to Terms for Assistants to the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for National Guard
and Reserve Matters...................................... 312
Section 507--Succession for Position of Chief, National
Guard Bureau............................................. 312
Section 508--Title of Vice Chief of the National Guard
Bureau Changed to Director of the Joint Staff of the
National Guard Bureau.................................... 312
Section 509--Two-Year Extension of Authority to Waive
Requirement that Reserve Chiefs and National Guard
Directors Have Significant Joint Duty Experience......... 313
Section 510--Repeal of Distribution Requirements for Naval
Reserve Flag Officers.................................... 313
Subtitle B--Other Officer Personnel Policy Matters........... 313
Section 511--Transition of the Active-Duty List Officer
Force to All Regular Status.............................. 313
Section 512--Mandatory Retention on Active duty to Qualify
for Retired Pay.......................................... 313
Section 513--Distribution in Grade of Marine Corps Reserve
Officers in an Active Status in Grades Below Brigadier
General.................................................. 314
Section 514--Tuition Assistance for Officers............... 314
Subtitle C--Reserve Component Matters........................ 314
Section 521--Revision to Statutory Purpose of the Reserve
Components............................................... 314
Section 522--Improved Access to Reserve Component Members
for Enhanced Training.................................... 314
Section 523--Status Under Disability Retirement System for
Reserve Members Released from Active Duty Due to
Inability to Perform within 30 Days of Call to Active
Duty..................................................... 315
Section 524--Federal Civil Service Military Leave for
Reserve and National Guard Civilian Technicians.......... 315
Section 525--Expanded Educational Assistance Authority for
Officers Commissioned Through ROTC Program at Military
Junior College........................................... 315
Section 526--Effect of Appointment or Commission as Officer
on Eligibility for Selected Reserve Education Loan
Repayment Program for Enlisted Members................... 315
Section 527--Number of Starbase Academies in a State....... 315
Section 528--Comptroller General Assessment of Integration
of Active and Reserve Components of the Navy............. 315
Section 529--Operational Activities Conducted by the
National Guard Under Authority of Title 32............... 316
Section 530--Army Program for Assignment of Active
Component Advisers to Units of the Selected Reserve...... 316
Subtitle D--Joint Officer Management......................... 316
Section 531--Strategic Plan to Link Joint Officer
Development to Overall Missions and Goals of Department
of Defense............................................... 316
Section 532--Joint Requirements for Promotion to Flag or
General Officer Grade.................................... 317
Section 533--Clarification of Tours of Duty Qualifying as a
Joint Duty Assignment.................................... 317
Section 534--Reserve Joint Special Officer Qualifications.. 317
Subtitle E--Professional Military Education.................. 318
Section 541--Improvement to Professional Military Education
in the Department of Defense............................. 318
Section 542--Ribbons to Recognize Completion of Joint
Professional Military Education.......................... 319
Section 543--Increase in Number of Private-Sector Civilians
Who May Be Enrolled for Instruction at National Defense
University............................................... 319
Section 544--Requirement for Completion of Phase I Joint
Professional Military Education before Promotion to
Colonel or Navy Captain.................................. 320
Subtitle F--Other Education and Training Matters............. 320
Section 551--College First Delayed Enlistment Program...... 320
Section 552--Standardization of Authority to Confer Degrees
on Graduates of Community College of the Air Force with
Authority for Other Schools of Air University............ 320
Section 553--Change in Titles of Heads of the Naval
Postgraduate School...................................... 320
Section 554--Increase from Two Years to Three Years in
Period for which Educational Leave of Absence May Be
Authorized............................................... 320
Section 555--Correction to Disparate Treatment of
Disabilities Sustained During Accession Training......... 320
Section 556--Prayer at Military Service Academy Activities. 321
Section 557--Revision to Conditions on Service of Officers
as Service Academy Superintendents....................... 321
Section 558--Codification of Prohibition on Imposition of
Certain Charges and Fees at Service Academies............ 321
Section 559--Qualifications of the Dean of the Faculty of
United States Air Force Academy.......................... 321
Subtitle G--Medals and Decorations and Special Promotions and
Appointments............................................... 322
Section 561--Separate Military Campaign Medals to Recognize
Service in Operation Enduring Freedom and Service in
Operation Iraqi Freedom.................................. 322
Section 562--Eligibility of All Uniformed Services
Personnel for National Defense Service Medal............. 322
Section 563--Authority to Appoint Brigadier General Charles
E. Yeager, United States Air Force (retired), to the
Grade of Major General on the Retired List............... 322
Section 564--Posthumous Commission of William Mitchell in
the Grade of Major General in the Army................... 322
Subtitle H--Military Justice Matters......................... 322
Section 571--Review on How Sexual Offenses Are Covered by
Uniformed Code of Military Justice....................... 322
Section 572--Service Time Not Lost When Confined in
Connection with Trial if Confinement Excused as
Unavoidable.............................................. 322
Section 573--Clarification of Authority of Military Legal
Assistance Counsel to Provide Military Legal Assistance
without Regard to Licensing Requirements................. 323
Subtitle I--Administrative and Management Matters............ 323
Section 581--Three-Year Extension of Limitation on
Reductions of Personnel of Agencies Responsible for
Review and Correction of Military Records................ 323
Section 582--Staffing and Funding for Defense Prisoner of
War/Missing Personnel Office............................. 323
Section 583--Permanent ID Cards for Retiree Dependents Age
70 and Older............................................. 324
Section 584--Authority to Provide Civilian Clothing to
Members Traveling in Connection with Medical Evacuation.. 324
Section 585--Authority to Accept Donation of Frequent Flyer
Miles, Credits, and Tickets to Facilitate Rest and
Recuperation Travel of Deployed Members of the Armed
Forces and Their Families................................ 324
Section 586--Limitation on Amendment or Cancellation of
Department of Defense Directive Relating to Reasonable
Access to Military Installations for Certain Personal
Commercial Solicitation.................................. 324
Section 587--Annual Identification of Reasons for
Discharges from the Armed Services During Preceding
Fiscal Years............................................. 324
Section 588--Authority for Federal Recognition of National
Guard Commissioned Officers Appointed from Former Coast
Guard Personnel.......................................... 325
Section 589--Study of Blended Wing Concept for the Air
Force.................................................... 325
Section 590--Continuation of Impact Aid Assistance on
Behalf of Dependents of Certain Members Despite Change in
Status of Member......................................... 325
Subtitle J--Other Matters....................................
Section 591--Employment Preferences for Spouses of Certain
Department of Defense Civilian Employees Subject to
Relocation Agreements.................................... 325
Section 592--Repeal of Requirement to Conduct Electronic
Voting Demonstration Project for the Federal Election to
be Held in November 2004................................. 326
Section 593--Examination of Sexual Assault in the Armed
Forces by the Defense Task Force Established to Examine
Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Military Service
Academies................................................ 326
Section 594--Renewal of Pilot Program for Treating GED and
Home School Diploma Recipients as High School Graduates
for Determinations of Eligibility for Enlistment......... 326
Section 595--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that
Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense Civilian Employees................. 327
Section 596--Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps and
Recruiter Access at Institutions of Higher Education..... 327
Section 597--Reports on Transformation Milestones.......... 327
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 327
OVERVIEW....................................................... 327
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 328
Combat-Related Special Compensation........................ 328
Commissary Funding After Closure of a Store................ 328
Consolidation of the Military Exchanges.................... 328
Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida, Combined Commissary
and Exchange Store....................................... 329
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 329
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 329
Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2005.... 329
Section 602--Authority to Provide Family Separation Basic
Allowance for Housing.................................... 329
Section 603--Geographic Basis for Basic Allowance for
Housing during Short Changes of Station for Professional
Military Education or Training........................... 329
Section 604--Immediate Lump-Sum Reimbursement for Unusual
Nonrecurring Expenses Incurred by Members Serving Outside
Continental United States................................ 330
Section 605--Income Replacement Payments for Reserves
Experiencing Extended and Frequent Mobilization for
Active Duty Service...................................... 330
Section 606--Authority for Certain Members Deployed in
Combat Zones to Receive Limited Advances on Their Future
Base Pay................................................. 330
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 330
Section 611--One-Year Extension of Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities.............................................. 330
Section 612--Reduction in Required Service Commitment to
Receive Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses............ 331
Section 613--Increase in Maximum Monthly Rate Authorized
for Hardship Duty Pay.................................... 331
Section 614--Termination of Assignment Incentive Pay for
Members Placed on Terminal Leave......................... 331
Section 615--Consolidation of Reenlistment and Enlistment
Bonus Authorities for Regular and Reserve Components..... 331
Section 616--Revision of Authority to Provide Foreign
Language Proficiency Pay................................. 331
Section 617--Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for
Critical Skills Retention Bonus and Expansion of
Authority to Provide Bonus............................... 332
Section 618--Eligibility of New Reserve Component Officers
for Accession or Affiliation Bonus for Officers in
Critical Skills.......................................... 332
Section 619--Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for
Incentive Bonus for Conversion to Military Occupational
Specialty to Ease Personnel Shortage..................... 332
Section 620--Availability of Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay
for Military Firefighters................................ 332
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowance.............. 332
Section 631--Expansion of Travel and Transportation
Allowances to Assist Survivors of a Deceased Member to
Attend Burial Ceremony of the Member..................... 332
Section 632--Transportation of Family Members Incident to
the Serious Illness or Injury of Members of the Uniformed
Services................................................. 332
Section 633--Reimbursement of Members for Certain Lodging
Costs Incurred in Connection with Student Dependent
Travel................................................... 333
Subtitle D--Survivors Benefits............................... 333
Section 641--Computation of Benefits Under Survivor Benefit
Plan for Surviving Spouses Over Age 62................... 333
Section 642--Open Enrollment Period for Survivor Benefit
Plan Commencing October 1, 2005.......................... 333
Section 643--Source of Funds for Survivor Benefit Plan
Annuities for Department of Defense Beneficiaries Over
Age 62................................................... 333
Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentality Benefits................................... 333
Section 651--Consolidation and Reorganization of
Legislative Provisions Regarding Defense Commissary
System and Exchanges and other Morale, Welfare, and
Recreational Activities.................................. 333
Section 652--Consistent State Treatment of Department of
Defense Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program..... 334
Section 653--Cooperation and Assistance for Qualified
Scouting Organizations Serving Dependents of Members of
the Armed Forces and Civilian Employees Overseas......... 334
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 335
Section 661--Repeal of Requirement that Members Entitled to
Basic Allowance for Subsistence Pay Subsistence Charges
while Hospitalized....................................... 335
Section 662--Clarification of Education Loans Qualifying
for Education Loan Repayment Program for Reserve
Component Health Professions Officers.................... 335
Section 663--Survey and Analysis of Effect of Extended and
Frequent Mobilization of Reservists for Active Duty
Service on Reservist Income.............................. 335
TITLE VII--HEALTHCARE MATTERS.................................... 335
OVERVIEW....................................................... 335
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 336
Collection of Perinatal Information........................ 336
Coordination of TRICARE and Medicare Benefits and Provider
Payments................................................. 336
Department of Defense Chemical and Biological Test Review.. 337
Landstuhl Regional Medical Center Alteration............... 337
Military-Civilian Education Programs Related to Sexual
Health Decision-Making................................... 338
Nurse Triage and Health Information Line Services.......... 338
Reserve Component Requirement for Medical and Dental
Readiness Accountability................................. 339
Resource Sharing Agreements................................ 339
State-of-the-Art Mobility Equipment........................ 339
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 339
Subtitle A--Enhanced Health Care Benefits for Reserves....... 339
Section 701--Demonstration Project for TRICARE Coverage for
Ready Reserve Members.................................... 339
Section 702--Comptroller General Report on the Cost and
Feasibility of Providing Private Health Insurance
Stipends for Members of the Ready Reserve................ 340
Section 703--Improvement of Medical Services for Activated
Members of the Ready Reserve and Their Families.......... 340
Section 704--Modification of Waiver of Certain Deductibles
Under TRICARE Program.................................... 340
Section 705--Authority for Payment by United States of
Additional Amounts Billed by Health Care Providers to
Activated Reserve Members................................ 340
Section 706--Extension of Transitional Health Care Benefits
After Separation from Active Duty........................ 341
Subtitle B--Other Benefits Improvements...................... 341
Section 711--Coverage of Certain Young Children Under
TRICARE Dental Program................................... 341
Section 712--Comptroller General Report on Provision of
Health and Support Services for Exceptional Family Member
Program Enrollees........................................ 341
Section 713--Exceptional Eligibility for TRICARE Prime
Remote................................................... 342
Section 714--Transition to Home Health Care Benefit Under
Sub-acute Care Program................................... 342
Section 715--Requirement Relating to Prescription Drug
Benefits for Medicare-Eligible Enrollees Under Defense
Health Care Plans........................................ 342
Section 716--Professional Accreditation of Military
Dentists................................................. 342
Section 717--Addition of Certain Unremarried Former Spouses
to Persons Eligible for Dental Insurance Plan of Retirees
of the Uniformed Services................................ 342
Section 718--Waiver of Collection of Payments Due from
Certain Persons Unaware of Loss of CHAMPUS Eligibility... 343
Subtitle C--Planning, Programming, and Management............ 343
Section 721--Pilot Program for Transformation of Health
Care Delivery............................................ 343
Section 722--Study of Provision of Travel Reimbursement to
Hospitals for Certain Military Disability Retirees....... 343
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 344
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 344
Subtitle A--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
Procedures, and Limitations.............................. 344
Section 801--Rapid Acquisition Authority to Respond to
Combat Emergencies....................................... 344
Section 802--Defense Acquisition Workforce Changes......... 344
Section 803--Limitation on Task and Delivery Order
Contracts................................................ 344
Section 804--Funding for Contract Cancellation Ceilings for
Certain Multiyear Procurement Contracts.................. 344
Section 805--Increased Threshold for Requiring Contractors
to Provide Specified Employee Information to Cooperative
Agreement Holders........................................ 345
Section 806--Extension of Authority for Use of Simplified
Acquisition Procedures................................... 345
Section 807--Authority to Adjust Acquisition-Related Dollar
Thresholds for Inflation................................. 345
Subtitle B--United States Defense Industrial Base Provisions. 345
Section 811--Defense Reciprocity Trade..................... 345
Section 812--Amendments to Domestic Source Requirements.... 346
Section 813--Three-Year Extension of Restriction on
Acquisition of Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) Carbon Fiber from
Foreign Sources.......................................... 346
Section 814--Grant Program for Defense Contractors to
Implement Strategies to Avoid Outsourcing of Jobs........ 346
Section 815--Preference for Domestic Freight Forwarding
Services................................................. 346
Subtitle C--Other Acquisition Matters........................ 346
Section 821--Sustainment and Modernization Plans for
Existing Systems while Replacement Systems are Under
Development.............................................. 346
Section 822--Review and Demonstration Project Relating to
Contractor Employees..................................... 347
Section 823--Defense Acquisition Workforce Limitation and
Reports.................................................. 348
Section 824--Provision of Information to Congress to
Enhance Transparency in Contracting...................... 348
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 348
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 348
National Defense University................................ 348
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 348
Section 901--Change in Title of Secretary of the Navy to
Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps................... 348
Section 902--Transfer of Center for the Study of Chinese
Military Affairs from National Defense University to
United States-China Economic and Security Review
Commission............................................... 348
Section 903--Transfer to the Secretary of the Army of
Responsibility for Assembled Chemical Weapons
Alternatives Program..................................... 349
Section 904--Modification of Obligated Service Requirements
under National Security Education Program................ 350
Section 905--Change of Membership of Certain Councils...... 350
Section 906--Actions to Prevent the Abuse of Detainees..... 350
Section 907--Responses to Congressional Inquiries.......... 350
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 351
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 351
Counter-Drug Activities...................................... 351
Overview................................................... 351
Items of Special Interest.................................. 351
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and tanker
support................................................ 351
Northern Command counter-narcotics support............... 351
Southwest Border Fence................................... 352
Tethered Aerostat Radar System........................... 352
Other Activities............................................. 352
Airlift Support for Homeland Defense Missions............ 352
Civil Reserve Air Fleet.................................. 353
Defense Transformation................................... 353
Global War on Terrorism.................................. 353
Homeland Defense Forces.................................. 354
Wisconsin Project's International Export Control Center.. 354
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 355
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 355
Section 1001--Transfer Authority........................... 355
Section 1002--Budget Justification Documents for Operation
and Maintenance.......................................... 355
Section 1003--Retention of Fees from Intellectual Property
Licenses................................................. 356
Section 1004--Authority to Waive Claims of the United
States when Amounts Recoverable are Less than Costs of
Collection............................................... 356
Section 1005--Repeal of Funding Restrictions Concerning
Development of Medical Countermeasures against Biological
Warfare Threats.......................................... 356
Section 1006--Report on Budgeting for Exchange Rates for
Foreign Currency Fluctuations............................ 357
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 357
Section 1011--Authority for Award of Contracts for Ship
Dismantling on Net-Cost Basis............................ 357
Section 1012--Independent Study to Assess Cost
Effectiveness of the Navy Ship Construction Program...... 357
Section 1013--Authority to Transfer Specified Former Naval
Vessels to Certain Foreign Countries..................... 357
Section 1014--Limitation on Leasing of Foreign-Built
Vessels.................................................. 357
Subtitle C--Sunken Military Craft............................ 358
Section 1021-28--Protection of Sunken Military Craft....... 358
Subtitle D--Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 358
Section 1031--Continuation of Authority to Use Dapartment
of Defense Funds for Unified Counter-Drug and Counter-
Terrorism Campaign in Colombia........................... 358
Section 1032--Limitation on Number of United States
Military Personnel in Colombia........................... 358
Subtitle E--Reports.......................................... 359
Section 1041--Study of Continued Requirement for Two-Crew
Manning for Ballistic Missile Submarines................. 359
Section 1042--Study of Effect on Defense Industrial Base of
Elimination of United States Domestic Firearms
Manufacturing Base....................................... 359
Section 1043--Study of Extent and Quality of Training
Provided to Members of the Armed Services to Prepare for
Post-Conflict Operations................................. 359
Subtitle F--Security Matters................................. 359
Section 1051--Use of National Driver Register for Personnel
Security Investigations and Determinations............... 359
Section 1052--Standards for Disqualification from
Eligibility for Department of Defense Security Clearances 359
Subtitle G--Transportation Matters........................... 360
Section 1061--Use of Military Aircraft to Transport Mail to
and from Overseas Locations.............................. 360
Section 1062--Reorganization and Clarification of Certain
Provisions Relating to Control and Supervision of
Transportation within the Department of Defense.......... 360
Section 1063--Determination of Whether Private Air Carriers
are Controlled by United States Citizens for Purposes of
Eligibility for Government Contract for Transportation of
Passengers or Supplies................................... 360
Section 1064--Evaluation of Whether to Prohibit Certain
Offers for Transportation of Security-Sensitive Cargo.... 360
Subtitle H--Other Matters.................................... 361
Section 1071--Two-Year Extension of Authority of the
Secretary of Defense to Engage in Commercial Activities
as Security for Intelligence Collection Activities Abroad 361
Section 1072--Assistance for Study of Feasibility of
Biennial International Air Trade Show in the United
States and for Initial Implementation.................... 361
Section 1073--Technical and Clerical Amendments............ 361
Section 1074--Commission on the Long-Term Implementation of
the New Strategic Posture of the United States........... 361
Section 1075--Liability Protection for Certain Department
of Defense Volunteers Working in the Maritime Environment 361
Section 1076--Transfer of Historic F3A-1 Brewster Corsair
Aircraft................................................. 361
TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL............... 362
OVERVIEW....................................................... 362
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 362
Section 1101--Payment of Federal Employee Health Benefit
Premiums for Mobilized Federal Employees................. 362
Section 1102--Foreign Language Proficiency Pay............. 362
Section 1103--Pay Parity for Civilian Intelligence
Personnel................................................ 362
Section 1104--Pay Parity for Senior Executives in
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities................... 363
Section 1105--Prohibition of Unauthorized Wearing or Use of
Civilian Medals or Decorations........................... 363
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS..................... 363
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 363
Subtitle A--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Global
War on Terrorism........................................... 363
Section 1201--Documentation of Conditions in Iraq under
Former Dictatorial Government as Part of Transition to
Post-Dictatorial Government.............................. 363
Section 1202--Support of Military Operations to Combat
Terrorism................................................ 363
Section 1203--Commander's Emergency Response Program....... 364
Section 1204--Status of Iraqi Security Forces.............. 364
Section 1205--Guidance and Report Required on Contractors
Supporting Deployed Forces in Iraq....................... 364
Section 1206--Findings and Sense of Congress Concerning
Army Specialist Joseph Darby............................. 364
Subtitle B--Other Matters.................................... 364
Section 1211--Assignment of Allied Naval Personnel to
Submarine Safety Programs................................ 364
Section 1212--Expansion of Entities of the People's
Republic of China Subject to Certain Presidential
Authorities when Operating in the United States.......... 365
Section 1213--Report by President on Global Peace
Operations Initiative.................................... 365
Section 1214--Procurement Sanctions against Foreign Persons
that Transfer Certain Defense Articles and Services to
the People's Republic of China........................... 366
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE
FORMER SOVIET UNION............................................ 366
OVERVIEW....................................................... 366
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 368
Visa Requirements.......................................... 368
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 368
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
Programs and Funds....................................... 368
Section 1302--Funding Allocations.......................... 368
Section 1303--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on
Funding for Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in
Russia................................................... 368
TITLE XIV--EXPORT CONTROLS AND COUNTERPROLIFERATION MATTERS...... 368
OVERVIEW....................................................... 368
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 369
Defense Technology Security Administration................. 369
Defense Threat Reduction Agency............................ 369
Nonproliferation Education................................. 370
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 370
Subtitle A--Export Controls.................................. 370
Section 1401--Definitions under Arms Export Control Act.... 370
Section 1402--Exemption from Licensing Requirements for
Export of Significant Military Equipment................. 371
Section 1403--Cooperative Projects with Friendly Foreign
Countries................................................ 371
Section 1404--Licensing Requirement for Export of
Militarily Critical Technologies......................... 372
Section 1405--Control of Exports of United States Weapons
Technology to the People's Republic of China............. 373
Section 1406--Strengthening International Export Controls.. 373
Subtitle B--Counterproliferation Matters..................... 373
Section 1411--Defense International Counterproliferation
Programs................................................. 373
Section 1412--Defense Counterproliferation Fellowship
Program.................................................. 374
Subtitle C--Initiatives Relating to Countries of the Former
Soviet Union............................................... 374
Section 1421--Silk Road Initiative......................... 374
Section 1422--Teller-Kurchatov Nonproliferation Fellowships 374
Section 1423--Collaboration to Reduce the Risks of a Launch
of Russian Nuclear Weapons............................... 374
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION
IRAQI FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM................... 375
OVERVIEW....................................................... 375
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATION................................. 375
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 378
Procurement................................................ 378
Operations and Maintenance................................. 378
Military Personnel......................................... 379
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 380
Section 1501--Purpose...................................... 380
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 380
Section 1511--Army Procurement............................. 380
Section 1512--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement............ 380
Section 1513--Air Force Procurement........................ 380
Section 1514--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement.......... 380
Section 1515--Operation and Maintenance.................... 380
Section 1516--Defense Health Program....................... 380
Section 1517--Military Personnel........................... 380
Section 1518--Treatment as Additional Authorization........ 381
Section 1519--Transfer Authority........................... 381
Section 1520--Designation of Emergency Authorization....... 381
Subtitle B--Personnel Provisions............................. 381
Section 1531--Three Year Increase in Active Army Strength
Levels................................................... 381
Section 1532--Three Year Increase in Active Marine Corps
Strength Levels.......................................... 381
Section 1533--Extension of Increased Rates for Imminent
Danger Pay and Family Separation Allowance............... 382
Subtitle C--Financial Management Matters..................... 382
Section 1541--Revised Funding Methodology for Military
Retiree Health Care Benefits............................. 382
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 382
PURPOSE........................................................ 382
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW................................. 382
TITLE XXI--ARMY.................................................. 400
SUMMARY........................................................ 400
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 400
Planning and Design........................................ 400
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 400
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 400
Section 2102--Family Housing............................... 400
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 400
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........ 400
Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2004 Projects........................ 401
Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2003 Projects........................ 401
TITLE XXII--NAVY................................................. 401
SUMMARY........................................................ 401
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 401
Planning and Design........................................ 401
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 401
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 401
Section 2202--Family Housing............................... 401
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 402
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........ 402
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE........................................... 402
SUMMARY........................................................ 402
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 402
Planning and Design........................................ 402
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 402
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 402
Section 2302--Family Housing............................... 402
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 403
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force... 403
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES..................................... 403
SUMMARY........................................................ 403
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 403
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 403
Section 2402--Improvements to Family Housing Units......... 403
Section 2403--Energy Conservation Projects................. 403
Section 2404--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense
Agencies................................................. 403
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM...................................................... 404
SUMMARY........................................................ 404
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 404
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 404
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........ 404
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 404
SUMMARY........................................................ 404
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 404
Planning and Design, Air National Guard.................... 404
Planning and Design, Air Reserve........................... 405
Planning and Design, Army National Guard................... 405
Planning and Design, Army Reserve.......................... 405
Unspecified Minor Construction, Army National Guard........ 405
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 405
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 405
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS.......... 406
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 406
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
Required to be Specified by Law.......................... 406
Section 2702--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 2002 Projects....................................... 406
Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 2001 Projects....................................... 406
Section 2704--Effective Date............................... 406
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS................................. 407
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 407
Base Realignment and Closure............................... 407
Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs Health Care
Facility Sharing......................................... 407
Housing Requirements Analyses.............................. 408
Military Housing Privatization Program..................... 408
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 409
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes.......................................... 409
Section 2801--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Carrying
Out Unspecified Minor Military Construction Projects..... 409
Section 2802--Assessment of Vulnerability of Military
Installations to Terrorist Attack and Annual Report on
Military Construction Requirements Related to
Antiterrorism and Force Protection....................... 409
Section 2803--Changes in Threshold for Congressional
Notification Regarding Use of Operation and Maintenance
Funds for Facility Repair................................ 409
Section 2804--Reporting Requirements Regarding Military
Family Housing Requirements for General Officers and Flag
Officers................................................. 409
Section 2805--Congressional Notification of Deviations from
Authorized Cost Variations for Military Construction
Projects and Military Family Housing Projects............ 410
Section 2806--Repeal of Limitation on Use of Alternative
Authority for Acquisition and Improvement of Military
Family Housing........................................... 410
Section 2807--Temporary Authority to Accelerate Design
Efforts for Military Construction Projects Carried Out
Using Design-Build Selection Procedures.................. 410
Section 2808--Exchange or Sale of Reserve Component
Facilities to Acquire Replacement Facilities............. 411
Section 2809--One-Year Extension of Temporary, Limited
Authority to Use Operation and Maintenance Funds for
Construction Projects Outside the United States.......... 411
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 411
Section 2811--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Reporting
Real Property Transactions............................... 411
Section 2812--Reorganization of Existing Administrative
Provisions Relating to Real Property Transactions........ 411
Section 2813--Treatment of Money Rentals from Golf Course
at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois......................... 411
Section 2814--Number of Contracts Authorized Department-
Wide Under Demonstration Program on Reduction in Long-
Term Facility Maintenance Costs.......................... 411
Section 2815--Repeal of Commission on Review of Overseas
Military Facility Sturcture of the United States......... 412
Section 2816--Designation of Airmen Leadership School at
Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, in Honor of John J. Rhodes,
a Former Minority Leader of the House of Representatives. 412
Section 2817--Elimination of Reversionary Interests
Clouding United States Title to Property Used as Navy
Homeports................................................ 412
Section 2818--Report on Real Property Disposal at Marine
Corps Air Station, El Toro, California................... 412
Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment..................... 412
Section 2821--Two-Year Postponement of 2005 Base Closure
and Relignment Round and Submission of Reports Regarding
Future Infrastructure Requirements for the Armed Forces.. 412
Section 2822--Establishment of Specific Deadline for
Submission of Revisions to Force-Structure Plan and
Infrastructure Inventory for Next Base Closure Round..... 413
Section 2823--Specification of Final Selection Criteria for
Next Base Closure Round.................................. 414
Section 2824--Requirement for Unanimous Vote of Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Commission to Add to or
Otherwise Expand Closure and Realignment Recommendations
made by Secretary of Defense............................. 414
Section 2825--Adherence to Certain Authorities on
Preservation of Military Depot Capabilities During Any
subsequent Round of Base Closures and Realignments....... 414
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances................................. 415
Part I--Army Conveyances..................................... 415
Section 2831--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction,
Defense Supply Center, Columbus, Ohio.................... 415
Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Fort Hood, Texas............ 415
Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Army National Guard
Facility, Seattle, Washington............................ 415
Part II--Navy Conveyances....................................
Section 2841--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Nebraska Avenue
Naval Complex, District of Columbia...................... 415
Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Navy Property, Former Fort
Sheridan, Illinois....................................... 416
Section 2843--Land Exchange, Naval Air Station, Patuxent
River, Maryland..........................................
Part III--Air Force Conveyances.............................. 416
Section 2851--Land Exchange, Maxwell Air Force Base,
Alabama.................................................. 416
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................... 416
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 416
OVERVIEW....................................................... 416
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 427
National Nuclear Security Administration..................... 427
Overview................................................... 427
Adjustments to the Budget Request.......................... 427
Reductions............................................... 427
Directed stockpile work................................ 427
Campaigns.............................................. 427
International nuclear materials protection and
cooperation.......................................... 427
Increases................................................ 428
Engineering campaign................................... 428
Readiness in technical base and facilities............. 428
Advanced Concepts and Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator...... 428
Advanced Technology Research and Development............... 429
Los Alamos Public Schools.................................. 429
Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility...................... 430
Environmental and Other Defense Activities................... 430
Overview................................................... 430
Adjustments to the Budget Request.......................... 430
Reductions............................................... 430
Waste incidental to reprocessing....................... 430
Worker and community transition........................ 431
Office of future liabilities........................... 431
Increases................................................ 432
2035 defense site accelerated completions.............. 432
Non-closure environmental activities................... 432
Idaho facilities management-other defense activities... 432
Technology Deployment and Development...................... 433
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. 433
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 433
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........ 433
Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration..... 433
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Management............. 434
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities..................... 434
Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal............... 434
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 434
Section 3111--Extension of Authority for Appointment of
Certain Scientific, Engineering and Technical Personnel.. 434
Section 3112--Requirements for Baseline of Projects under
Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program... 434
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 434
Section 3131--Transfers and reprogrammings of National
Nuclear Security Administration Funds.................... 434
Section 3132--National Academy of Sciences study on
management by Department of Energy of high-level
radioactive waste........................................ 435
Section 3133--Contract to Review Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant, New Mexico........................................ 435
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 436
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 436
Section 3201--Authorization................................ 436
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE......................... 436
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 436
Section 3301--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile
Funds.................................................... 436
Section 3302--Revisions of Limitations on Required
Disposals of Certain Materials in National Defense
Stockpile................................................ 436
Section 3303--Authority to Dispose of Certain Materials in
National Defense Stockpile............................... 436
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................ 437
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 437
Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations.............. 437
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 437
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 437
Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Maritime
Administration for Fiscal Year 2005...................... 437
Section 3502--Extension of Authority to Provide War Risk
Insurance for Merchant Marine Vessels.................... 437
Departmental Data................................................ 437
Department of Defense Authorization Request.................... 438
Committee Position............................................... 438
Communications From Other Committees............................. 438
Fiscal Data...................................................... 448
Congressional Budget Office Estimate........................... 448
Committee Cost Estimate........................................ 448
Oversight Findings............................................... 449
General Performance Goals and Objectives......................... 449
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 450
Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 450
Roll Call Votes.................................................. 450
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 459
Additional Views................................................. 462
Additional views of Ike Skelton................................ 462
Additional views of Solomon P. Ortiz........................... 464
Additional views of Steve Israel............................... 465
Additional views of Kendrick B. Meek........................... 466
Additional views of Mike D. Rogers............................. 469
Additional views of Vic Snyder and Mac Thornberry.............. 471
Additional views of Jim Cooper and Tim Ryan of Ohio............ 473
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 108-491
======================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
_______
May 14, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hunter, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4200]
[Includes committee cost estimate]
The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 4200) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2005 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2005,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the
bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the
reported bill.
The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment
to the text of the bill.
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 4200. The title of
the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the
bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as
amended.
PURPOSE
The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2005 for procurement and for research, development, test
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2005 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2005: (a) the
personnel strength for each active duty component of the
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the
Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed
forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the
active and reserve components of the military departments; (4)
Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel
and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel
actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2005 for military construction
and family housing; (6) Authorize emergency appropriations for
increased costs due to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
Enduring Freedom; (7) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2005 for the Department of Energy national security programs;
(8) Modify provisions related to the National Defense
Stockpile; and (9) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2005 for the Maritime Administration.
RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS
The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The
bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts
provide budget authority. The bill addresses the following
categories in the Department of Defense budget: procurement;
research, development, test and evaluation; operation and
maintenance; working capital funds, military personnel; and
military construction and family housing. The bill also
addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs and
the Maritime Administration.
Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.
SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL
The President requested budget authority of $423.1 billion
for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 2005.
Of this amount, the President requested $402.6 billion for the
Department of Defense, including $9.5 billion for military
construction and family housing. The defense budget request for
fiscal year 2004 also included $17.2 billion for Department of
Energy national security programs and the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board.
The committee recommends an overall level of $422.1 billion
in budget authority. This amount represents an increase of
approximately $21.7 billion from the amount authorized for
appropriation by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136).
In addition, the committee recommends $25.0 billion in
budget authority for the Department of Defense for fiscal year
2005, in addition to amounts otherwise authorized by this Act,
to provide funds for additional costs due to Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS
The following table provides a summary of the amounts
requested and that would be authorized for appropriation in the
bill (in the column labeled ``Budget Authority Implication of
Committee Recommendation'') and the committee's estimate of how
the committee's recommendations relate to the budget totals for
the national defense function. For purposes of estimating the
budget authority implications of committee action, the table
reflects the numbers contained in the President's budget for
proposals not in the committee's legislative jurisdiction.
RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL
H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005, comes with our nation at war on multiple
fronts. The ongoing Iraq mission, Operation Enduring Freedom in
Afghanistan, and the broader Global War on Terrorism demand an
appropriate level of resources and capabilities that Congress
can and should provide. Additional security challenges
elsewhere require planning and perseverance, including a
continued commitment to the evolution of the U.S. armed forces.
H.R. 4200 attempts to do all this given limited resources in
the ``Year of the Soldier''.
The largest mobilization in decades, Operation Iraqi
Freedom will remain the focus of our armed forces for some
time. The mission to rebuild and rehabilitate Iraq after
decades of tyranny, though, is not static; the 2004 force
rotation plan, completed earlier this year, represents the
largest troop transfer undertaken by U.S. forces since World
War II. In the Army alone, elements from eight of ten divisions
were on the move during the first four months of 2004--a force
of 250,000 soldiers, nearly half of them reservists.
The challenges associated with the 2004 Operation Iraqi
Freedom rotation of forces has confirmed pervasive concerns
over end-strength shortfalls that strain armed forces personnel
and undermine their ability to perform critical missions.
Sustaining troop levels for Operation Iraqi Freedom and the
broader Global War on Terrorism has in fact already exceeded
the Army's immediate capabilities. As a result, the U.S. Marine
Corps deployed 25,000 active and reserve component personnel to
Iraq for two successive seven-month rotations, beginning in
March 2004, while the Army was left extending the tours of more
than 20,000 soldiers there. The Air Force and Navy, moreover,
have deployed assets to Iraq to substitute for capabilities a
stressed Army Total Force cannot provide.
Even these forces may not relieve the Army's overall
burden. Over the last year, the committee has examined a range
of issues related to the armed forces' inability to meet
military commitments and, perhaps, potential emergencies
worldwide. The committee, for instance, found that the Army
cannot meet its stated goal of resetting the force within 120
days of returning from Iraq so that it is available for
contingencies elsewhere. At the same time, it discovered that
service force structure and manning decisions over the years
have yielded insufficient numbers of high demand and low
density assets, including special operations forces,
intelligence and law enforcement units--elements critical to
the Global War on Terrorism.
Recent operations reinforced similar conclusions on the
adequacy of the reserve component end-strength. Since the end
of the 1991 Gulf War, reliance on the overall reserve component
for peacetime support has increased twelve-fold. In fact, for
the last seven years the reserve component has provided annual
peacetime support equaling roughly 33,000 active duty
personnel, in course adopting missions previously the exclusive
domain of full-time forces. Wartime reliance on reserve
component personnel has also increased. For example, average
mobilization tours for reservists were substantially
lengthened, from 156 days during Operations Desert Storm and
Desert Shield to 319 for Operations Iraqi Freedom, Enduring
Freedom and Noble Eagle, the continuing homeland security
mission.
These trends suggest the committee cannot expect reserve
component relief anytime soon; the Department of Defense itself
assumes there will be no substantial reduction in the length of
the average mobilization tour. By the end of January 2003--
immediately prior to mobilizations in support of the war with
Iraq and just fifteen months after the start of the Global War
on Terrorism--more than 56,000 reserve component personnel
remained on active duty worldwide. In comparison, at the peak
of the Iraq mobilization, 225,000 reservists found themselves
on active duty. Presently, the Department of Defense reports
that sustaining troop levels in Iraq will require the
mobilization of at least 100,000 to 150,000 reservists annually
for the next several years. Reserve component personnel will
ultimately comprise nearly 40 percent of all forces committed
to Iraq and Kuwait during this rotation.
The demand for additional manpower to sustain mission
requirements and fulfill required capabilities is finally
reflected in the actual active component strengths each service
needed during the past two fiscal years--all services executed
actual end-strength levels well above the minimum authorized
amount. In general, these additional active component personnel
were funded as part of emergency supplemental appropriations.
Finding this approach to managing what is clearly an end-
strength shortfall self-defeating and ultimately unsustainable,
the committee recommends the first significant increase in
military end strength in decades.
Further, H.R. 4200 directly addresses the numerous and
growing force protection requirements that have emerged from
the threats and realities found on the Iraqi battlefield. This
legislation provides critical force protection resources,
including additional body armor, countermeasures for improvised
explosive devices, armored ``Humvees'' and armor add-on kits
for ``thin-skinned'' vehicles. These tangible improvements in
force protection accompany equally important combat capability
enhancements. H.R. 4200 will provide the American warfighter
with much needed supplies and ammunition to continue a ``hot''
war against global terrorism and the anti-democratic insurgents
in Iraq.
Today's adversaries are adaptable; they sabotage Iraq's
developing infrastructure, ambush noncombatants and coalition
forces alike and have found a powerfully simple capability to
neutralize American conventional military might through the use
of remote improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, to terrorize
the country and inflict a steady number of casualties on
coalition forces. U.S. servicemen and women must have every
possible advantage to beat them soundly and safely. Believing
that the armed forces cannot allow more unforeseen dangers--a
new ``IED problem''--to surprise our troops and threaten their
missions, H.R. 4200 makes available funds for advanced research
and development to counter emerging threats to the American
Soldier.
While the American Soldier is at work in Iraq, Afghanistan,
and terrorist locations worldwide, other potential threats to
the United States loom. The committee believes that the
standoffs on the Korean Peninsula and in the Taiwan Strait can
be resolved peacefully if all parties act in good faith, but
the U.S. must remain capable of responding to aggression
alongside its regional partners whenever threats to peace and
democracy surface. By supporting initiatives to strengthen our
force posture and, thus, that of our allies and friends in the
region, H.R. 4200 ensures that U.S. forces will not fight wars
unnecessarily and from a disadvantaged starting point.
Over the long term, the committee understands that the
outcome of future engagements, including terrorist attacks, may
be decided during today's battles against proliferation. H.R.
4200 supports current programs designed to stop potential
aggressors from obtaining advanced conventional weapons and
weapons of mass destruction, including their long-range and
stealth delivery systems. H.R. 4200 also takes additional steps
to help the United States maintain its technological advantage
by strengthening domestic and multilateral controls on arms as
well as militarily-sensitive goods and technologies. Coupled
with measures designed to strengthen the U.S. industrial base
also contained in H.R. 4200, smarter export controls will help
prevent a situation in which our troops and homeland are
threatened with American-made or designed technology without
sacrificing American economic productivity.
In summary, this legislation is designed to strike a proper
balance. H.R. 4200 provides such balance between the exigencies
of ensuring full and total support for the needs of our men and
women presently engaged in the difficult fight against global
terrorism, while also advancing the necessary mix of policy and
investments to ensure America's defense capabilities remain
overwhelmingly superior to any known and future adversary,
adaptable to the fast changing nature of the threat, and able
to decisively defend our national interests now and in the
future.
HEARINGS
Committee consideration of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 results from hearings
that began on February 4, 2004 and that were completed on April
1, 2004.
The full committee conducted seven sessions. In addition, a
total of 29 sessions were conducted by 6 different
subcommittees on various titles of the bill.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
OVERVIEW
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $76,034.3
million for procurement. This represents a $1,830.8 million
increase from the amount authorized for fiscal year 2004.
The committee recommends authorization of $76,215.7
million, an increase of $190.4 million from the fiscal year
2005 request after the transfer of $1,372.0 million and $9.0
million respectfully, for chemical agent and munitions
destruction, Army, and the Defense Production Act, which have
been transferred to other titles.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
procurement program are identified in the table below. Major
issues are discussed following the table.
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $2,658.2
million for Aircraft Procurement, Army. The committee
recommends authorization of $2,805.9 million, an increase of
$147.7 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Aircraft Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Airborne communications
The budget request contained $9.8 million to procure
communication equipment for Army aircraft, but included no
funds to upgrade the AN/ARS-6 personnel locator system for Army
special operations forces (SOF) MH-60 and MH-47 helicopters.
The committee is aware of the urgent need for modern
survival radios for Army SOF aircraft to replace older, less
capable equipment that these aircraft now carry. Army SOF
helicopters routinely perform search and rescue operations with
all components of the U.S. armed forces, as well as with the
disparate elements of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
member militaries. Growing numbers of these military
organizations are migrating to modern survival systems that are
incompatible with the communications equipment currently
deployed on Army SOF aircraft.
The committee recommends $15.8 million for Army airborne
communications, an increase of $6.0 million for procurement of
the AN/ARS-6 version 12.
Blackhawk helicopter de-icing system upgrade
The budget request included $6.1 million for UH-60
modifications.
The committee directs that $2.4 million be made available
within the funds authorized for Army aircraft procurement for
de-icing system upgrades for the Blackhawk helicopter.
Crashworthy crew seats
The budget request contained $703.5 million for CH-47 Cargo
Helicopter Mods, of which no funds were requested for the
crashworthy crew chief seats.
The crashes of CH-47s due to hostile fire and non-hostile
fire incidents in Operation Iraqi Freedom demonstrate the need
for crashworthy crew chief seats. The installation of
crashworthy seats will increase crewmember mission efficiency
and effectiveness while significantly reducing the risk of
death or injury during a hard landing or controlled crash.
Survivability equipment is an essential part of force
protection, which is the committee's highest priority.
The committee recommends $710.0 million, an increase of
$6.5 million for the procurement of crashworthy crew chief
seats for the CH-47 aircraft.
Modern signal processing unit
The budget request contained $37.2 million for AH-64 Mods,
of which no funds were requested for the modern signal
processing unit (MSPU) initial integration and production for
the AH-64.
The MSPU is an embedded digital vibration diagnostic
technology already developed by the Army for the AH-64A Apache
and the AH-64D Longbow to monitor the tail rotor gearbox, the
intermediate gearbox, and the auxiliary power unit clutch for
incipient failures. The MSPU is a direct replacement for the 30
year old analog signal processing unit which is known to
experience high failure rates and shown to be unreliable in
detecting incipient gearbox failures. The improved diagnostics
of the MSPU will improve flight safety and reduce maintenance
test costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.6 million to
begin initial integration of the modern signal processing unit
into the AH-64A and AH-64D production line and to procure the
MSPU for fielding as spares for both the active Army and
National Guard Apache and Longbow aircraft.
Missile Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,398.3
million for Missile Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,414.3 million, an increase of $16.0
million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Missile Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,639.7
million for Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army. The
committee recommends authorization of $1,739.7 million, an
increase of $100.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army program are
identified in the table below. Major changes to the Army
request are discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Air-droppable, lightweight armored direct fires system
The committee notes that the operational need for a rapidly
deployable, air droppable, lightweight armored direct fires
system has been validated. Additionally, recent combat
operations demonstrate the need for such a system. The
committee is encouraged by the Department of the Army's
decision to evaluate existing and developmental platforms in
meeting this requirement.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to keep the
congressional defense committees informed on the progress of
the evaluation effort and provide a report of the Army's
findings at the conclusion of the evaluation program.
Armor and vehicle protection kits
The budget request included $1,639.7 million for Weapons
and Tracked Combat Vehicle procurement.
The committee notes the importance of expedited delivery of
armor and vehicle protection kits for the global war on
terrorism.
Accordingly, the committee directs that $1.0 million be
made available within funds authorized for Army Weapons and
Tracked Combat Vehicle procurement for the Rock Island Arsenal
for a laser cutting machine, titanium welding cell, and wash
rack to ensure the on-time delivery of armor kits and vehicle
protection kits.
Bradley fighting vehicle integrated management
The budget request contained $55.4 million for Bradley
Fighting Vehicle Series Modifications, of which no funds were
requested for sustainment and modernization.
The committee is concerned that no funding exists for a
sustainment and modernization program for the Bradley Fighting
Vehicle. Considering the most optimistic assumptions for the
fielding of the Future Combat Systems, the current force of the
Abrams main battle tank and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle will
constitute the majority of the total force for the next three
decades.
The Abrams Integrated Management Program is the Army's long
term management program for the Abrams tank which provides a
rebuild capability, a modernization program, and sustainment of
both the government and private industrial bases. No such
program exists for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to develop
and implement a Bradley Fighting Vehicle Integrated Management
program to maintain the Bradley fleet readiness through planned
overhaul and modernization.
The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for
procurement of items to support the initiation of a Bradley
Fighting Vehicle Integrated Management program.
M1A2 system enhancement package
The budget request contained $292.2 million to procure 67
M1A2 system enhancement package (SEP) tanks.
The committee understands the budget request fulfills M1A2
SEP procurement for the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.
Consistent with previous actions, the committee continues to
recognize the advantages of upgrading the Army's armored
brigade combat teams with M1A2 SEPs. The committee understands
the M1A2 SEP brings advantages to the warfighter in combat and
training and reduces logistical burdens. The committee commends
the Army for accelerating modernization of the 3rd Armored
Cavalry Regiment as part of this effort to digitize the heavy
counterattack corps.
Accordingly, the committee strongly recommends the Army
continue the holistic M1 Abrams tank reset plan by modernizing
with M1A2 SEP tanks the 3rd Infantry Division, the first
armored unit to transform to the Chief of Staff's modularity
construct.
M777 lightweight 155 millimeter howitzer
The budget request contained $37.2 million to procure 18
M777 Lightweight 155mm Howitzer (LW155) artillery systems.
However, no funds were included for the Army National Guard.
The M777 LW155 is a joint competitively procured program
for the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) and U.S. Army that replaces
and improves upon the currently fielded 25-year old M198 towed
howitzer artillery system by utilizing networked fires at
almost 50 percent of the weight of the M198. The committee
recognizes the LW155 would provide enhanced mobility and
lethality to the USMC, the Army's XVIII Airborne Corps and
Stryker Brigade Combat Teams and to the Army National Guard.
The committee understands the Director of the Army National
Guard has identified a $35.0 million fiscal year 2005 unfunded
requirement for 18 LW155 systems. The committee recommends
$72.2 million for the M777 LW155 artillery system, an increase
of $35.0 million to procure an additional 18 systems and
fulfill the Army National Guard's unfunded requirement.
Ammunition Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,556.9
million for Ammunition Procurement, Army. The committee
recommends authorization of $1,729.4 million, an increase of
$172.5 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Ammunition Procurement, Army program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Ammunition production base upgrades
The budget request contained $147.9 million for ammunition
production base support, of which $40.7 million is for the
provision of industrial facilities. However, no funds were
requested for flexible load, assemble, and pack (LAP) upgrades
for modern munitions or small and medium caliber production
line upgrades.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense has
not adequately funded or addressed the requirements for
production line upgrades to the Nation's ammunition production
industrial base. Further, the committee understands these
upgrades are required, to not only update World War II-era
production lines, but are also necessary to fulfill the
increased production requirements of the growing shortfalls in
war reserve and training ammunition, which have occurred from
increased ammunition use in the global war on terrorism,
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. These
increased requirements span from small to large caliber
conventional ammunition, as well as conventional bombs and
other explosive materials. The increased ammunition use rate,
combined with the atrophy and underfunded ammunition production
industrial has resulted in a limited production capacity in the
United States, as well as an increased reliance on foreign
sources for ammunition for U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen, and
marines. The committee is concerned and disturbed about these
trends.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $59.4
million for army ammunition plant (AAP) modernization and
transformation to support the munitions industrial base. The
increases include:
In millions
(1) Lake City AAP modernization and transformation................$22.4
(2) Radford AAP modernization and transformation...................16.0
(3) Lone Star AAP LAP technology upgrades...........................6.0
(4) Kansas AAP LAP modern munitions enterprise.....................15.0
The committee recognizes additional resources will be
required to complete these production line upgrades and
strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to provide the
resources necessary in future fiscal year budget requests to
complete these upgrades in order to ensure that the U.S.
ammunition production base can and will support the
transformational and future operational munitions requirements
of the 21st century.
Conventional munitions demilitarization
The budget request contained $95.4 million for conventional
munitions demilitarization.
The committee understands the remote weapon decasing and
explosive removal kits project is an ongoing project in its
second year and comprises two separate systems that are used
for conventional munitions demilitarization. The committee
understands rotary furnace RF9 upgrades are required for a
furnace pollution abatement system and the committee notes the
rotary furnace is used to thermally treat fuzes, primers,
igniters, and munitions up to 20mm.
The committee recommends $97.4 million for conventional
munitions demilitarization, an increase of $1.5 million for
remote weapon decasing and explosive removal kits and an
increase of $500,000 for rotary furnace RF9 upgrades.
Other Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $4,240.9
million for Other Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
authorization of $4,313.6 million, an increase of $72.7
million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Other Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Common system open architecture
The budget request contained $0.8 million to procure joint
tactical area command systems (JTAC), but contained no funds
for the integration of open architecture commercial off the
shelf (COTS) technology to sustain currently fielded
communications within JTACs.
The committee recognizes there is a need to upgrade the
tactical communication, navigation, and personnel location
equipment for the Department of Defense and the Army. The
committee understands this program will directly impact
affordability and sustainability of currently fielded JTAC
systems by integrating current commercial products and
technology in an open architecture environment.
The committee recommends $8.8 million for JTACs, an
increase of $8.0 million to integrate open architecture COTS
technology.
Digital soldier
The budget request contained $2.9 million for human
intelligence information management, but contained no funds for
the digital soldier concept.
The digital soldier project is a handheld extension for the
Army's Information Dominance Center (IDC) at Fort Belvoir,
Virginia and the Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) for
soldiers in the field. This highly ruggedized device supports
remoted soldiers and teams in harsh combat environments. The
concept leverages wireless and encrypted internet protocol
(IP), voice over IP, text messaging, multi-data receive or
transmit, GPS location, tracking, or fiber optic gyro for
emission control conditions. The device provides eyewitness,
actionable intelligence and situational reporting via networked
inputs to and from IDC and DCGS with the ability to interface
with other tactical radios to get information to those who
critically need it.
The committee notes that this project is part of the Army
senior intelligence officer's ``every soldier a sensor'' model
for the intelligence transformation focus area of Army
transformation.
Therefore the committee recommends $8.9 million, an
increase of $6.0 million for the digital soldier concept.
Distributed common ground system
The budget request contained a total of $734.5 million for
the Department of Defense's (DOD) Distributed Common Ground
System (DCGS) program. DCGS is a multi-service and agency
program to enable existing intelligence processing,
exploitation and dissemination systems to operate seamlessly
across national and DOD architectures and standards.
The committee supports the recent decision of the military
service acquisition executives to integrate the DCGS backbone,
version 10.2, into each service DCGS architecture. The
committee commends the services in coming together to work the
challenges of intelligence sharing and views this as an
important step towards the goal of seamless information
sharing.
However, the committee is concerned that the present DCGS
architecture within each of the military services is unique and
may not be able to properly network and provide critical,
timely information to the tactical users in the battlespace.
The committee believes the services must have an overarching
architecture that is well-defined so DCGS may operate across
multiple domains to include ships at sea, Army and Marine Corps
battalions on the move, and fixed sites for the Air Force.
The committee also believes that the multiple systems that
run the DCGS were devised by organizational tradition and not
to modern standards. The committee is further concerned that
while the services perform analogous operations on each DCGS
system, they have not devised a coordinated strategy to merge
requirements, functionalities, and applications to support a
joint environment for users. The committee recommends that the
Department coordinate service-centric requirements; use the
best commercial practices to implement a systems architecture,
maintain cost controls, leverage purchasing power, and
streamline development for the program.
In addition, the committee notes that the Defense
intelligence community (IC) has an interest in the DOD's Global
Information Grid. Since DCGS is required to operate in both the
IC and DOD domains, the committee believes there must be a
common approach for managing intelligence data over both
enterprise networks. Therefore, the committee encourages the IC
and the Department to work together to create and implement a
systems architecture that will allow users from both
communities to access information in a timely and accurate
manner.
Further, the committee is concerned that the DCGS is unable
to receive data from either the E-8C Joint Surveillance
Targeting and Radar System (J-STARS) or the RC-135 RIVET JOINT
signals intelligence system and is unable to directly task the
RQ-4 Global Hawk high-altitude endurance unmanned aerial
vehicle for imagery. The committee is concerned that the DCGS
will not be able to achieve its goals without this ability.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence to provide a report to the
congressional defense committees and intelligence committees
detailing the Department's DCGS integration plan to include
tasking and imagery downlinks for the E-8C J-STARS, RC-135
RIVET JOINT, and RQ-4 Global Hawk systems by March 1, 2005.
Furthermore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Networking Information and Integration to report to
the congressional defense committees and intelligence
committees by March 1, 2005, on the two communities' plans for
future operation of a network- centric, DCGS across both the IC
domain and the larger DOD information technology domain.
The committee recommends the following for the DCGS
military service programs: $8.2 million for the Army, a
decrease of $1.4 million; $45.2 million for the Navy, a
decrease of $8.0 million; and $291.7 million for the Air Force,
a decrease of $28.5 million.
Logistics support vessel
The budget request contained no funding for the logistics
support vessel (LSV).
The committee is aware that the LSV fleet is currently used
in Iraq. It also notes that the Army has major concerns with
the LSVs sea-keeping qualities. An improved bow has been
developed to correct this problem.
The committee recommends $3.5 million for LSV service life
extension for LSVs 1-6.
Physical security systems
The budget request included $68.0 million for physical
security systems. The budget request included no funding for
equipping new required truck and delivery inspection stations.
The committee recommends $71.0 million, an increase of $3.0
million for gamma ray inspection machines and associated items
for equipping truck and inspection stations authorized in title
XXI of this report.
Movement tracking system
The budget request contained $84.0 million to procure
palletized load systems including trucks and trailers, heavy
equipment transporter systems, heavy expanded mobility tactical
trucks and other related equipment of which $19.0 million was
included to procure 1,067 movement tracking systems (MTS).
The MTS is a satellite-based communications system
providing combat support and combat service support units with
secure real-time global positioning system vehicle location and
tracking and two-way text messaging between stationary base
locations and vehicles.
The committee understands the MTS significantly enhances
the Army's ability in current operations to strategically
position tactical vehicles based on battlefield requirements,
monitor and track re-supply items, and provides the ground
commander with total asset visibility. The committee recognizes
given the current asymmetric threat matrix there is no forward
or rear front to direct combat situations and the need for an
affordable, interoperable logistics tracking and communications
system is essential for accurate situational awareness. The
committee also notes the Chief of the Army Reserve and the
Chief of the National Guard have identified fiscal year 2005
high priority unfunded requirements for MTS.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million for
the family of heavy tactical vehicles to accelerate the
procurement of MTS.
Shortstop electronic protection system
The budget request contained no funds for the procurement
of the Shortstop Electronic Protection System (SEPS).
SEPS is a countermeasure for proximity fuzed indirect fire
munitions and other electronic attack measures. SEPS were
modified in response to the emerging Improvised Explosive
Device (IED) threats in Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).
The committee understands the IED threat continues to pose
the greatest risk to deployed military personnel serving in OIF
and recognizes the need to continue to address this threat in
an aggressive manner. The committee feels SEPS is critical to
providing better force protection against the IED threat in
OIF.
Therefore, the committee recommends $18.6 million to
procure additional SEPS.
Small Tugs
The budget request contained no funds for theater support
vessels.
The committee understands that additional funds are
required to complete the small tug under construction and for
life extension upgrades to the existing Army tug fleet.
The committee recommends $1.0 million to complete the tug
under construction and for tug fleet life extension upgrades.
Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $100.5 million for the
tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (TUAV), but included no
funding for the tactical common data link (TCDL).
The committee is aware that three major improvements were
identified during operational testing that should be
incorporated into the Shadow 200 tactical unmanned aerial
vehicle. These improvements are a larger wing to increase
payload and endurance, electronics system changes to reduce
target location error, and use of the TCDL.
The committee supports rapid fielding of mature improved
technology to our forces and recommends $116.5 million for
TUAV, an increase of $16.0 million for Shadow 200 improvements.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $8,767.9
million for Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The committee
recommends authorization of $8,912.7 million, an increase of
$144.8 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Aircraft Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
AN/USC-42 miniaturized-demand assigned multiple access terminals
The budget request contained $15.1 million for E-2 series
modifications, but contained no funds for upgrading the AN/USC-
42 miniaturized-demand assigned multiple access (Mini-DAMA)
terminals with improved communications security (COMSEC) and a
graphical user interface (GUI).
The committee notes that the AN/USC-42 provides significant
communications improvement at less than one-tenth the size or
weight of legacy communications equipment, and understands that
the AN/USC-42 can be upgraded to accommodate improved COMSEC to
alleviate demand on existing COMSEC systems. Additionally, the
committee understands that an automated GUI upgrade would allow
E-2C crews to program satellite communications channels more
rapidly, and believes that both the COMSEC and GUI upgrade are
necessary for future E-2C communications suites.
Therefore, the committee recommends $22.7 million for E-2
series modifications, an increase of $7.6 million for the
procurement, installation, and testing of the COMSEC and GUI
upgrades for the E-2C's AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA systems. The
committee also expects that this increase would provide for the
integration of this equipment into training facilities.
F/A-18E/F shared reconnaissance pod
The budget request contained $2,907.5 million for
procurement of 42 F/A-18E and F/A-18F aircraft, but included no
funds to procure shared reconnaissance pods (SHARPs) or their
associated logistics support elements.
The SHARP is a digital reconnaissance pod capable of
operating day or night, over a wide area, with the ability to
use real-time data links to either land or sea-based
distributed common ground systems for information exploitation.
The SHARP is carried on the F/A-18F and replaces the tactical
air reconnaissance pod system carried on the F-14 which is
scheduled to retire in fiscal year 2006. The committee
understands that current funding will only provide 21 pods,
leaving the Department of the Navy short of its requirement for
30 SHARPs, and notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has
included the procurement of additional SHARPs among his
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2005.
Consequently, the committee recommends $2,931.5 million for
the F/A-18E/F, an increase of $24.0 million for three SHARPs
and their associated support elements.
H-1 series modifications
The budget request contained $3.5 million for H-1 series
modifications, all of which were five AN/AAQ-22 night thermal
imaging system (NTIS) product improvement program (PIP)
upgrades.
The AN/AAQ-22 NTIS provides the Marine Corps' UH-1N
helicopter fleet with a capability to operate in both day and
night conditions, as well as in a smoke, dust or haze
environment. The PIP upgrade improves the AN/AAQ-22 NTIS by
increasing resolution by greater than 20 percent, improving
system stability and control, upgrading target detection and
obstacle avoidance capability, and adding a laser designator to
guide precision munitions. The committee understands that the
UH-1Ns equipped with the AN/AAQ-22 NTIS PIP upgrade have
performed superbly in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation
Iraqi Freedom in their mission to identify targets of
opportunity and to provide rapid alerting of threats to Allied
forces. Additionally, the committee notes that both the Chief
of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have
included the AN/AAQ-22 NTIS PIP upgrade among their unfunded
priorities for fiscal year 2005.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $17.5 million for H-1
series modifications, an increase of $14.0 million for 17
additional AN/AAQ-22 NTIS PIP upgrades.
Joint primary air training system
The budget request contained $2.5 million for procurement
of Joint Primary Air Training System (JPATS) support equipment,
but included no funds to procure T-6A aircraft or associated
ground-based training systems.
The JPATS, consisting of both the T-6A aircraft and a
ground-based training system, will be used by the Navy and Air
Force for primary pilot training. The T-6A will replace both
the Navy's T-34 and Air Force's T-37B fleets, providing safer,
more economical and more effective training for student pilots.
The committee notes that the Department of the Navy does
not plan to continue JPATS procurement until fiscal year 2007,
and continues to believe that its procurement for the Navy
would not only reduce procurement costs for both the Navy and
the Air Force, but would also reduce operations and maintenance
costs.
Consequently, the committee recommends $37.5 million for
JPATS, an increase of $35.0 million for six T-6A aircraft and
associated ground-based training systems.
Metrology and calibration program
The budget request contained $16.1 million for aircraft
industrial facilities, of which $7.7 million was included for
the Navy metrology and calibration (METCAL) program.
The METCAL program provides the Navy with products and
services to maintain accurate test equipment used for
maintenance of weapons, aircraft, ships, submarines, and Marine
Corps ground systems. The committee notes that without
calibration equipment, test equipment drifts to inaccurate
performance levels. This could induce errors in weapons systems
or result in serviceable components being removed for
unnecessary maintenance or unserviceable components remaining
in a weapons or support system. The committee also notes that
during the past 10 years, funding for the Navy's calibration
test equipment has been substantially reduced, resulting in a
corresponding decrease in the availability of calibrated test
equipment.
Therefore, the committee recommends $17.3 million for
aircraft industrial facilities, an increase of $1.2 million for
the METCAL program.
P-3 series modifications
The budget request contained $135.0 million for P-3 series
modifications, but included no funds for procurement of
satellite communications (SATCOM) or a common
informationprocessing system (CIPS) upgrades for aircraft that are not
equipped with the anti-surface warfare improvement program (AIP).
The AIP upgrade improves the P-3's communications,
survivability, and over-the-horizon targeting capabilities
through the installation of commercial-off-the-shelf
components. The committee understands that AIP-equipped P-3s
are the theater commander's platform of choice for overland
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions,
and that, as a result of extensive tasking, AIP-equipped P-3s
are rapidly aging. The committee notes however, that of the
Navy's 288-aircraft P-3 inventory, only 71 aircraft have been,
or are planned to be, modified with the AIP upgrade. The
committee understands that some of the remaining 217 non-AIP
equipped aircraft could be upgraded with SATCOM and CIPS
allowing those P-3 aircraft to assume lower priority ISR
missions thereby conserving aircraft life on AIP equipped P-3
aircraft.
Consequently, the committee recommends $139.0 million, an
increase of $4.0 million for procurement of SATCOM and CIPS
upgrades for non-AIP equipped P-3 aircraft and expects that
this amount will provide for procurement of two prototype
systems including fleet evaluation.
T-45TS and T-48
The budget request contained $52.4 million for one T-48
aircraft and $253.6 million for eight T-45C aircraft and its
associated training system. The T-48 would be a multi-seat
replacement for the T-39 aircraft used for undergraduate
military flight officer training. The T-45TS is an integrated
training system that combines the T-45 aircraft, simulators,
and computer-based training for the Navy's intermediate-level
undergraduate pilot training.
Subsequent to submission of the budget request, the
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and
Acquisition informed the committee that procurement of the T-48
is no longer required since the Department of the Navy now
plans to conduct its undergraduate military flight officer
training by using the T-45C, synthetic radar displays, and
high-fidelity ground-based training systems.
Accordingly, the committee recommends no funds for the T-
48, a decrease of $52.4 million. The committee also recommends
$306.0 million for the T-45TS, a corresponding increase of
$52.4 million and expects that this increase will procure at
least two additional T-45C aircraft.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $2,101.5
million for Weapons Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
authorization of $2,253.5 million, an increase of $151.9
million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Weapons Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Close-in weapon system block 1B
The budget request contained $86.1 million for 19 close-in
weapon system (CIWS) modifications to upgrade the CIWS to the
block 1B configuration.
The CIWS is a weapon system with a high rate of fire that
automatically acquires, tracks and destroys anti-ship missiles
that have penetrated all other surface ship defenses. The CIWS
block 1B configuration is a CIWS upgrade that incorporates a
thermal imager and automatic acquisition video tracker to
provide additional capability to engage small, high-speed
maneuvering craft, and low, slow aircraft and helicopters. The
committee understands that the CIWS, upgraded to the block 1B
configuration, is the most effective surface-ship weapon system
used to combat terrorist surface vessels and air threats. The
committee further understands that 22 CIWSs are scheduled for
overhaul in fiscal year 2005 without an upgrade to the CIWS
block 1B configuration.
Since the committee believes that completing the block 1B
upgrade as part of an overhaul is the most cost-effective
method to maximize CIWS block 1B capability for the surface
ship fleet, it recommends $120.1 million for CIWS
modifications, an increase of $34.0 million to upgrade 22
additional CIWSs to the block 1B configuration.
Evolved sea sparrow missile
The budget request contained $80.3 million for 71 evolved
Sea Sparrow missiles (ESSMs).
The ESSM is an upgraded version of the existing North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Sea Sparrow missile which provides
improved surface-ship air defense capabilities against low
altitude, high-velocity and maneuvering aircraft and against
anti-ship cruise missiles. The ESSM is designed for use in a
``quad pack'' canister, or set of four missiles, in the MK 41
vertical launching system.
The committee notes that additional ESSMs were included
among the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities for
fiscal year 2005, and believes that increased procurement of
ESSMs would significantly improve force protection capabilities
in the surface fleet.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $102.3 million for
the ESSM, an increase of $22.0 million for 24 additional ESSMs
and for 6 additional ``quad pack'' canisters.
Hellfire II missile
The budget request for the Department of the Navy contained
no funds for Hellfire II missiles.
The Hellfire II missile is a laser-guided, anti-armor and
anti-ship weapon used by the Marine Corps on the AH-1W
helicopter and by the Navy on the SH-60B helicopter as their
primary precision-guided munition. The committee notes that
current Hellfire II missile inventories are at 34 percent of
requirements, and are projected to fall to 13 percent of the
inventory requirement by fiscal year 2009 based on forecast
expenditures and shelf-life expirations. As a result of this
projection, the committee notes that both the Chief of Naval
Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have included
procurement of Hellfire II missiles among their unfunded
priorities for fiscal year 2005.
Consequently, the committee recommends $42.0 million to
procure 500 Hellfire II missiles.
Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $8.8 million to improve the
Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).
The committee is aware that the Navy no longer uses
Pioneer, but has loaned Pioneer to the Marine Corps for use as
a tactical UAV until the Marine Corps has developed and fielded
its objective high speed vertical take-off and landing (VTOL)
UAV. The committee notes that a Marine Corps VTOL UAV will, at
best, not be operational until the end of this decade. The
committee understands that the cost to improve the Pioneer is
approximately the same as to produce a new Shadow tactical UAV
(TUAV). Therefore, the committee believes that it is wiser to
equip the Marine Corps with new Shadow systems incorporating a
standard tactical common data link, target location error
reduction features and other improvements. The committee notes
that this would provide an interim TUAV to the Marine Corps
that could, when appropriate, be transferred to the Army.
Therefore, the committee recommends no funding for Pioneer,
a reduction of $8.8 million. Elsewhere in this report funding
is recommended to provide an upgraded Shadow 200 TUAV system to
the Marine Corps.
Tomahawk missile
The budget request contained $256.2 million for 293
tactical tomahawk (TACTOM) missiles.
The TACTOM missile is a long-range, precision-strike cruise
missile launched from surface ships or submarines.
The committee understands that the Department of the Navy's
programmed budget for TACTOM missiles would result in an
inventory that is significantly below the Navy's stated
Tomahawk required inventory levels, and notes that planned
production of 293 TACTOM missiles is below both the fiscal year
2003 and fiscal year 2004 production rate of 350 missiles per
year. Also, the committee notes that additional TACTOMs were
included among the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded
priorities for fiscal year 2005 to restore inventory levels
expended during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
To sustain TACTOM production at a rate of 350 missiles per
year for fiscal year 2005 and to improve the TACTOM inventory
levels, the committee recommends $305.9 million for the
Tomahawk missile, an increase of $49.7 million for an
additional 57 TACTOM missiles.
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $858.6
million for Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps. The
committee recommends authorization of $870.8 million, an
increase $12.2 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps program are
identified in the table below. Major changes to the Navy &
Marine Corps request are discussed following the table.
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $9,962.0
million for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. The committee
recommends authorization of $10,120.0 million, an increase of
$158.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Aft ramp range retriever craft
The budget request contained $32.1 million for the
procurement of service craft, but included no funding for aft
ramp range retriever craft (ARC).
The committee is informed that the Naval Undersea Warfare
Center Division located in Keyport, Washington, currently has
two, approximately 40-years-old, wooden ARCs that are at the
end of their useful service life. The committee notes that the
Navy has approved an Operational Requirements Document for
replacement ARCs.
The committee recommends $40.1 million for the procurement
of service craft, an increase of $8.0 million to design and
build two aluminum ARCs and provide appropriate spare parts.
Amphibious assault ship replacement program
The budget request contained no funding for the amphibious
assault ship replacement program (LHA (R)).
The committee understands that the LHA (R) will be based on
the LHD-1 Class hull combined with the latest propulsion and
electric plant technology. The committee further notes that,
while the LHA (R) design is not yet finalized, commonality with
LHD-1 Class will be much greater than 50 percent. The Secretary
of the Navy is directed to report to the congressional defense
committees how the additional funding will be used prior to
obligation of those funds, since no description has been
provided with the budget request.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $150.0
million in ship construction Navy for advanced procurement of
components common to LHD-9 and LHA (R).
Other Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $4,834.3
million for Other Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
authorization of $4,876.7 million, an increase of $42.4
million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Other Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Chemical biological defense for aviation and explosive ordnance
disposal
The budget request included $25.1 million for explosive
ordnance disposal equipment and $131.9 million for chemical and
biological defense individual protection equipment.
The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has
identified a critical requirement for chemical and biological
individual protection equipment and explosive ordnance disposal
equipment for which funding was not requested in fiscal year
2005.
The committee notes increasing Navy requirements for
improvement of the mission readiness of explosive ordnance
disposal (EOD) units for incidents involving improvised
explosive devices and weapons of mass destruction. The
committee notes that commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) robotic
and explosive detection systems are available that would
significantly enhance the ability of EOD units to conduct
remote reconnaissance and disruption operations against a range
of military and commercial explosive devices.
The committee also notes significant shortfalls in chemical
and biological defense individual protection systems for Navy
aircrews. The procurement of replacement aircrew chemical
biological defense respirators is essential for Navy and Marine
aircrews to be capable of operating in a chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear threat environment until the joint
service aircrew mask is fielded in fiscal year 2009.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.4 million for
procurement of COTS robotic and explosive detection systems for
EOD units. The committee also recommends an increase of $11.0
million for procurement of aircrew chemical and biological
defense respirators.
Complementary acoustic system improvements
The budget request contained $225.0 million for the
procurement of SSN acoustics, but contained no funding for
complementary acoustic system improvements.
The committee understands that it is necessary to
coordinate complementary acoustic improvements in order that
maximum overall system performance is realized. The committee
also realizes that cost savings can be realized by such an
approach.
Therefore, the committee recommends $229.0 million for
procurement of SSN acoustics, an increase of $4.0 million for
complementary acoustic system improvements.
CVN replacement propeller program
The budget request contained no funds for advanced aircraft
carrier propellers.
The committee is aware that the Navy has designed a new
Generation III propeller for new and in service aircraft
carriers. It further notes that it costs $2.0 million per ship
set to refurbish old propellers which last for only a few
years. The committee believes the Generation III propeller
offers a more cost-effective alternative.
The committee recommends $7.0 million to procure two ship
sets of Generation III propellers for in-service aircraft
carriers.
Envelop protective covers
The budget request contained $245.5 million for the
procurement of spares and repair parts, but contained no
funding for envelop protective covers.
The committee is aware that envelop protective covers
significantly reduce corrosion on Navy surface combatant
weapons systems. The committee notes that a 2003 General
Accounting Office study estimated annual cost of corrosion
control for military infrastructure at $20,000 million. The
committee further notes that envelop covers, developed under
Navy-sponsored research use modern technology to draw moisture
from beneath the cover, keeping metal surfaces dry. The
committee understands that Navy test results show that envelop
covers reduce corrosion by 95 percent, compared to current
covers.
The committee recommends $249.9 million for the procurement
of spares and repair parts, an increase of $4.4 million to
procure covers for weapons systems on Navy surface combatants.
Integrated bridge system
The budget request contained $57.5 million for the
procurement of Aegis support equipment, but contained no
funding for an integrated bridge system (IBS).
The committee notes that an integrated bridge system has
been developed that automates underway planning, reduces bridge
manning, and reduces risk of collision and grounding. The
committee also notes that significant cost savings per ship
result from installation of IBS.
The committee recommends $76.5 million for Aegis support
equipment, an increase of $19.0 million for IBS.
Integrated condition assessment system
The budget request contained $148.6 million for the
procurement of items less than $5.0 million, but included no
funding for an integrated condition assessment systems (ICAS).
The committee is aware that ICAS links the key elements of
the maintenance decision process, continually monitoring and
recording critical machinery operating data. The committee
notes that ICAS facilitates more timely and accurate
maintenance with the potential to improve systems reliability
while lowering operating costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $11.8 million for
ICAS.
Man overboard identification program
The budget request contained $20.7 million in other
procurement Navy, but included no funding for man overboard
identification program (MOBI).
The committee is aware that each year more than 50 service
members fall overboard from U.S. Navy ships. The MOBI system
provides an active means by which a Navy ship can immediately
be alerted to a man-overboard incident and also be provided
precision location of the individual in the water, thereby
reducing death and injury from such incidents. The committee
notes that the Navy has begun installing MOBI on all Navy
ships.
The committee recommends an increase of $12.4 million in
other procurement Navy to expedite MOBI installation on all
Navy ships.
Multi-climate protection clothing system
The budget request contained $19.0 million for the
procurement of aviation life support equipment, but contained
no funding for a multi-climate protection clothing system.
The committee is aware that the Chief of Naval Operations
has given high priority to procurement of improved clothing for
aircrews. The committee notes that a new multi-climate clothing
system has been introduced that meets present requirements.
The committee recommends $27.0 million aviation life
support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million for the multi-
climate clothing protection system.
Programmable integrated communications terminal
The budget request contained $14.1 million for shipboard
tactical communications, but included no funding for a
programmable integrated communications terminal (PICT).
The committee is aware that many of the secure voice
terminals aboard ship are out-dated and require expensive and
time-consuming maintenance. The committee notes that a single
commercial technology PICT can be used to replace several
legacy terminals for interior and radio communications.
The committee recommends $16.1 million, an increase of $2.0
million for procurement and installation of PICTs aboard Marine
Corps amphibious ships.
Serial number tracking system
The budget request contained $11.5 million for the
procurement of other supply support equipment, but contained no
funding for a serial number tracking system (SNTS).
The committee notes that the SNTS provides web-based,
``cradle-to-grave'' total asset visibility of individual
components throughout the supply, maintenance and
transportation processes. This leads to increased readiness and
reduced maintenance costs.
The committee recommends $19.5 million for other supply
support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million to continue
implementation of SNTS in the areas of shipboard automated
configuration management and calibrated equipment areas.
Weapons elevator automation
The budget request contained $148.6 million for the
procurement of items less than $5.0 million, but included no
funding for weapons elevator automation.
The committee is aware that weapons elevators on aircraft
carriers are critical to the success of strike missions. The
committee is also aware that a successful demonstration of an
automated weapons elevator has been conducted and that it was
also proven during recent combat deployments.
The committee supports this improved capability and
recommends an increase of $2.3 million for weapons elevator
automation.
Procurement, Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,190.1
million for Procurement, Marine Corps. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,315.1 million, an increase of $125.0
million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Procurement, Marine Corps program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Marine Corps request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Assault breacher vehicle
The budget request contained $4.6 million for the assault
breacher vehicle (ABV).
The ABV is a tracked, armored combat engineer vehicle
designed to breach mine fields, complex obstacles and provide
in-stride breaching capability to Marine Corps ground forces
operating on the battlefield. The committee understands the ABV
enters into low-rate initial production in fiscal year 2005 and
recognizes the ABV would provide additional crew protection,
vehicle survivability and improve the mobility of the Marine
Air-Ground Task Force. The committee also notes the Commandant
of the Marine Corps identified a $12.0 million fiscal year 2005
unfunded requirement for the ABV.
The committee recommends $16.6 million for the ABV, an
increase of $12.0 million to accelerate ABV fielding by one
year and fulfill the Commandant of the Marine Corps fiscal year
2005 unfunded requirement.
Improved recovery vehicle
The budget request contained no funds for procurement of
the M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicle (IRV).
The committee understands the M88A2 IRV is a joint Marine
Corps and Army product improvement program that reuses the
fielded M88A1 recovery vehicle hull and installs a new upgraded
engine and provides better suspension to increase towing,
hoisting, and winching capability. The committee notes the
M88A2 IRV also provides improved armored crew protection and is
the prime recovery vehicle for the M1 Abrams tank and other
heavy vehicles.
The committee recommends $8.5 million to procure three
M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicles and fulfill the
Commandant of the Marine Corps's fiscal year 2005 unfunded
requirement.
Marines global command and control systems and integrated imagery and
intelligence analysis system
The budget request included $9.6 million for modification
kits for intelligence.
The committee notes the Commandant of the Marine Corps's
number one unfunded requirement for fiscal year 2005 is the
acceleration of the Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS)
integrated backbone (DIB). The DCGS DIB integration supports
the capstone requirements document (CRD) and ongoing multi-
service collaboration efforts for the Marine Corps. Additional
funding would provide the Marine Corps with needed licenses,
software, and servers for intelligence analysis systems
necessary to support the Marine Corps intelligence
infrastructure.
The committee recommends $14.1 million, an increase of $4.5
million for Global Command and Control Systems, Integrated
Imagery and Intelligence (GCCS-I3) for the Marine Corps.
Nitrile rubber collapsible storage units
The budget request contained $5.2 million for tactical fuel
systems, but included no funding for nitrile rubber collapsible
storage tanks.
The committee understands that the Marine Corps has
identified an immediate need to procure nitrile rubber
collapsible storage tanks for its Tactical Fuel System (TFS).
The committee notes that TFS played a critical role in
receiving, storage, transfer and dispensing fuel and bulk
liquid in support of Marine Corps operations in Iraq.
The committee recommends $8.5 million, an increase of $3.3
million for nitrile rubber collapsible storage tanks.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $13,163.2
million for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $13,649.2 million, an increase of
$486.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced targeting pod
The budget request contained $309.7 million for other
production charges, of which $52.3 million was for procurement
of advanced targeting pods (ATP).
The ATP will supplement and replace existing targeting pods
while providing improved infra-red technology, improved laser
capability, a laser spot tracker, and enhanced combat
identification. The committee notes that the budget request
would only provide forty-four percent of the fiscal year 2005
inventory requirement for targeting pods, and understands that
current budget plans would leave the Department of the Air
Force 300 ATPs short of its inventory requirement.
Additionally, the committee notes that the Air Force Chief of
Staff has included accelerated ATP procurement as his second
highest unfunded priority for fiscal year 2005.
Therefore, the committee recommends $374.7 million for
other production charges, an increase of $65.0 million to
accelerate the procurement of ATPs.
B-1B modifications
The budget request contained $8.8 million for B-1B
procurement modifications, but included no funds for
modifications or operations and maintenance required to
regenerate 17 additional aircraft.
The committee notes that the Air Force had planned to
retire 32 of its 92-aircraft B-1B aircraft fleet by the end of
fiscal year 2004. However, in its report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept.
108-106) the committee noted the B-1B's long-range capability
to deliver conventional precision-guided munitions against
strategic and tactical targets during the recent Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, and the B-1B's
crucial contribution to the success of both operations.
Moreover, the committee continues to believe that possible
future conflicts could require an increased number of long-
range bomber aircraft to deliver precision-guided munitions
since basing for shorter range aircraft may not be assured.
To address the need for additional long-range bomber
aircraft in fiscal year 2004, the committee recommended an
increase of $20.3 million for B-1B modifications to begin the
regeneration of 23 of the 32 aircraft planned for retirement,
because, only 23 were available for regeneration at that time.
The committee notes that $17.0 million was appropriated in
fiscal year 2004 for this purpose. For fiscal year 2005, the
committee understands that only 17, rather than 23, of the 32
B-1Bs scheduled for retirement can now be reasonably
regenerated to an operational condition, and that the
Department of the Air Force plans to regenerate 7 of those 17
aircraft. The Department, however, has not included the
additional $7.5 million to operate and maintain these aircraft
in its fiscal year 2005 budget request. To address this
shortfall, the committee recommends a $7.5 million increase for
this purpose elsewhere in this report.
Since the committee continues to believe that all 17 of
those aircraft should be regenerated, it recommends $104.6
million for B-1B procurement modifications, an increase of
$95.8 million for the necessary upgrades for 10 additional B-1B
aircraft. Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends an
increase of $149.9 million to operate and maintain these
aircraft for fiscal year 2005.
In making this recommendation, the committee understands
that an additional $732.5 million will need to be budgeted in
various appropriations for fiscal years 2006 through 2011 to
provide for these aircraft, and strongly encourages the
Department to take this action.
C-5 modifications
The budget request contained $99.6 million for C-5
modifications, of which $89.7 million was included for 18 C-5
avionics modernization program (AMP) kits.
The C-5 AMP replaces unreliable and unsupportable engine
flight instruments and flight system components. The committee
understands that increased C-5 AMP funding is critical to
sustain the operational utility and viability of the Air Force
Reserve and Air National Guard C-5A fleet.
Consequently, the committee recommends $120.6 million for
C-5 modifications, an increase of $21.0 million for 6 C-5
additional AMP kits.
C-17
The C-17 is a strategic cargo aircraft, capable of rapid
delivery to main operating bases or forward bases in the
deployment area. The aircraft is also capable of performing
tactical airlift and airdrop missions when required. The C-17
is currently procured under a multiyear procurement contract
that delivers 15 aircraft per year with the last deliveries
under the existing contract scheduled for fiscal year 2008. The
Department of the Air Force currently plans for an inventory of
180 C-17 aircraft.
The committee notes that the January 2001 Mobility
Requirements Study 2005 (MRS-05) concluded that the airlift
capacity to transport 54.5 million ton miles per day (MTM/D) is
needed to execute the national military strategy with a
moderate degree of risk, but that currently airlift capacity is
approximately 44.7 MTM/D, a shortage of 9.8 MTM/D. In testimony
before the committee's Projection Forces Subcommittee on March
17, 2004, the Commander of the U.S. Transportation Command
noted that a new Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS) is underway
and stated that, ``we need to make sure that we meet at least
the requirements of MRS-05 plus whatever MCS lays on the
table.'' This would require an inventory of at least 222 C-17s,
42 more than now planned to meet mobility requirements.
Accordingly, the committee strongly urges the Department of
the Air Force to budget for continued C-17 procurement through
a multiyear program to procure at least 42 additional C-17
aircraft.
C-17 maintenance training system
The budget request contained $2,512.5 million to procure 14
C-17 aircraft and associated support equipment, of which $45.0
million was included for a C-17 maintenance training system
(MTS) at Travis Air Force Base, California, but included no
funds for an MTS at Hickam AFB, Hawaii.
The C-17 MTS consists of three maintenance training devices
designed to qualify personnel, and to sustain proficiency, in
the maintenance of the C-17's engines, aircraft systems, and
avionics. The committee understands that eight C-17 aircraft
are planned for delivery to Hickam AFB in December 2005, and
that without an MTS at this location, maintenancepersonnel
would be required to travel to McChord AFB, Washington, for this
training resulting in increased travel costs and maintenance manpower
loss at Hickam AFB.
Therefore, the committee recommends $2,547.5 million for
the C-17, an increase of $35.0 million for an additional MTS.
C-130E engine upgrades
The budget request contained $110.4 million for C-130
modifications but included no funds to upgrade the C-130E's
T56-A-7 engines to the T-56-A-15 configuration.
Due to engine power limitations, the committee understands
that C-130E aircraft are restricted to less demanding missions.
The committee also understands that upgrading the C-130E's T56-
A-7 engines to the T-56-A-15 configuration would provide a 32
percent increase in engine power, reduce time between engine
overhaul by 15 percent, and provide the same engine
configuration as the C-130E/H fleet.
Consequently, the committee recommends $117.6 million for
C-130 modifications, an increase of $7.2 million to upgrade 20
C-130E T56-A-7 engines to the T-56-A-15 configuration.
F-15 modifications
The budget request contained $181.6 million for F-15
modifications, of which $3.0 million was included for ALQ-135
band 1.5 countermeasures system support equipment, but included
no funds for the procurement of ALQ-135 band 1.5
countermeasures system modification kits.
The ALQ-135 band 1.5 countermeasures system modification
provides a self-protection jamming capability against modern
surface-to-air enemy missiles and is integrated with the F-
15E's existing internal countermeasure set and its ALR-56C
radar warning receiver to provide full threat coverage. The
committee understands that over half of the F-15E fleet is now
equipped with the ALQ-135 band 1.5 countermeasures system, and
believes that all combat-coded F-15E aircraft should be so
equipped until the F/A-22 and F-35 aircraft enter the Air Force
inventory in significant numbers.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $198.6 million for F-
15 modifications, an increase of $17.0 million for ALQ-135 band
1.5 countermeasures system modification kits, and encourages
the Department of the Air Force to complete ALQ-135 band 1.5
production and installation on all combat-coded F-15E aircraft
as soon as possible with a minimum production rate of two
shipsets per month.
F-16 Air National Guard Force Structure
The committee notes that the 177th Fighter Wing (FW) in
Atlantic City, New Jersey, is designated as one of several
full-time Combat Air Patrol (CAP) alert sites by the United
States Northern Command. The 177th FW currently possesses a
primary assigned aircraft (PAA) strength of only 15 Block 25 F-
16 aircraft, but the committee believes that an increase to 24
PAA would enable the 177th FW to better meet its essential CAP
mission protecting the citizens and property located on the
East Coast of the United States. The committee strongly
encourages the Air Force to adopt 24 PAA at the 177th FW as
part of its force structure plan as soon as aircraft become
available from elsewhere in active or air reserve component
units, aircraft reassignments resulting from domestic or
overseas base realignment and closure, or from future
acquisition of F-16 aircraft.
F-16 modifications
The budget request contained $336.3 million for F-16
modifications, but included no funds for the AN/APX-113
Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) for F-16 block 25,
30, and 32 aircraft, or for the Air National Guard's (ANG)
Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System (TARS) pods.
The AN/APX-113 AIFF provides F-16 block 25, 30, and 32
aircraft with a capability to identify both U.S. and allied
aircraft at well beyond visual ranges. The committee notes that
the APX-113 AIFF is included among the ANG's significant
equipment shortages in the ``National Guard and Reserve
Equipment Report for Fiscal Year 2005,'' and believes that this
system is critical for F-16 block 25, 30, and 32 aircraft that
perform a homeland defense combat air patrol mission.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million for the AN/APX-113 AIFF for the ANG's F-16 block 25,
30, and 32 aircraft.
The two ANG F-16 units equipped with TARS pods provide a
responsive reconnaissance capability to support intelligence
and targeting requirements of military users. The committee
understands that upgraded TARS pods are available that meet
Department of the Air Force operational requirements for day
and night, through-the-weather reconnaissance and near real-
time data link of imagery to support time-critical targeting.
The committee also understands that the Air Force component
commander of the U.S. Central command has requested that this
capability be deployed to the Iraq theater. Accordingly, the
committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to provide
one of the two ANG F-16 TARS-equipped units with two TARS pods
and associated spares and support equipment.
In total, the committee recommends $358.3 million for F-16
modifications, an increase of $22.0 million.
KC-767 aerial refueling tanker aircraft
The budget request contained no funds for a KC-767 aerial
refueling tanker aircraft. The Secretary of the Air Force has
designated the KC-767 to be the replacement for the 43-year old
KC-135 aerial refueling tanker aircraft.
In its report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rpt. 108-106) for fiscal
year 2004, the committee noted the advancing age of the KC-135
fleet, which comprises most of the Air Force's aerial refueling
capability, and expressed concern that a substantial portion of
the Air Force's air refueling tanker fleet will reach
simultaneous maturity, and will require substantial investment
to operate, maintain, and eventually replace this fleet. To
address this concern, the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) included a provision
(section 135) that authorized the Secretary of the Air Force to
lease not more that 20 tanker aircraft and to procure up to 80
additional tanker aircraft through a ten-year multiyear
procurement program.
On December 1, 2003, the Deputy Secretary of Defense
requested the Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General
(IG) determine if there is any compelling reason why the
Secretary of the Air Force should not proceed with its tanker
lease program. The committee notes the DOD IG concluded that
there was no compelling reason why the Air Force could
notexecute the proposal as planned, but that the DOD IG was critical of
the Air Force's procurement strategy, acquisition procedures, and
adherence to statutory requirements.
Additionally, the committee notes that the Secretary of
Defense has directed other reviews of the tanker lease program
including a Defense Science Board evaluation of the tanker
recapitalization program, a DOD General Counsel review and
update of ethics policy and training for senior DOD officials,
and a National Defense University study to analyze the
decisionmaking process to develop lessons learned that would
improve the acquisition and procurement processes. Other on-
going studies include an analysis of alternatives to meet the
Air Force's aerial refueling requirements and a study of the
long-term tanker aircraft maintenance and training requirements
directed by sections 134 and 135 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136). As
a result of these studies, analyses, and investigations, the
committee further notes that the Secretary of Defense has
directed the Secretary of the Air Force to suspend all further
negotiations on the tanker lease program.
While the committee supports the DOD and Congressionally-
directed studies and analysis regarding the Air Force's tanker
aircraft, it remains concerned that as the KC-135 aircraft
fleet ages, the Air Force confronts a risk that the entire KC-
135 fleet may be grounded pending the resolution of stress,
material, or corrosion problems. The prospect of grounding the
KC-135 fleet puts the Nation's long range strike and re-supply
capabilities at risk when U.S. forces are globally deployed in
support of the global war on terrorism. Accordingly, the
committee believes that the Secretary of the Air Force should
begin the KC-767 program in fiscal year 2005 in accordance with
section 135 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) and section 116 and 117
of this act. The committee further understands that projected
annual procurement of KC-767 tanker aircraft would result in a
procurement program likely to span over twenty-five years to
replace the entire 544-aircraft KC-135 fleet, and further
understands that the last of the retiring KC-135 aircraft may
be approximately 70 years old when they are removed from the
Air Force's tanker aircraft inventory.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in procurement for the advance procurement of KC-767
aerial refueling tankers, and an increase of $80.0 million in
PE 64XXXF for KC-767 development. Elsewhere in this report, the
committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in operations
and maintenance to sustain the KC-767 system program office and
for KC-767 training.
Predator unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $146.6 million for Predator
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
The committee is aware that Predator B is the next
generation of the proven Predator UAV. The committee strongly
supports additional acquisition of propjet Predator B UAVs. The
committee also realizes that Predator A has significant
capability to support operations in Iraq.
The committee recommends $322.6 million, an increase of
$44.0 million for additional propjet Predator B UAVs and an
increase of $132.0 million for four Predator A systems.
Senior scout permanent carrier
The budget request contained $110.4 million for the C-130
program, but contained no funding for the establishment of a
dedicated C-130 unit for the SENIOR SCOUT mission.
The SENIOR SCOUT mission package and assigned personnel are
temporarily located at the Air National Guard's 169th
intelligence squadron (169th IS) in Salt Lake City, Utah. The
SENIOR SCOUT mission package is a self-contained, roll-on/roll-
off shelter that can be accommodated on any appropriately
modified C-130 aircraft. The Joint Chiefs of Staff has
mobilized this mission since October 2001 and considers this a
high demand, low density asset capable of meeting current
counternarcotics and global war on terrorism intelligence
tasking.
The Air National Guard (ANG) supports the SENIOR SCOUT
mission lift requirements. The Idaho ANG at Gowen Field has
indicated that it wishes to host the SENIOR SCOUT mission
personnel and is presently coordinating with the National Guard
Bureau (NGB) in establishing this permanent affiliation. The
committee commends both the NGB and their units for their
initiative and looks forward to the 169th IS-Idaho ANG
affiliation to increase mission effectiveness and availability
to both the counternarcotics and the global war of terrorism.
Therefore, the committee recommends $112.4 million in C-130
procurement, an increase of $2.0 million for the establishment
of a dedicated ANG unit for the SENIOR SCOUT mission.
T-38 modifications
The budget request contained $153.7 million for T-38
modifications, but included no funds for the T-38 ejection
system upgrade program (ESUP).
The T-38 ESUP will replace the T-38's original ejection
seats, add an inter-seat sequencing system, and improve escape
path clearance. The committee understands that the T-38 ESUP
will also result in improved accommodation for smaller and
larger crewmembers not considered when the aircraft was
originally fielded in the early 1960s, and notes that the Air
Force Chief of Staff has included the T-38 ESUP among his
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2005.
Therefore, the committee recommends $173.7 million for T-38
modifications, an increase of $20.0 million for the T-38 ESUP.
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,396.5
million for Ammunition Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends the budget request for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $4,718.3
million for Missile Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $4,638.3 million, a decrease of
$80.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Missile Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced extremely high frequency satellite
The budget request contained $98.6 million for the advanced
extremely high frequency (EHF) program, but contained no funds
for long lead procurement associated with advanced EHF IV.
Advanced EHF will replenish the existing EHF system and
improve the capability to provide survivable, anti-jam,
worldwide, secure communications for strategic and tactical
warfighters. The current national space architecture plans for
three advanced EHF satellites with follow-on capability
provided by the Transformational Satellite (TSAT)
Communications program. The committee is aware of the risk
associated with the TSAT schedule and its ability to satisfy
follow-on requirements which may require an additional advanced
EHF satellite.
The committee recommends $133.6 million, an increase of
$35.0 million for long-lead procurement for a fourth advanced
EHF satellite. This additional funding may not be obligated
until 30 days after a formal Air Force decision to procure an
additional advanced EHF satellite.
Evolved expendable launch vehicle
The budget request included $611.0 million to acquire space
launch services in the evolved expendable launch vehicle (EELV)
program.
EELV services are procured two years in advance of an
operational requirement to provide the EELV contractors time to
prepare for future launches. The fiscal year 2005, EELV budget
request included launch services for a spaced-based infrared
system satellite launch in fiscal year 2007. The committee
notes that this launch will be delayed at least a year because
of technical difficulties in satellite development and
therefore funding for this launch is not required.
Consequently, the committee recommends $511.0 million, a
reduction of $100.0 million for the EELV program.
Other Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $13,283.6
million for Other Procurement, Air Force. The committee
recommends authorization of $13,229.3 million, a decrease of
$54.3 million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Other Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Combat training ranges
The budget request contained $38.1 million for combat
training ranges, of which $9.2 million was included for the
joint threat emitter (JTE).
The JTE is an advanced, mobile, rapidly reprogrammable
electronic warfare threat simulator that generates all known
ground-based electronic warfare threats. The committee
understands that the Air Force's Air Combat Command fielding
plan for the JTE includes additional JTEs in fiscal year 2006,
and believes that this schedule should be accelerated.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $43.1 million for
combat training ranges, an increase of $5.0 million for the
fielding of one additional JTE.
Advanced compression of tactical sensor information
The budget request included $99.7 million for general
information technology, but no funding for commercial-off-the-
shelf (COTS) technology that would improve intelligence
analysis through the use of high-quality automatic target
recognition from compressed video information.
The committee is aware of COTS technology like Eagle Scout
that would dramatically enhance the capability of advanced
digital data and image compression technology that would
automatically detect changes and objects within compressed
digital video thereby improving target recognition and
analysis.
Therefore the committee recommends an increase of $7.0
million for procurement and integration of COTS advanced
compression, change detection, and target recognition software.
Fixed aircrew standardized seats
The budget request contained $13.0 million for personal
safety and rescue equipment items under $5.0 million, but
included no funds for fixed aircrew standardized seats (FASS).
FASS would provide crewmembers and passengers on C-130, C-
135, C-5, E-3, and E-8 aircraft protection against aircraft
crash loads up to 16 times the force of gravity. In prior
years, the committee has supported the development of the FASS,
and understands that development will be completed in the early
months of fiscal year 2005. The committee continues to believe
that FASS procurement would not only increase safety, but would
also reduce supply and maintenance costs through the
commonality and interchangeability of their parts.
Therefore, the committee recommends $17.8 million, an
increase of $4.8 million for personal safety and rescue
equipment items under $5.0 million for FASS.
General information technology
The budget request contained $99.9 million for general
information technologies, but included no funds for the science
and engineering lab data integration (SELDI) program.
The Air Force Material Command's science and engineering
lab captures, analyzes and disseminates lab test data to the
Air Force's engineering and system overhaul operations. The
SELDI program facilitates this mission by providing a
maintenance and logistics information management tool that
allows more rapid lab data access affecting overhaul
operations, provides accident investigators with immediate
access to lab results of failed components, enables component
failure trend analysis, and implements a new acoustic signature
sensors to ensure the proper chemical composition of materials
and equipment. The committee has recommended increases for the
SELDI program in prior years, and continues to believe its
implementation would improve operational aircraft readiness,
increase flight safety and reduce support costs.
Therefore, the committee recommends $107.9 million, an
increase of $8.0 million for the SELDI program.
Point of maintenance and combat ammunition system initiative
The budget request contained $16.2 million for mechanized
material handling equipment, but included no funds for the
point of maintenance and combat ammunition system initiative
(POMX/CAS).
The POMX/CAS is an automatic data collection program
developed by the Air Force Materiel Command's Automatic
Identification Technology Program Office, which streamlines
mission critical data collection to reduce the burden on flight
line personnel. The committee has supported the POMX/CAS in
prior years.
Since the committee continues to believe that the POMX/CAS
would increase the timeliness and accuracy of maintenance data
collection while reducing the administrative burden on
maintenance technicians, it recommends $32.2 million for
mechanized material handling equipment, an increase of $16.0
million for the POMX/CAS.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
Overview
The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $2,883.3
million for Procurement, Defense-Wide. The committee recommends
authorization of $2,950.7 million, an increase of $67.4
million, for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005
Procurement, Defense-Wide program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Air Force request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Chemical agents and munitions destruction
The budget request contained $1,372.0 million for chemical
agents and munitions destruction, including $1,138.8 million
for operations and maintenance, $154.2 million for research,
development, test and evaluation, and $79.0 million for
procurement. The budget request also contained $81.9 million in
military construction for the chemical agents and munitions
destruction program.
The committee notes that to date more than 8,600 tons of
lethal chemical agents and munitions, over 27 percent of the
total U.S. stockpile, has been safely destroyed in 4
operational chemical demilitarization facilities. The committee
notes, however, that the budget request represents a decrease
of $166.2 million from the fiscal year 2004 budget request,
despite the increased level of activity planned for the program
in fiscal year 2005:
(1) Destruction of chemical agents and munitions at
six sites: Tooele, Utah; Anniston, Alabama; Umatilla,
Oregon; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Aberdeen, Maryland; and
Newport, Indiana;
(2) Design, permitting, and construction activities
for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative pilot plants
at Pueblo, Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky;
(3) Sustainment of emergency preparedness activities
and capability improvements; and
(4) Non-stockpile chemical material cleanup and
disposal efforts.
The committee also notes that the fiscal year 2005 budget
request reduced the fiscal year 2005 estimate for the chemical
demilitarization program for completion, equipping, and
systemization of the Pueblo Army Depot pilot plant from $151.7
million to $4.9 million. The committee is informed that an
analysis of alternatives for potential redesign of that plant
is underway. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
report to the congressional defense committees by July 1, 2004
the results of the analysis of alternatives, the recommended
course of action for proceeding with the construction of the
Pueblo facility and destruction of the stockpile, and fiscal
year 2005 funding requirements necessary to carry out that
course of action.
The committee further notes the ongoing review of proposals
for disposal at a commercial hazardous waste water disposal
facility of the hydrolysate that will result from the
neutralization of the bulk VX agent at Newport. The committee
believes that the United States must proceed as rapidly as
possible in destroying the stockpile to ensure the overall
maximum safety of our citizenry and meet our international
treaty commitments. At the same time we must proceed
objectively and deliberately in ensuring that the disposal of
the hydrolysate in a commercial hazardous waste disposal
facility would not compromise the public health and safety of
the citizens or the environment near such a facility. The
committee directs that the Army proceed expeditiously in
providing for a prompt, objective and deliberate independent
review of the process for destroying the VX nerve agent
stockpile at Newport and not proceed with that process until
such a review is completed, the findings are made available for
public scrutiny, and all concerned understand precisely the
risks involved.
Section 1412(f) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99-145) requires that funds
for carrying out the destruction of the U.S. stockpile shall be
set forth in the budget of the Department of Defense for any
fiscal year as a separate account and shall not be included in
the budget accounts for any military department. In committee
hearings on the fiscal year 2005 budget request, Department of
Defense witnesses testified that, while the Army was executive
agent for the demilitarization program, the budget for the
program is funded in a defense-wide account and any increases
to program funding that might be required would come from the
defense-wide account and not from the Department of the Army's
budget. The committee agrees that this interpretation
corresponds to the intent of Congress in establishing the
program.
Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends a
provision that would transfer oversight of the Assembled
Chemical Weapons Alternative program from the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to the
Secretary of the Army. The committee believes that the
establishment of a new management structure, which brings
together all elements of the program under a single activity,
as recommended by the General Accounting Office, would ensure
more efficient management of the total program, and would also
address the equities and concerns of those sites using
assembled chemical weapons alternatives for destruction of
stockpiles.
The committee recommends $154.2 million for Chemical Agents
and Munitions Destruction research, development, test and
evaluation, $79.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction procurement, and $1,138.8 million for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction operations and maintenance.
Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends $81.9 million
for military construction for the chemical agents and munitions
destruction program.
Chemical and biological defense procurement program
The budget request contained $637.7 million for chemical
and biological defense (CBD) procurement, including $104.9
million for procurement of installation force protection
equipment, $131.9 million for individual protection equipment,
$11.3 million for decontamination equipment, $101.1 million for
the joint biological defense program, $18.4 million for
collective protection equipment, and $270.1 million for
contamination avoidance equipment.
The committee recommends the following increases for
procurement of CBD individual protection and decontamination
equipment:
In millions
M40 protective mask (rebuild)......................................$5.0
M45 protective mask (rebuild).......................................0.5
M40 protective mask.................................................2.0
M45 protective mask.................................................3.0
M12A1 decontamination apparatus (rework)............................3.0
M49 fixed installation filters......................................1.0
M100 sorbent decontamination kit....................................2.0
M291 skin protection kit............................................3.0
M295 equipment decontamination kit..................................2.0
The committee also recommends an increase of $19.0 million
for procurement of retrofit kits for improvement of the
currently fielded chemical biological protective shelters and
$20.0 million for procurement of M22 automatic chemical agent
alarms for the Army National Guard.
Countering improvised explosive devices
The committee finds that the well-being of the members of
the Armed Forces deployed in defense of the Nation is of
paramount importance. Therefore, the Department of Defense
should do its utmost to see that deployed military personnel
have the best force protection equipment the Nation can make
available.
Toward that end, the committee recommends that the
Department of Defense and the military departments should,
using all means at their disposal, increase the ability of
currently unarmored vehicles that are deployed forward for
operations in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
Freedom to resist improvised explosive devices, including
nontraditional production sources and technologies, field-
installable kits, and reprogramming of funds. Further, the
committee urges the Department of Defense to immediately
release all funds that have been authorized and appropriated
and that have not previously been released, to the military
departments for the purposes of defeating improvised explosive
devices and mitigating their effect on vehicles.
In order to facilitate future such acquisitions, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2005,
discussing the lessons learned from the fiscal year 2004 effort
to rapidly acquire force protection equipment and possible
improvements in the acquisition system reflecting these
lessons.
Guard and Reserve equipment
The committee believes that the Chiefs of the Reserve and
National Guard should exercise control of modernization funds
provided for Reserve and National Guard programs and directs
that the Chiefs of the Reserve and National Guard provide a
separate submission for fiscal year 2006 of a detailed
assessment of their modernization requirements and priorities
to the congressional defense committees.
Indexing of class A mishaps
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
seeks to index certain contract thresholds to inflation, on the
grounds that over time, unintended consequences result from not
adjusting values to reflect actual economic conditions. The
committee also notes that the value criterion for determining a
Class A mishap has remained at $1.0 million for many years,
while the value of parts for, and repair of, military systems
have increased considerably.
Therefore, the committee requests the Secretary of Defense
to report to the congressional defense committees by February
1, 2005, his recommendation as to whether the dollar values
used to classify military mishaps should be indexed, and if so
to recommend a generally accepted index to be used.
Joint threat work station, ground signals intelligence kits
The budget request contained $16.9 million for the Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) joint threat work station (JTWS),
ground signals intelligence (SIGINT) kits (GSK).
The committee notes that the JTWS is presently being
integrated into the SOCOM mobile force platforms. The GSK is a
variant of the JTWS that provides threat warning, force
protection and SIGINT capabilities packaged for ground mobile
special operation forces (SOF). Its utility in the global war
on terrorism operations is significant. Additional funding
would permit procurement of an additional 45 GSKs for use in
the field by operational forces.
The committee recommends $31.4 million, an increase of
$14.5 million for SOF intelligence systems for the procurement
of 45 GSKs.
Military specifications for radomes
The committee notes that the military specification for
radomes, also known as MIL-R-7705B, was written in 1975, and
believes that this specification is outdated since it does not
account for technological advancements that improve signal
efficiency, reduce cost, and promote easier radome
installation.
The committee understands that, according to MIL-R-7705B,
radomes are constructed according to four styles. One of these
styles is a sandwich construction where the wall of the radome
is constructed of three layers, two skins and a core material,
and the dielectric constant of the skin materials is higher
than the dielectric constant of the core material. The
committee believes that greater efficiencies could be achieved
through the use of interchangeable panels and overlapping
flanges where the panels are joined so that signal loss could
be diminished and installation time is reduced, resulting in
lower cost.
Therefore, the committee recommends that the Department of
Defense consider updating its MIL-R-7705B military
specification for radomes, by adding language to the sandwich
construction section of this military specification to permit
panels to be arranged in horizontal rows of identical
interchangeable panels. The total panel arrangement would be
such that the vertically joined edges would be staggered by
locating them at the center of the panels in the rows
immediately above and below the joint and that the joints of
the panels would be overlapping sandwich flanges having
appropriate dielectric constants and dimensions to produce
minimum loss at the principal frequency of the system.
Special Operations Forces binocular goggle system
The budget request contained $8.2 million for Special
Operations Forces (SOF) small arms and weapons, but included no
funding to procure the AN/PVS-15 binocular goggle system for
SOF operators. The committee understands that this new
binocular system will substantially improve the ability of SOF
operators to conduct night operations by providing a wider
field of view and better depth perception than the system
currently in use. The committee notes that this item is on the
unfunded priority list of the Commander, Special Operations
Command.
The committee recommends $20.2 million, an increase of
$12.0 million for the procurement of AN/PVS-15 goggles for SOF
small arms and weapons.
Special Operations Forces MH-47 infrared engine exhaust suppressor
The budget request contained $447.3 million for Special
Operations Forces (SOF) rotary wing upgrades and sustainment,
but included only $2.9 million to procure the MH-47 infrared
engine exhaust suppressor. The committee understands that these
helicopter heat suppressors are a critical force protection
requirement for the Army SOF MH-47 fleet now operating in a
hostile environment, and believes that the entire fleet should
be protected as soon as these suppressorscan be manufactured.
The committee notes that this item is on the unfunded priority list of
the Commander, Special Operations Command.
The committee recommends $454.3 million, an increase of
$7.0 million for SOF rotary wing upgrades and sustainment for
procurement of additional MH-47 infrared engine exhaust
suppressors.
Use of capability-based acquisition
The committee endorses the Department's continuing move to
capability-based planning and acquisition, a system that
develops requirements based on the expected capabilities of
potential adversaries rather than any specific employment
scenario.
Capability-based planning can be useful in allowing for
unforeseen situations. Ideally, tailoring American forces to
exceed other nations' known and projected capabilities should
yield an advantage regardless of the situation in which they
are employed.
However, the committee notes a growing difficulty emerging
from capability-based acquisition. Requiring all new hardware
to exceed the posited capabilities of all possible enemies in
all possible scenarios, while ignoring the likelihood of
engagement against a particular adversary, leads ineluctably to
more sophisticated and expensive systems. Given a defense
budget top-line relatively fixed in real terms, that focus on
possible future conflicts impinges on the Department's ability
to meet requirements for current and known threats. The combat
systems of the future fight for dollars against current
logistics and operations and maintenance requirements, often to
the detriment of both.
Further, designing systems to meet the most stringent
adversary capabilities does not always increase the capability
to address lesser or unconventional threats. Traditional force
structures included a ``high-low'' mix, offering an optimum
combination of cost and capability. If all combat aircraft, for
example, are tailored to operate in the most stressing
environment that can be conceived, there can by definition be
no ``low'' side.
The Department asserts that the point of spiral acquisition
is to be able to increase system capabilities as threats
increase. But even the basic systems, prior to any spirals, are
far more complex than will be needed in many post-Cold War
conflicts.
Before capabilities-based acquisition became the standard,
the Office of Net Assessment provided input to the Defense
Planning Guidance indicating which threats were likely to be
most significant in the future; indeed, that was the reason Net
Assessment was created in the first place. Force structures and
acquisitions were designed to be relevant to what was likely to
happen during the foreseeable future, recognizing that the
likelihood of, for example, going to war against longtime
allies was at best remote. The resulting forces can hardly be
called technologically inadequate.
As the military continues to operate at an unprecedented
tempo around the globe against largely unsophisticated threats,
the committee is concerned that use of capabilities-based
acquisition, unleavened by common sense input as to the
probability of a particular capability threat being used, will
increase the pressure placed on the budgeting necessary to
fight and win the wars in which we are currently engaged.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations
These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year
2005 funding levels for all procurement accounts.
Subtitle B--Program Matters
Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for the M777 Lightweight
155mm Howitzer Program
This section would permit the Secretary of the Navy and the
Secretary of the Army to enter into a joint-service multiyear
contract for procurement of the Lightweight 155mm Howitzer.
Section 112--DDG-51 Modernization Program
This section would direct the Secretary of the Navy to
accelerate modernization of in-service guided missile
destroyers (DDG-51) and expansion of the DDG-51 modernization
program to include additional emphasis to reduce crew size to
about 200.
The budget request contained $3,445.0 million for
procurement of three guided missile destroyers (DDG-51), but
included no funding for in-service DDG-51 modernization.
The committee notes that the Navy is scheduled to commence
a DDG-51 modernization plan in fiscal year 2005 with new
construction and subsequently extend modernization to in-
service destroyers. The committee is aware that the foundations
for DDG-51 modernization are: increased warfighting capability,
leverage of the DDG-51 shipbuilding program, reduction of total
ship ownership costs, and use of open architecture. In addition
to those factors, the committee believes that reduction in crew
size from the present approximately 300 to an objective of 200
personnel should also be part of the foundation of an even more
aggressive modernization program.
According to the Navy, a DDG-51 class ship costs $25.0
million per year to operate, including $13.0 million for the
crew. The Navy estimate is that its present modernization plan
could reduce the crew cost per ship by $2.7 million per year. A
larger reduction in crew size would clearly appear to result in
significant savings over the estimated 18 years of remaining
normal service life, especially noting that per capita
personnel costs may be expected to increase during that period.
The committee understands that the present DDG-51
retirement schedule would retire some ships significantly
before their expected life. The recent report to Congress,
``DDG-51 Class Guided Missile Destroyers Modernization Plan''
indicates that modernization, beginning with the oldest DDGs
first, ``will keep the DDG-51 portion of the Aegis equipped
fleet an integral part of the Navy's Sea Power 21 Plan through
year 2047.''
The committee believes that acceleration of the in-service
DDG-51 modernization would have the benefit of providing
significant additional work to sustain the shipbuilding
industrial base, which would allow deliberate maturation of the
next generation destroyer's (DD (X))critical technologies prior
to initiating production. The committee notes the recent testimony of
the General Accounting Office and Congressional Research Service
indicating that the majority of the DD (X) critical technologies are
well below the acceptable level for initiating system design and
development.
The committee also notes that efforts are reportedly being
made to accelerate the Coast Guard Deepwater Cutter program and
that the Army is preparing to award a contract to construct
several high speed vessels. Both programs, if coordinated with
Navy ship construction, have potential to eliminate significant
fluctuation in shipyard manning and to help to stabilize the
industry.
The committee understands that to increase shipyard work
load, one solution would be to simply authorize one or several
additional existing class new construction ships or to
accelerate commencement of acquisition of some other class of
ship. However, the committee believes it would be much wiser in
the long run not to procure additional ships for which there is
no established requirement. Likewise, to accelerate development
of a class whose critical technologies are not mature has
proven to significantly increase costs and cause delays that
exacerbate industrial base problems.
In fiscal year 2003, Congress approved and funded, above
the President's request, a $300.0 million proposal that
included a swap of DDG-51 and amphibious transport dock (LPD)
shipbuilding workload between two shipyards handling the
construction of these ships. At the time, the Navy indicated
that such a workload ``swap'' was in the best interests of the
government, providing workload stability and generally
protecting a vital industrial base for the construction of
surface combatants.
This swap, implemented by Congress as a way of stabilizing
the workload at these yards, has been undermined by the Navy's
changing construction profile. Starting in 2004 and continuing
into 2005, the Navy has reduced the number of DDG-51s and LPDs
in its shipyard construction plan. Each time this happens, it
creates instability within the surface combatant shipyards that
see workload shares decrease in both the short- and long-term.
In both 2004 and 2005, the Navy's ship construction plan
changed from the proposal presented in 2003, negatively
impacting the construction of surface combatants and thereby
the same shipyards that Congress, with approval of the Navy,
attempted to stabilize in 2003.
The committee recommends $3,545.0 million for DDG-51s, an
increase of $100.0 million to accelerate in-service DDG-51
modernization.
Section 113--Repeal of Authority for Pilot Program for Flexible Funding
of Cruiser Conversions and Overhauls
This section would repeal Section 126 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136).
Section 114--Force Protection for Asymmetric Threat Environment
This section would require that all manned ground systems,
war-fighter survivability systems, and certain manned airborne
systems be assessed for adequacy in survivability and
suitability against asymmetrical threats. Force protection or
survivability enhancements would be developed for these
existing systems through the combination of in-service
modifications and tactics, techniques, and procedures. Further,
developmental military system designs must account for
survivability and suitability against asymmetrical threats.
The global war on terrorism has revealed a new
sophisticated enemy. This foe is rapid to adapt, unbounded by
civilized rules, and successfully using simple mechanisms to
fight our advanced technology. Our military forces were
developed to survive on the battlefield by detecting and
destroying the enemy before he could see and engage our forces.
Therefore, our existing manned ground and airborne systems were
designed to survive in an environment that did not include the
types of threats that now prevail in the global war on
terrorism. Our military systems must now adapt to counter the
close proximity, asymmetrical threat. Along with conventional
threats, asymmetrical threats must be included as significant
factors in the design and development of our war-fighter
systems.
The committee recommends that military departments adapt
their current war gaming and simulation systems used to test
advanced concepts to include asymmetrical threat capability.
Section 115--Allocation of Equipment Authorized by This Title To Be
Made on Basis of Units Deployed or Preparing To Deploy
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide that, in allocation to operational units of equipment
acquired using funds authorized to be appropriated by the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005,
priority shall be given to units that are deployed to, or
preparing to deploy to, Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation
Enduring Freedom, regardless of the status of those units as
active, Guard, or reserve component units.
Section 116--KC-767 Tanker Multiyear Procurement
This section would clarify and reaffirm that the intent of
Congress behind the multiyear aircraft tanker pilot program
authority established by section 135 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) is
to accomplish a lease of no more than 20 aircraft and
conventional purchase of no more than 80 aircraft. The
provision would repeal the multiyear portion of section 135 of
Public Law 108-136 and reestablish it as an authorization for
the Secretary of the Air Force to enter into a multiyear
contract for 80 KC-767 tanker aircraft under section 2306b of
title 10, United States Code. The multi-year procurement
authority provided in this section may not be executed under
section 135 Public Law 108-136 or under section 8159 of the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2002 (Public Law 107-
117).
Section 117--Other Matters Relating to KC-767 Tanker Acquisition
Program
This section would express the Sense of Congress that: (1)
aerial refueling capability is a critical combat force
multiplier, (2) the nation must expeditiously proceed with a
program to replace the existing aging fleet of aerial refueling
tankers, (3) in pursuing such a program, the Department of
Defense should take full advantage of the United States'
commercial aircraft production base, and (4) anyone currently
or previously associated with this program that is found to
have engaged in illegal activities should be prosecuted to the
fullest extent of the law. The provision would also direct the
Secretary of the Air Force to proceed with one or more new
contracts to execute the program authorized by subsection (a)
in section 135 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), section 8159 of the
Department ofDefense Appropriations Act, 2002 (Public Law 107-
117), and section 116(a) of this Act. Finally, the provision would
require the creation of an advisory panel of experts to review and
assess the terms of the new contract and advise the Department of
Defense and Congress on whether it provides the best value for the
funds expended.
The committee is deeply concerned that the ongoing multiple
investigations into allegations of wrongdoing associated with
this program, while necessary and proper, are needlessly
delaying the pressing requirement to proceed with the
acquisition of a replacement aircraft for our aging fleet of
KC-135 tankers. The committee believes that a ``fresh start''
approach is warranted on the question of the contract proposed
for the execution of the so-called 20-80 plan authorized by
section 135 of Public Law 108-136. By negotiating a new
contract and submitting the outcome of such negotiations to
review by an independent panel of experts, the committee
believes the Department can proceed with this important program
without jeopardizing or undermining the various investigations
presently under way at the direction of the Secretary of
Defense. In turn, this approach would also help ensure that the
Air Force can take full advantage of the existing availability
of a ``warm'' domestic commercial aircraft production line
ideal for the aerial tanker role. The committee is concerned
that the increased costs associated with starting the
production line, should production cease in the immediate
future, would be significant and wholly unnecessary.
The committee notes that there is no legal or other
impediment presently precluding the Department from immediately
pursuing this strategy and strongly urges the Secretary of
Defense to pursue this approach in advance of the enactment of
the fiscal year 2005 defense authorization bill.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, & EVALUATION
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $67,772.3 million for
research, development, test, & evaluation (RDT&E). The
committee recommends $68,128.4 million, an increase of $356.1
million to the budget request.
Army Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $9,266.3 million for Army
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $9,478.2 million, an increase of
$211.9 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced amputee treatment research and development
The budget request contained $60.9 million in PE 62787A for
applied research in medical technology.
The committee notes that in Afghanistan and Iraq
approximately 60 to 80 percent of all survivable combat
injuries are to the extremities with 20 percent resulting in
traumatic amputation. In order to provide the best care for
these patients, the Surgeon General established the Walter Reed
Amputee Care Center and the Army Amputee Patient Care Program
at Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC). The program
provides state-of-the-art treatment and is the center of a
multi-site, coordinated complex of facilities involving
regional military medical centers, the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and other military and civilian treatment facilities.
The goal of the program is to ensure that amputee patients
receive the kind of care that will allow them to lead lives
unconstrained by their amputation.
Highlights of the program include innovative prosthetic
technology; computer-assisted design and manufacturing of
prosthetic devices; laboratory and training facilities, amputee
education and peer visitation; clinical developments; and
collaborative research in treatment, prosthetic design, and
rehabilitation.
The committee strongly endorses the Army's initiative in
establishing the Amputee Patient Care Program. The committee
notes that one element of the program is an infrastructure
improvement plan for the center, which proposes construction of
an advanced amputee training center at WRAMC at a cost of $10.9
million and is addressed elsewhere in this report.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
62787A for the Army program in clinical and applied
collaborative research in amputee treatment, prosthetics, and
rehabilitation.
Advanced battery technology initiative
The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 62705A for
applied research in electronics and electronic devices.
The committee continues to note continuing requirements for
small, light-weight, efficient, and portable battery and non-
battery power sources for U.S. forces and of on-going applied
research and development activities of the military departments
that address these requirements. The committee is aware of a
number of emerging battery and non-battery power technologies
that have the potential for meeting the requirements of the
military services, including but not limited to alkaline
cylindrical cells, cylindrical zinc air batteries, high
capacity nickel/zinc rechargeable cells, lithium oxyhalide and
lithium ion thin-film technology, lithium copper oxide, lithium
carbon monoflouride cells, and proton exchange membrane fuel
cells. The committee recommends that these technologies be
considered for potential funded research and development under
the services' on-going programs on the basis of technical
merit, cost effectiveness, and the potential of the particular
technology to meet service needs.
The committee requests the Secretary of Defense provide a
report to the congressional defense committees on the next
generation of lithium battery technologies for military
applications. New lithium batteries for advanced portable
electronic applications should be able to significantly
increase energy and power, increase safety, lower cost, and/or
weigh less. The Secretary should report on all phases of
research, development and production for new systems and
recommend actions necessary for commercial production in a one-
to-three year time frame.
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE
62705A for the battery/portable power technology initiative.
Advanced carbon nano technology
The budget request contained $131.2 million in PE 61102A
for defense research sciences, but included no funding for
advanced carbon nanotechnology.
The committee is aware that advanced carbon nanotechnology
has the potential to open the door to the creation of new
sensors and other devices.
The committee recommends $137.2 million in PE 61102A for
defense research sciences, an increase of $6.0 million for a
multi-institution, peer reviewed program for development of
advanced carbon nanotechnology.
Advanced weapons technology
The budget request contained $16.6 million in PE 62307A for
Advanced Weapons Technology.
The committee understands the need to carry out applied
research in support of existing and future missile defense
technologies. The committee is specifically aware of the need
to conduct research on systemic issues common to Terminal High
Altitude Area Defense, PAC-3/ Medium Extended Air Defense
System, Ground-based Midcourse Defense and future systems in
areas such as radar and radio frequency sensors, electronics
and micro-fabrication, optical sensors and composite material
and structures.
The committee is also aware of the Army's need for
additional funding for solid state technology laser research in
support of directed energy weapons.
The committee recommends $46.6 million in PE 62307A, an
increase of $30.0 million. Of the $30.0 million increase, $20.0
million shall be for missile defense applied technology
research conducted by the Army Space and Missile Defense
Command. The remaining $10.0 million of the increase shall be
for solid state laser technology research conducted by the Army
Space and Missile Defense Command.
Aerostat joint project office
The budget request contained $81.5 million for the Aerostat
Joint Project Office.
The committee is aware of the importance of Micro Electro
Mechanical (MEMS) antenna technology to the radar system for
the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted
Sensor System (JLENS).
The committee recommends $84.5 million, an increase of $3.0
million for MEMS antenna technology in support of JLENS radar
development.
Applied communications and information networking
The budget request contained $41.8 million in PE 63008A for
electronic warfare advanced technology, but included no funding
for applied communications and information networking (ACIN).
The committee realizes that the goal of ACIN is to
revolutionize military doctrine and methods by enhancing high-
value military systems with rapidly advancing commercial
information technologies and innovative applications of those
technologies.
The committee supports the application of state-of-the art
commercial technology to improve military systems and
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63008A for ACIN.
Center for rotorcraft innovation
The budget request included $41.7 million in PE 62211A for
Aviation and Applied Research and Technology. No request was
included for a center for rotorcraft innovation.
The committee is concerned that continued shortcomings in
national policy planning for rotorcraft research and production
is resulting in the inability of the United States to
effectively produce competitive world-class rotorcraft
products. This is evident by key decision-makers within
federal, state, and local governments, as well as private
sector users, selecting foreign products to meet their
rotorcraft needs. National shortcomings in this regard are
further evidenced by the closure of unique National Full Scale
Aerodynamic Complex rotorcraft wind tunnel resources at the
National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) Ames
Research Center at Moffett Field, California.
The committee believes there exists a requirement to
establish a center for rotorcraft innovation to coordinate
technology strategies and areas of cooperative research efforts
and increase public and private resources available for
rotorcraft research. The committee understands that the first
step toward creation of a center for rotorcraft innovation was
recently taken when industry and academic leaders signed an
agreement to work together with the federal government to
coordinate rotorcraft research.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
establish a center for rotorcraft innovation to facilitate the
furtherance of the recently created partnership between the
rotorcraft industry and academia to administer collaborative
research projects. Members shall include major helicopter
manufacturing companies, rotorcraft academic institutions, and
technology firms; the Department of Defense; NASA; and the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The center shall take
advantage of historical and present-day sites of helicopter
technology development, rotorcraft academic institutions, and
FAA technology facilities. Further, since NASA has concluded it
is unable to continue to operate the National Full Scale
Aerodynamic Complex, the committee recommends that the
Secretary of the Army seek the transfer of the Complex to the
Department of the Army.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in PE 62211A, $10.0 million to retain the availability
of the wind tunnel facilities at Ames Research Center and $5.0
million for the establishment of a center for rotorcraft
innovation.
Center for tribology
The budget request contained $69.6 million in PE 62601A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no
funding for a center for tribology.
The committee notes that new coatings and other surface
treatments commercially available today could extend the useful
life of gears and other commercially available parts from 4 to
10 times longer than current treatments. The committee is aware
that this technology holds great promise for increasing the
reliability for all types of military equipment, extending
equipment life, and reducing fuel costs.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to work
with the friction, wear and abrasion test equipment
manufacturing industry to develop a commercial capability to
create and standardize new test apparatus and methods to
analyze new coatings more quickly.
Centers of excellence
The budget request contained $77.7 million in PE 61104A for
university and industry research centers and included $2.5
million for a collaborative academic research effort leveraging
Army Training and Doctrine (TRADOC) Battle Labs in accordance
with the Army Science and Technology Master Plan.
The committee notes the Army initiative to harness
university research expertise for Army-unique science and
technology problems. The committee further notes the Army
effort to partner university researchers at Historically Black
Colleges and Universities/Minority Insitutions (HBCU/MI) with
Army TRADOC Battle Labs in an effort to accelerate the
transition of research to actual technology demonstration. The
committee recognizes the potential benefits in the cognitive
research areas of modeling and simulation, data fusion,
protective materials, maneuver, health, and human systems
integration. The committee encourages a continuation of this
initiative.
The committee recommends $80.7 million in PE 61104A, an
increase of $3.0 million for the collaborative effort between
HBCU/MI centers and TRADOC Battle Labs.
Combat vehicle electronics
The budget request contained $16.0 million in PE 23735A for
combat vehicle improvements, but included no funding to develop
standardized next generation electronics architectures for
current combat vehicle programs.
The committee is aware that current combat vehicles face
accelerated component obsolescence issues.
The committee recommends $21.0 million in PE 23735A, an
increase of $5.0 million to develop standardized next
generation electronics architectures for current and future
combat vehicle programs.
Defense language institute/foreign language center
The budget request contained no funds for the Defense
Language Institute Foreign Learning Center (DLI/FLC) for
research and development.
The committee notes the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 Public Law 108-136) recommended that the
Secretary of the Army establish a research and development
line, specifically focused on the latest technologies and
instructional methods in language and language learning that
are required by the DLI/FLC. The committee is surprised that a
budget request was not included in the fiscal year 2005 budget
request.
The committee is aware of the increased demands within the
Department of Defense for increased student throughput and
expanded off-campus and distant learning sites. These current
endeavors necessitate innovative approaches in the instruction
of foreign languages and the educational processes to
administer them.
The committee applauds the progress of DLI/FLC's innovative
practices in meeting this challenge and supports the efforts in
seeking new methods in teaching foreign languages and language
learning to meet the goals of the Department and the National
Security Agency.
Therefore the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
to establish a new research and development program in fiscal
year 2005 for the DLI/FLC, entitled, ``Defense Language
Institute, Foreign Learning Center'' and recommends $5.0
million for this purpose.
Digital array radar technology development
The budget request contained $32.0 million in PE 63772A for
advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology, but
included no funds for digital array radar technology
development.
The committee is aware that evolving threats place new
demands on sensors and notes that in particular the ground
forces need reliable, transportable counter-fire radars to
protect against mobile threats.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63772A to develop a transportable, ground-based, digital solid-
state multi-mission radar.
Electronic flight planning
The budget request contained $2.4 million in PE 23752A for
the aircraft engine component improvement program, but included
no funding for electronic flight planning.
The committee believes that electronic flight planning will
improve force protection and operational performance knowledge
of helicopter aircrews in the combat environment.
The committee recommends $5.9 million in PE 23752A, an
increase of $3.5 million for electronic flight planning.
Flexible display initiative
The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 62705A for
electronics and electronic devices, but included no funding for
the flexible display initiative.
The committee is aware that new flexible display technology
has the potential to provide the military with technology to
fabricate high definition displays on rugged conformable,
flexible substrates. The committee notes that the United States
Display Consortium coordinates these efforts with over 80
companies, using investments from both the public and private
industry to accelerate the development of technologies and
products needed by the Army, other military services, and
various national security agencies.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $13.5
million in PE 62705A for the flexible display initiative.
Force XXI battle command brigade and below blue force tracking system
The committee recognizes the Army's superb efforts to
establish a truly network-centric (tactical) command, control,
and communications (C3) capability through the fielding of the
Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) Blue Force
Tracking system by employing a satellite communications
network. The committee notes the accelerated fielding of this
enhanced version of FBCB2 prior to commencement of Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom proved to be an
invaluable situational awareness tool for the warfighters and
saved lives.
The committee strongly recommends the Department of Defense
leverage the Army's investment into a joint solution providing
interoperability to all military services. Furthermore, the
committee recommends the Army maintain the role of executive
agent for this joint capability and directs the Secretary of
the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees on its vision for a joint blue force situational
awareness capability that builds upon the successes of previous
operations.
Future combat systems
The budget request included $3,198.1 million in PE 64645A
and PE 64647A for the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program.
The committee believes that the March 2004 General
Accounting Office assessment is correct and is particularly
concerned that the system network, the heart of this
transformational concept, is by far the most technically
challenging aspect of the FCS program. The committee believes
that the demonstrations required by this section should begin
early in system development and become increasingly more
complex. In order to accomplish the direction of this section
in regard to demonstrating the capabilities of the network, the
committee recommends that the Secretary of the Army direct the
U.S. Army Communications Electronics Command to test emerging
network concepts in small scale field exercises at readily
accessible range facilities.
Further, the committee believes that to provide for
necessary congressional oversight the Department of the Army's
budget justification documents should provide separate
justification of the major elements of the FCS program, as
shown in the accompanying tables.
The committee recommends $2,952.8 million in PE 64645A and
PE 64647A for FCS, a reduction of $245.3 million as detailed in
section 211 of this report.
Geospatial information decision support for single integrated air
picture
The budget request contained $91.7 million in PE 63327A for
air and missile defense systems engineering, but included no
funding for geospatial information decision support for the
single integrated air picture (GIDS-SIAP).
The committee notes that there is a need for commanders to
have a clear, unambiguous geospatial foundation in order to
support a common operational picture. The committee is aware
that GIDS-SIAP will integrate disparate geospatial information
systems to provide ground and air picture recommendations for
the commanders.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63327A for GIDS-SIAP.
Human systems integration
The budget request included $16.9 million in PE 62716A for
human factors engineering, $61.1 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology, and $71.5 million
in PE 62202F for human effectiveness applied research.
The committee recognizes the need to consider human systems
integration issues early in the development cycle. Too often,
man-machine interface issues are not addressed until late in
the development cycle after the configuration of a particular
weapon or system has been set.What results is a degraded combat
system that is not able to achieve its maximum performance and, at
worst, becomes a liability on the battlefield.
The committee notes that all the military departments
include some form of human systems integration in their
development and acquisition process, but believes that
institutionalization and standardization of human systems
integration methodologies and modeling tools across the
Department of Defense is desirable. To this end, the committee
recommends that the Secretary of Defense conduct a
comprehensive Department-wide review of the implementation of
human systems integration in defense acquisition programs.
Further, the committee recommends additional resources for
human factors engineering initiatives in each of the military
departments.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million in PE
62716A for development of manpower and personnel integration
(MANPRINT) tools for modeling and predicting soldier and system
performance; increases of $3.0 million in PE 63236N and $2.0
million in PE 62233N to develop cognitive and physiological
research data under the Navy's system engineering, acquisition
and personnel integration (SEAPRINT) program; and an increase
of $3.0 million in PE 62202F for the development of new
training algorithms for human performance prediction under the
Air Force's improved performance research integration tool
(IMPRINT) program. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of human systems
integration programs within the Department and to report the
results of that review to the congressional defense committees
by December 31, 2004.
Hydrogen proton exchange membrane
The budget request contained $69.6 million in PE 62601A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no
funding for the hydrogen proton exchange membrane (PEM) ambient
pressure fuel cell medium/heavy duty vehicle demonstration
program.
The committee is aware that the hydrogen PEM fuel cell is
to demonstrate zero emission, ambient pressure, highly
efficient hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles in various
operating situations and conditions. The committee notes that
this development supports the government objective of tripling
fuel economy while reducing harmful emissions.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
62601A for the hydrogen proton exchange membrane (PEM) ambient
pressure fuel cell medium/heavy duty vehicle demonstration
program.
Information dominance center
The budget request contained no funds for operations and
maintenance or research and development for the Army's
information dominance center (IDC) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
The IDC provides multi-disciplinary Information Operations
(IO) support to the Army's commands. Through tailored
analytical products generated to meet immediate operational
needs, the IDC also monitors potential trouble spots worldwide,
preparing to support contingency operations with IO-related
products. The committee believes the IDC's use of high-capacity
communications links to access selected information from a
number of databases maintained by a number of other
organizations is truly transformational.
The committee acknowledges that the IDC is one of the Army
Chief of Staff's unfunded priorities intelligence objectives.
The committee supports the transformation efforts of the IDC
and the future plan to incorporate functions of the IDC into
the Army's Distributed Common Ground Systems (DCGS).
Therefore, the committee recommends $6.0 million in
operations and maintenance, Army for IDC, an increase of $6.0
million, and $4.0 million in PE 33028A, an increase of $4.0
million for research and technology development at the IDC.
Institute for creative technologies
The budget request contained $15.0 million in PE 62308A for
advanced concepts and simulation, including $1.6 million for
the institute for creative technologies (ICT).
The committee notes that the technologies developed at the
ICT are being applied to significantly improve fidelity of
computer-based training, which is essential to the Army.
The committee supports development of improved training
devices and recommends $22.0 million in PE 62308A, an increase
of $7.0 million for the ICT.
Integrated communications navigation identification avionics program
The committee is aware that during the execution of the now
canceled Comanche program, significant progress had been made
in development of the Integrated Communications Navigation
Identification Avionics (ICNIA) system. The Joint Tactical
Radio System (JTRS) has been selected as the joint standard
radio system for all services and has also made significant
technical progress and is scheduled to begin testing in the
first quarter of fiscal year 2005. After the cancellation of
the Comanche program the Army convened an independent
assessment panel to compare the relative performance of the
Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) and ICNIA. The committee is
aware that a second evaluation has been requested as a result
of the independent assessment team's review.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit
the results of the independent assessment panel and subsequent
evaluations to the congressional defense committees. The
committee further directs the Secretary, prior to a final
decision or selection of JTRS or ICNIA as the standard for Army
aviation or the obligation of fiscal year 2005 authorized
amounts for JTRS, to brief the congressional defense committees
on the criteria of selection and the performance comparison of
these two avionics systems.
Joint and combined communications test tool product suite
The budget request contained $53.5 million in PE 63305A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no
funding for the joint and combined communications test tool
product suite.
The committee notes that the joint and combined
communications test tool product suite will provide a test tool
suite that will test interoperability issues within joint and
combined forces.
The committee recommends $63.5 million in PE 63305A, an
increase of $10.0 million for the joint and combined
communications test tool product suite.
JP-8 soldier fuel cell
The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 62705A for
electronics and electronic devices, but included no funding for
JP-8 soldier fuel cell.
The committee is aware that light, compact, high-capacity
power sources are essential to success on the modern
battlefield to power a variety of devices. The committee notes
that an effort is on-going to modify a commercial fuel cell to
run on standard, readily available JP-8 fuel.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62705A for development of the JP-8 soldier fuel cell.
LEAN munitions
The budget request contained $67.2 million in PE 78045A for
end item industrial preparedness activities, but included no
funds for the second phase of the LEAN Munitions program.
The committee notes that the Army Armaments Research,
Development and Engineering Command (ARDEC) is responsible for
90 percent of the munitions produced and utilized by the U.S.
Army. The committee further notes that the Army's increased
operational tempo and transformation plans support the need to
reduce the time and cost for development and production of
munitions used by our armed forces. The committee believes that
the use of a standards-based, model-driven design and
manufacturing life cycle support environment would enable the
more timely and affordable production and sustainment of
current and future munitions systems.
The committee recommends $70.2 million in PE 70845A, an
increase of $3.0 million to continue the LEAN Munitions
program.
Light unmanned aerial vehicle weaponization
The budget request contained $203.1 million in PE 63005A
for combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no
funds for light unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weaponization.
The committee notes that historically, light UAVs have been
unable to carry weapons. The committee is aware that a unique,
patented, electronically-fired, stacked-round technology has
been developed that lends itself to the stringent restrictions
of lightweight UAV weaponization.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63005A for integration of the unique electronically-fired,
stacked-round capability with a light UAV such as the Defense
Advanced Research Agency DP-5 UAV.
Light utility vehicle
The budget request contained $69.6 million in PE 62601A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no
funding for the light utility vehicle.
The committee believes that the Army requires a low-cost,
light utility vehicle (LUV) that would provide soldiers with
enhanced mobility, lethality and survivability compared to the
current high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle and
understands that the design and development of a LUV
demonstrator could be accelerated due to previous research in
LUV technology by the National Automotive Center.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 62601A to design, develop, and deliver an
operational prototype LUV.
Lightweight structures initiative
The budget request contained $203.1 million in PE 63005A
for combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no
funding for the Army lightweight structures initiative (ALSI).
The committee is aware that the objective of the ALSI
program is to develop, design, demonstrate, validate and
implement a methodology for producing lightweight vehicle
structure components and assemblies for the Army Future Combat
Systems. The committee notes that the methodology utilized has
been proven to substantially reduce costs and weights of
structures in the automotive and aerospace applications.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE
63005A for the ALSI.
Low cost course correction
The budget request contained $28.2 million in PE 64601A for
infantry support weapons, of which no funds were requested for
Low Cost Course Correction.
The committee has been encouraged by the demonstration of
Low Cost Course Correction (LCCC) technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
64601A to accelerate the development of LCCC for projectiles in
the 20mm to 100mm range.
M5 high performance fiber for personnel armor systems
The budget request contained $21.1 million in PE 62786A for
warfighter technology, but included no funding for M5 high
performance fiber.
The committee notes that M5 fiber, based on independent
evaluation, offers the possibility of a new generation of
lighter and more effective body and vehicle armor as well as
similar improvement in heat resistant clothing.
The committee recognizes the urgency to provide improved
personnel protection and recommends $31.1 million in PE 62786A,
an increase of $10.0 million to hasten development and
evaluation of M5 fiber and M5 based armor.
Medical technology applied research initiative
The budget request contained $60.9 million in PE 62787A for
medical technology applied research.
The committee notes that the primary goal of medical
research and development in the Department of Defense is to
sustain medical technology to effectively protect and improve
the survivability of U.S. armed forces in a variety of settings
including, but not limited to: conventional battlefields, areas
of low-intensity conflict, and military operations other than
war. Operations of U.S. forces in the global war on terrorism
have placed a premium on the need for a range of medical
technologies in the areas of infectious diseases, combat
casualty care, military operational medicine, and health
hazards for materials, that are the core applied technology for
the Army's military technology applied research program.
The committee recommends the establishment of a medical
technology applied research initiative that would provide the
opportunity for emerging medical technologies and concepts to
compete for funding on the basis of peer-reviewed technical
merit. The committee recommendsthat the medical projects and
technologies to be considered for funding under the initiative,
include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Bio-activity of nanomaterials;
(2) Bio-defense gene knockout technology;
(3) Dermal phase meter;
(4) Elgen gene delivery technology;
(5) Fibrin bandage from non-mammalian sources;
(6) Nano-fabricated Bio-artificial kidney; and
(7) Rapid Bio-pathogen detection technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE
62787A for the medical technology applied research initiative.
Clinical research programs
The committee understands that the primary federal agency
responsible for conducting research into diseases affecting a
broad demographic portion of the population is the Department
of Health and Human Services. Nonetheless, the Department of
Defense (DOD), and in particular the Department of the Army,
has at the direction of Congress conducted and managed research
for a number of diseases that particularly affect military
members, their family members, and military retirees. In fact,
the Army provides special scrutiny to these programs, since
they are congressional directed and necessarily involve
clinical trials conducted over several years.
While the committee applauds the Department's efforts to
manage these programs, the committee is concerned that there
may be missed opportunities to conduct research into other
vital areas. For example, service members, family members, and
military retirees are certainly affected by such serious and
increasingly prevalent diseases as lung cancer and diabetes,
yet no formal program exists for either.
The committee believes that a comprehensive review of these
research programs is necessary so that research can be directed
into areas that may have been neglected. Accordingly, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review ongoing
clinical research efforts within the military departments and
report to the congressional defense committees by February 1,
2005, whether any research programs should be added to the
DOD's efforts. The committee believes that lung cancer and
diabetes are excellent candidates for military sponsored
research and urges the Secretary to give every consideration to
establishing formal programs to fight these diseases, as they
relate to military service.
Medium tactical truck development
The budget request contained $2.9 million in PE 64604A for
the continued development of medium tactical truck technologies
and enhancements.
The family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV) A2 will be
the next generation of FMTVs. The committee understands
additional funds are required to ensure synchronization with
the fielding of the Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS)
Increment I Unit of Action. The committee also notes these
additional funds will enable the spiraling of FCS-like
technologies into the tactical truck fleet, ensuring
interoperability and maximizing future force capability.
The committee recommends $12.6 million in PE 64604A, an
increase of $9.7 million, to further the development of medium
tactical truck technologies.
Miniature sensor development for small and tactical unmanned aerial
vehicles
The budget request contained $22.6 million in PE 62709A for
night vision technology, but included no funding for
miniaturized hyperspectral and coherent imaging sensors for
small and tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
The committee notes the urgent need for better sensors for
small and tactical UAVs and recommends $27.6 million in PE
62709A, an increase of $5.0 million for miniaturized
hyperspectral and coherent imaging sensors for small and
tactical UAVs.
Modeling and analysis of the response of structures
The budget request contained $47.2 million in PE 62784A for
military engineering technology, but included no funding for
modeling and analysis of the response of structures (MARS).
The committee notes that MARS computer simulations will
provide accurate vulnerability assessments that can be used to
improve warfighter protection, enhance survivability, and
facilitate rapid repair of structures.
The committee recommends $52.2 million in PE 62784A, an
increase of $5.0 million for MARS.
Night vision fusion
The budget request contained $50.1 million in PE 63710A for
night vision advanced technology, but included no funds to
accelerate development of night vision fusion technology.
The committee recognizes that night vision capability has
provided our armed forces a significant advantage over their
adversaries. The committee notes that while older technology
has become available to others, state-of-the-art in night
vision, pixel level digital fusion of light intensification and
infrared images offers a very significant advantage over
previous night vision devices. The committee understands that
this technology will provide vital survivability and
operational enhancements.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.5 million in PE
63710A to accelerate development and fielding of pixel level,
digital fusion of light intensification and infrared image
technology.
Patient monitor with defibrillator
The budget request contained $38.4 million in PE 63002A for
medical advanced technology development.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63002A for development of advanced technology for a compact,
lightweight, full-featured patient monitor with defibrillator.
Portable and mobile emergency broadband system
The budget request contained $41.8 million in PE 63008A for
electronic warfare advanced technology, but included no funding
for the portable and mobile emergency broadband system.
The committee notes that the portable and mobile emergency
broadband system, based on emerging commercial technology, will
allow rapid establishment of emergency communications networks.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63008A to complete critical development of the portable and
mobile emergency broadband system.
Shadow tactical unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $27.1 million in PE 35204A for
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAV).
The committee is aware that the three major improvements to
the Shadow 200 TUAV based on operational evaluation were
incorporation of the tactical common data link (TCDL), changes
to reduce target location error, and a larger wing to increase
both payload and endurance. The committee understands that the
only remaining engineering necessary to include all three
improvements in future Shadow 200 production is software
modifications associated with TCDL.
The committee fully supports expediting completion of these
improvements in order to field the most capable Shadow 200 to
ground forces. Therefore the committee recommends $30.6 million
in PE 35204A, an increase of $3.5 million to complete required
Shadow non-recurring engineering for these improvements.
Smart responsive nanocomposites
The budget request contained $75.1 million in PE 61103A for
University Research Initiatives, but included no funding for
smart responsive nanocomposites (SRN).
The committee is aware that there is a multitude of design
possibilities for nanostructured, nature-simulating materials
capable of responding to outside stimuli.
The committee recommends $79.1 million in PE 61103A, an
increase of $4.0 million to develop a smart responsive
nanostructured material, which combines detection of toxins and
alarm-release with self-cleaning and self-repairing material.
Space and missile defense architecture analysis program
The budget request contained $91.7 million in PE 63327A for
Army air and missile defense systems engineering, but included
no funding for the Army Space and Missile Defense (ASMD)
architecture analysis program.
The committee places a priority on the development of a
transformational capability. The committee recognizes the
contributions of the ASMD architecture analysis program in
providing the essential analytical, modeling, and simulation
tools to support advanced concepts and architectures of future
forces.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63327A for the ASMD architecture analysis program.
Strategic materials strategic manufacturing initiative
The budget request contained $44.7 million in PE 62624A for
weapons and munitions technology, but included no funding for
the strategic materials strategic manufacturing initiative
(SM2i).
The committee notes that titanium is important for weight
reduction of weapons systems. The committee is aware that SM2i
will link the Army's efforts to establish a reliable low-cost
domestic source of titanium with advanced domestic
manufacturing capabilities.
The committee supports an increase of $6.0 million in PE
62624A for SM2i.
Titanium alloy powder
The budget request contained $15.4 million in PE 62105A for
materials technology, but included no funding for titanium,
titanium-alloy powder production.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
62105A to enhance the domestic capacity to produce inexpensive,
high-quality titanium powder for military use.
Titanium extraction, mining, and process engineering research
The budget request contained $44.7 million in PE 62624A for
weapons and munitions technology, but included no funding for
Titanium extraction, mining, and process engineering research
(TEMPER).
The committee is aware that the TEMPER initiative is
intended to enhance U.S. industrial capability for the
efficient production of inexpensive titanium for military
systems. The committee notes that titanium offers weight and
performance advantages and that the process must be developed
to produce titanium at a reasonable cost in order to realize
those advantages in future military systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE
62624A for TEMPER.
Unmanned systems initiative
The budget request contained $52.0 million in PE 62303A for
missile technology, but included no funding for the unmanned
systems initiative.
The committee recognizes the unmanned systems initiative
will support battlefield control of multiple unmanned assets.
The committee recommends $62.0 million in PE 62303A, an
increase of $10.0 million for the unmanned systems initiative.
Navy Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $16,346.4 million for Navy
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $16,047.8 million, a decrease of
$298.6 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced composite structures program
The budget request contained $81.2 million in PE 63561N,
for advanced submarine systems development.
The committee notes that the success of the Navy's Phase I
Large Scale Vessel (LSV) advanced composite sail program
suggests that the use of composite materials can impart
improved performance, significant increases in load carrying
capacity and stealth characteristics to submarine sails and to
surface combatant superstructures and hulls. Therefore, the
committee recommends that the Secretary of the Navy expand the
program to include the fabrication and test of full-scale
composite structures.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63561N to continue the program for development and evaluation
of advanced composite structures for submarine and surface
combatant applications.
Advanced gun system for DD(X) multi-mission destroyer
The budget request contained $1,431.6 million in PE 64300N
for DD(X) total ship systems engineering development and
demonstration, including $46.5 million for the advanced gun
system (AGS), $20.3 million of which is for continued
development and testing of the engineering development model of
the long-range land attack projectile.
The committee notes that the acquisition strategy for the
DD(X) multi-mission destroyer includes the development and
testing of engineering development models of the major
component systems of the DD(X), including AGS, to ensure that
these systems are ready for fielding with the first ship of the
DD(X) class. The AGS system consists of a major caliber gun,
automated ammunition handling systems, and the long-range land
attack projectile family of munitions.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
64300N to continue development, integration, and testing of the
long-range, land-attack projectile family of munitions with the
AGS.
Advanced laser diode arrays
The budget request contained $80.8 million in PE 63582N for
combat systems integration advanced development and
prototyping. The budget included no funds for continued
development of advanced laser diode arrays.
The committee notes that the Navy is developing
electrically driven high energy lasers for potential use in
ship self defense against a variety of surface and air threats.
High reliability and high power continuous wave diode arrays,
efficient laser optical configurations, and advanced solid-
state laser gain materials will be among the key technologies
needed to reach the power levels required in a solid-state
laser weapon system.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63582N to continue the development of advanced laser diode
arrays.
Advanced mine detection program
The budget request contained $58.2 million in PE 63640M for
the Marine Corps advanced technology demonstration, but
included no funding for the advanced mine detection program.
The committee is aware that the Marine Corps urgently needs
a backpack advanced mine detection capability with minimal
false alarm rates. The committee notes that the Office of Naval
Research has been working to develop an advanced mine detection
system based on quadrupole resonance technology that has the
potential to meet Marine Corps requirements.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
63640M to complete development of a quadrupole resonance
technology advanced backpack mine detection system.
Advanced processor build integration
The budget request contained $75.3 million in PE 64503N for
system development and demonstration for SSN-688 and Trident
submarine modernization.
The committee has strongly supported the use of the
acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf technology insertion
(ARCI) program and use of advanced processor software builds
(APB) to upgrade sonar systems on submarines, surface
combatants, and other platforms. Use of the ARCI/APB process
has enabled the United States Navy to regain the advantage in
sonar systems that it lost in the 1980s.
The committee notes that the fiscal year 2005 budget
request includes sufficient funds for APB integration to
provide the fiscal year 2004 advanced processor build (APB-04)
software update for 668I and SSGN submarine sonar systems.
However, additional funding is needed to integrate APB-04 into
the 688, SEAWOLF, and SSBN class ARCI systems and ensure that
thirteen ships, for which the update is not presently funded,
receive the updates before their planned deployments in fiscal
year 2006.
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE
64503N for the Navy's unfunded requirement for integration of
APB-04 update into the 688, SEAWOLF, and SSBN class ARCI
systems.
Aegis open architecture
The budget request contained $146.5 million in PE 64307N
for Aegis combat system engineering systems development and
demonstration.
The Aegis combat system engineering program includes the
development of upgrades for cruiser and destroyer Aegis combat
systems and the integration of new equipment and systems to
keep pace with the threat and capture advances in technology.
The committee notes that experiences aboard Aegis-equipped
ships and shore sites have shown that the use of currently
available commercial-off-the-shelf equipment requires periodic
refreshment and additional development effort as new
technologies become available and computer operating systems,
device drivers, and interfaces are updated. To overcome these
problems, the Navy is developing an open architecture computing
environment for Aegis-equipped cruisers and destroyers as a
part of the Navy's overall open architecture program. The goal
of the program is to evolve combat systems into a ``system of
systems'' that resides on a common computing environment which
will be less complex, more easily upgraded, and have lower
total ownership costs.
The committee recommends $168.3 million in PE 64307N, an
increase of $21.8 million to accelerate the development and
introduction of an open architecture computing environment for
the Aegis combat system.
Affordable towed array construction
The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 64503N for
submarine system equipment development, including $5.2 million
to continue the development of affordable towed array
technology initiatives for the development of fiber optic thin
line towed arrays technology initiatives. The affordable towed
array construction (ATAC) program employs fiber optic thinline
arrays to provide reliability improvements by reducing system
complexity, eliminating wet end electronics, enhancing littoral
capability and incorporating robust array construction methods.
The committee believes that accelerating the development
and fielding of fiber optic towed array technology using
improved construction methods and processes would provide
increased performance, reliability and operational capabilities
at reduced costs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in PE 64503N to accelerate the development and
introduction into the fleet of fiber optic thinline arrays.
Affordable weapon system
The budget request contained $82.0 million in PE 63795N for
land attack technology advanced component development and
prototypes, and included $28.9 million for development and
demonstration of the affordable weapon system (AWS).
The AWS program began as an Office of Naval Research (ONR)
advanced technology initiative to demonstrate the ability to
design, develop, and build a capable and affordable precision
guided weapon system at a cost that would be an order of
magnitude cheaper than comparable weapons systems and in
production would achieve a stable unit production cost very
early in the production cycle.
The committee notes that the ONR program has been
successful in all respects. In less than four years, the AWS
program demonstrated the use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS)
components to construct a 400-600 mile range, subsonic (180-220
knot), loitering, 200 pound payload, precision strike missile
with global positioning inertial navigation system guidance; a
control unit; and a data link. The missile has both line-of-
sight and satellite data links for interaction with ground
stations and forward observers and is reprogrammable in flight.
In operational use the missile would be launched from CONEX-
type containers that hold between six and twenty missiles and
could be carried on land, sea, or air platforms. The initiative
has demonstrated that the COTS approach can reduce costs by an
order of magnitude from traditional cruise missiles. The
current missile cost in large scale production, exclusive of
warhead, is estimated to be approximately $60,000.
Based on the results of the AWS advanced technology
demonstration, the Department of Defense and the Navy decided
to transition the AWS from the technology base to an
accelerated advanced component development and prototype
program that demonstrates the ability to produce the missile at
the projected cost; provides up to 100 missiles and launch and
fire control equipment for developmental and operational
testing; and supports user evaluation of the AWS for potential
use by the fleet. Congress provided $28.0 million to support
the program in fiscal year 2004. The committee notes that
shortfalls in science and technology funding for the AWS
transition and delays in award of the development and
production contract have delayed the program and completion of
operational test and evaluation until the spring of 2005 and
resulted in increased costs to complete the initial missile
production buy.
The committee recommends an increase of $23.0 million in PE
63795N to complete a 100-missile build of the AWS and support
developmental and operational testing and fleet evaluation of
the system.
Airborne mine neutralization system
The budget request contained $50.5 million in PE 64373N for
airborne mine countermeasures system development and
demonstration, including $15.6 million for continued
development of the Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS)
The AMNS is an expendable, remotely operated mine
neutralization device that is deployed in shallow and deep
water from the MH-53E and MH-60S mine countermeasures
helicopters to explode unburied bottom and anchored sea mines,
which are impractical or unsafe to counter using existing
minesweeping techniques.
In an audit of the AMNS program completed in February 2004,
the Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) concluded
that the program is well-managed overall. However, the DOD IG
cited the decision to transition the MH-53E to a Rapid
Deployment Capability as premature and recommended that the
ASN(RDA) rescind approval and require full operational test and
evaluation of the system to assure that it is operationally
effective and capable of supporting real-world contingency
operations. The DOD IG also found that the Navy did not perform
an adequate analysis of alternatives to evaluate the cost- and
operational- effectiveness of alternative courses of action and
that the Program Executive Officer (Littoral and Mine Warfare)
should not proceed further with the development and acquisition
of the AMNS unless a comprehensive, independent analysis of
alternatives justifies proceeding.
The committee recognizes that operational necessity may
require the rapid deployment of interim or developmental
capabilities in times of emergency, but also recognizes and
supports the requirement that such systems be operationally
capable and effective. The committee directs the Secretary of
the Navy to report to the congressional defense committees by
September 30, 2004, the actions that will be taken by the
Department of the Navy to respond to the DOD IG's findings.
Airborne reconnaissance systems
The budget request contained $10.2 million in PE 35206N for
airborne reconnaissance systems, but included no funding for
passive collision avoidance and reconnaissance (PCAR).
The committee is aware that unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV)
must fly in regions that make them a potential hazard to
commercial and other manned aircraft. The committee notes that
PCAR will sense an impending collision and allow the UAV to
safely avoid approaching aircraft.
Therefore, to improve safety of UAV operations, the
committee recommends $13.2 million in PE 35206N, an increase of
$3.0 million for PCAR.
AN/BLQ-10 test and support
The budget request contained $75.3 million in PE 64503N for
system development and demonstration for SSN-688 and Trident
submarine modernization, including $1.4 million for submarine
support equipment.
The submarine support equipment program develops and
evaluates improvements in submarine electronic warfare support
measures, including implementation of state-of-the-art
technologies for periscope, mast, and engineering improvements
in the AN/BLQ-10 tactical electronic support system.
The committee notes proposals for adaptation and evaluation
of a commercial-off-the-shelf tester for electronic circuit
card assemblies that could be used aboard submarines.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
64503N for adaptation and evaluation of a commercial-off-the-
shelf tester for electronic circuit card assemblies for the AN/
BLQ-10 tactical electronic support system.
Anti-torpedo torpedo
The budget request contained $46.9 million in PE 63506N for
surface ship torpedo defense advanced component development and
prototyping.
The surface ship torpedo defense program develops the
Tripwire AN/WSQ-11 torpedo defense system, which includes the
Tripwire towed sensor and processor to detect a threat torpedo
and provide launch orders for the associated anti-torpedo
torpedo countermeasure. The committee notes that the anti-
torpedo torpedo as the ``offensive'' response to the Tripwire
launch detection is a critical part of the surface ship torpedo
defense.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63506N to accelerate development of the anti-torpedo torpedo as
a part of the surface ship torpedo defense system.
Automatic radar periscope detection and discrimination
The budget request contained $13.4 million in PE 64261N for
acoustic search sensors system development and demonstration,
including $2.9 million to continue development of the automatic
radar periscope detection and discrimination (ARPDD) project.
The ARPDD project provides fully automated periscope
detection, classification and tracking capability to reliably
detect periscopes and masts of submerged submarines and to
discriminate periscopes from other targets. The committee notes
that the Navy regards this capability as essential for
effective detection of submarines in congested littoral waters.
The current program of record provides for a four-year
development cycle, followed by developmental and operational
testing and a low rate initial production decision in fiscal
year 2011. The budget request would be used for project
planning and acquisition program documentation in preparation
for awarding a contract for development of an airborne ARPDD
capability. The committee notes that acceleration of the
program is a priority for the Navy.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million in PE 64261N to accelerate ARPDD system development and
demonstration and rapid introduction of the capability into the
fleet.
Aviation ship integration center
The budget request contained $157.5 million in PE 63512N
for carrier systems advanced technology development and
prototyping. No funds were included for the Aviation Ship
Integration Center.
The Aviation Ship Integration Center supports the
development and conceptualization of fully integrated advanced
technology designs for future aircraft carriers. The center
identifies, tests, and integrates transformational design
changes and products for aviation capable ships and component
systems, and permits the identification and resolution of
potential problems early in the development cycle, thereby
reducing overall engineering costs and facilitating the
introduction of transformational initiatives in the CVN-21
carrier.
The committee notes that additional funding is required to
expand and complete several key initiatives by the shipbuilder
and appropriate government sponsors.
Congress appropriated $9.8 million for the Aviation Ship
Integration Center in fiscal year 2004. The Chief of Naval
Operations has indicated the center is a critical unfunded
requirement for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63512N for the Aviation Ship Integration Center.
Aviation shipboard information technology initiative
The budget request contained $28.6 million in PE 64512N for
system development and demonstration for shipboard aviation
systems, but included no funds for continuation of the
integrated aviation shipboard information technology
initiative.
The aviation shipboard information technology initiative
seeks to use state-of-the-art information technology and
decision support systems to automate the current manually
intensive process for collecting and distributing the
information required to manage aviation operations on board
aircraft carriers more efficiently and effectively. The
committee notes continued progress in the initiative, now
renamed the Aviation Data Management and Control Systems
(ADMACS). The development of a common operating picture for
carrier aviation operations and the ability through process
automation and integration of key operational systems to
provide an accurate status of weapons, aircraft, personnel,
launch, and recovery systems throughout the ship should result
in significant workload reductions, reduced mission planning
and execution time, and an increased sortie generation rate. In
addition to the operational impact of ADMACS, the committee
notes estimates of operations and support cost savings of $2.0
million per year per ship and workload savings of 45 man-years
per year per ship. Congress has provided a total of $7.8
million for the program since fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
64512N to continue the development of ADMACS. The committee
expects the Navy to include funding for any further development
of ADMACS in the Navy's core aviation program beginning with
the fiscal year 2006 budget request.
Biomedical research imaging
The budget request contained $16.7 million in PE 63729N for
warfighter protection advanced technology development.
The committee continues to note the progress being made in
the use of advanced imaging technology in biomedical research.
The program develops new tools and diagnostic procedures that
improve the efficiency and accuracy of biomedical research in
bone marrow transplantation and breast and prostate cancer, and
the potential for new collaboration between previous
unconnected medical specialties. The committee believes that
these findings have important implications for advances in
real-time medical diagnosis and treatment and for the
application of advanced data fusion technologies in other
areas.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63729N to continue research in the applications of advanced
imaging technology to biomedical research.
Center for critical infrastructure protection
The budget request contained $96.3 million for force
protection applied research, but included no funding for the
Center for Critical Infrastructure Protection (CCIP).
The committee believes that the Department of Defense
should place a greater emphasis on its acknowledged mission of
protecting critical defense infrastructure, such as ports,
railroads, and pipelines. Sustained force protection of fixed
defense-critical national assets requires additional research
on sustained and integrated surveillance and sensing
capabilities. The CCIP is an innovative program that will
explore such technologies on a continuing basis, helping to
develop the most comprehensive security systems for the
nation's critical defense infrastructure.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
62123N for this important research.
Claymore marine
The budget request contained $4.5 million in PE 63254N for
anti-submarine warfare (ASW) systems development.
The committee notes that the Navy established the Claymore
Marine program to investigate and demonstrate a new littoral
antisubmarine warfare (ASW) system that integrates the
previously developed ATD-111 airborne ASW and mine hunting
system with new signal processing algorithms to achieve a
significant increase in performance.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63254N for the Claymore Marine program.
Common submarine radio room
The budget request contained $18.7 million in PE 33140N for
information systems security program operational systems
development.
The committee notes that the radio room on many of today's
ships uses outdated, and in some cases, obsolete technologies.
As a result, the systems that support ship communications in
the radio room are labor intensive, require heavy and costly
maintenance, suffer from operator overload and require large
numbers of highly skilled operators. The Navy developed the
Common Submarine Radio Room (CSRR) in the Virginia Class
submarine program and now plans to standardize radio rooms
across all submarine classes using the CSRR model. CSRR will
reduce the cost, training, and maintenance of submarine radio
rooms and, through increased use of automation, will permit the
reduction of personnel required to stand watch in the radio
room. In the future the CSRR concept may be extended to the
surface fleet.
The committee recommends $36.4 million in PE 33140N, an
increase of $17.7 million for the Navy's unfunded requirement
for the CSRR.
Composite ceramic unmanned underwater vehicle
The budget request contained $63.7 million in PE 62236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development, but
included no funding for development of a composite ceramic
unmanned underwater vehicle.
The committee notes that the high cost of development and
manufacture of advanced underwater vehicles (UUV) and that the
long design and development lifecycle have significantly
limited introduction of innovative UUV capabilities. The
committee is aware that the composite ceramic unmanned
underwater vehicle program plans to use advanced ceramic
material research for the rapid development of high-
performance, low cost, modular UUVs. The committee supports the
development of high-performance UUVs, using advanced composite
technology, ceramic component technology and water-soluble
tooling, and integration of next- generation sensors, guidance
and control, propulsion and payloads. The committee expects
that this technology could replace steel construction with
light-weight, high strength, corrosion resistant ceramics and
polymers.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
62236N for composite ceramic unmanned underwater vehicle
applied research.
Consolidated undersea situational awareness
The budget request contained $79.5 million in PE 63235N for
common picture advanced technology development, but included no
funds to continue development of the consolidated undersea
situational awareness system (CUSAS).
The committee notes that CUSAS is a decision-support system
that would provide knowledge superiority to undersea warfare
(USW) forces through the use of advanced, interactive, decision
support software. Developed initially under the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency, CUSAS would offer
significant improvements in situational awareness for fleet
operators through the use of high fidelity, two- and three-
dimensional presentations, augmented with real-time,
intelligent agent-based, tactical recommendations.
The committee notes the progress in the development of
CUSAS. The system has demonstrated the capability to interface
with, process, and display all sources of sensor and
intelligence data onboard a U.S. submarine. The core technology
has been installed and successfully demonstrated in an
operational tactical submarine trainer and a follow-on at-sea
demonstration is scheduled later in 2004. The committee
believes that successful development of the CUSAS decision
support system would provide a capability that would
significantly assist submarine commanders to make rapid and
informed decisions in critical combat operations.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63235N to continue development of CUSAS.
DD(X) multi-mission destroyer
The fiscal year 2005 budget request included $1,450.6
million for the DD(X) multi-mission destroyer, including
$1,431.5 million in PE 64300N and $19.0 million in PE 63513N,
to continue detailed design and, using RDT&E funding, to begin
construction of the first ship of the DD(X) class. Of the
amount requested, $221.1 million is for construction.
DD(X) is a multi-mission surface combatant tailored for
land attack in support of the ground campaign and maritime
dominance. In addition, the DD(X) program will provide a
baseline for development of technology and engineering to
support a range of future surface ships such as the CG(X)
future cruiser and the Littoral Combat Ship. A Milestone B
acquisition decision is scheduled for mid-fiscal year 2005.
Delivery of the first ship of the class to the fleet is
currently planned for fiscal year 2011. The Navy wants to
procure a total of 24 DD(X)s at a unit procurement cost of
$1,200 million to $1,400 million.
The committee has strongly supported the DD(X) program
since its inception. DD(X) will be the advanced technology
platform for transformational technologies including an
integrated power system and electric drive; an advanced gun
system; a new multi-function radar/volume search radar suite;
optimal manning through advanced system automation; stealth
through reduced acoustic, magnetic, infrared, and radar cross-
section signatures; and enhanced survivability through
automated damage control and fire protection systems. The
committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) noted that the
ship's operational requirements and key performance parameters,
which affect the mission capabilities, design, and size of the
ship, were under review. Subsequently, the Navy decided to
reduce the size of the DD(X) from a full load displace of
approximately 18,000 tons to 14,000 tons.
In its report, ``Defense Acquisitions--Assessments of Major
Weapons Programs,'' dated March 2004, the General Accounting
Office (GAO) assessed the DD(X) as entering system development
with none of its 12 critical technologies fully mature (and
thereby subject to a higher risk of completing development at
the planned cost and schedule). The program manager is pursuing
risk mitigation by constructing and testing engineering
development models for the critical technologies; however, the
acquisition strategy calls for engineering development model
construction and testing to be done concurrently with system
design. The decision to reduce the weight of the ship prompted
redesign of the advanced gun system and hull form engineering
development models. Because of schedule slippage, only two
engineering development models (the hull form and the
integrated power system) would be mature by the award of the
lead ship construction contract, currently planned for
September 2005. Current testing schedules call for the
integrated power system, dual band radar suite, total ship
computing environment, and peripheral vertical launching system
to continue development beyond the lead ship production
decision. In the GAO's view, should any of these innovative
technologies encounter challenges that cannot be accommodated
within the current design margins, redesign of other
technologies and of the integrated ship system may be needed.
Redesign would likely result in additional costs and schedule
delays and affect the planned installation schedule. In
addition, because the DD(X) acquisition strategy focuses on
developing and maturing technologies that could be leveraged
across multiple ship classes, delay in the maturation of
critical technologies would increase the risk for other
development programs.
The committee notes that the engineering development models
of the integrated power system and the advanced gun system are
scheduled to complete land-based testing by the end of fiscal
year 2005 and the multi-function radar will have completed two-
thirds of its land-based and at-sea testing by that date. The
committee believes that it would be prudent to delay the award
of the contract for construction of the first ship of the class
from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2006 in order to
accommodate any results from the testing of these critical
systems in the design of the ship prior to beginning
construction. The committee recommends that the DD(X) program
be restructured to reduce concurrency and develop technology
``off-ramps'' for technologies that do not mature.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $221.1
million in PE 64300N and deferring the initiation of
construction of the lead ship from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal
year 2006.
Deployable joint command and control
The budget request contained $42.4 million in PE 63237N for
research and development of the Deployable Joint Command and
Control System (DJC2) and $32.5 million for procurement of two
DJC2 cores (120 seats total) for the European Command.
The committee supports the concept of establishing a
standing joint force headquarters within each of the regional
combatant commands (RCCs) and of providing standardized joint
command and control capabilities for the commands. However, the
committee questions the acquisition strategy to procure, equip,
and provide technology updates for this program. The committee
is concerned that the schedule to procure and equip the first
set of two cores per RCCs is too aggressive and may not
accomplish its schedule due to lack of technology integration
for the information systems and applications that are required
for this program.
While the committee understands that each combatant
commander would like four core systems, for a potential of up
to 240 seats per RCC, the committee notes the Department has
not devised a capital planning strategy to pay for the second
set of two cores per RCC. Furthermore, there is no
justification to show how the Department plans to pay for
updating hardware and software systems to prevent them from
becoming obsolete by fiscal year 2008.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy, in coordination with the commander, Joint Forces Command,
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by
March 31, 2005, detailing a systems architecture, performance
metrics, management plan for the development of DJC2, and a
capital planning investment strategy as to how the Department
plans to fund the second set of two cores per combatant
command.
Digital modular radio
The budget request contained $78.6 million in PE 64280N for
system development and demonstration for the Joint Tactical
Radio System-Navy (JTRS-Navy). No funds were requested to
continue system development and demonstration for the digital
modular radio (DMR).
DMR is a digital, modular, software programmable, multi-
channel, multi-function and multi-band (2 megahertz--2
gigahertz) radio system that would provide improved fleet radio
communications in the high, very-high, and ultra-high frequency
radio bands. DMR would replace and be interoperable and
backwards compatible with currently deployed Navy radio
systems.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense has
mandated that all future tactical radio procurements must be
compliant with the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS). The
committee also notes that the contract for a commercial-off-
the-shelf, non-development initiative DMR was awarded before
the JTRS architecture and acquisition strategy was established.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE
64280N to continue development of the DMR and bring the DMR
operating environment software to full compliance with the JTRS
common architecture (version 2.2).
DP-2 thrust vectoring system
The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for
power projection advanced technology development, but included
no funding for continuation of the DP-2 thrust vectoring system
demonstration.
DP-2 is a proof-of-concept program to demonstrate the use
of jet-powered, thrust vector control in a light weight
composite airframe to achieve vertical takeoff and short
takeoff and landing in a one-half scale flight test vehicle.
The committee notes the progress to date in the program and
believes that the potential for a successful proof-of-concept
demonstration justifies continuation of the program.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63114N to continue development and demonstration of the DP-2
thrust vector system concept, leading to potential flight test
of the one-half scale airframe.
Electromagnetic gun program
The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology development.
In section 211 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), Congress directs the
Secretary of Defense to establish and carry out a collaborative
program among the Director of Defense Research and Engineering,
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Army, the Navy,
and other appropriate Department of Defense activities, for
evaluation and demonstration of advanced technologies and
concepts for advanced gun systems that use electromagnetic
propulsion for direct and indirect fire applications. The
committee believes that the development of electromagnetic gun
technology would have potentially high payoff for U.S. armed
forces in both direct and indirect fire weapons systems, and
that the major investment made by the Department of Defense
(principally by the Army) in this technology over the last 20
years is beginning to provide significant returns. In the
fiscal year 2005 budget request, the committee notes
significant shortfalls in Department of the Navy funding for
the program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $9.5
million in PE 63123N for electromagnetic gun technology
advanced development.
Embedded national tactical receiver integration with advanced anti-
radiation guided missile
The budget request included $163.4 million in PE 25601N for
operational systems development for high-speed anti-radiation
missile (HARM) improvement, including $53.5 million for the
advanced anti-radiation guided missile (AARGM).
The embedded national tactical receiver (ENTR) is a circuit
card capable of receiving global surveillance information.
Integrating the ENTR in the AARGM would facilitate the
engagement of time sensitive and critical targets by adding the
ability for the missile to receive threat data from national
assets, thereby enlarging the target set and increasing aircrew
situational awareness. The capability of such a system to
receive near real time intelligence data will enhance the
suppression of enemy air defense by increasing the ability to
engage the most current surface-to-air missile threats in
denied access area.
The committee recommends $165.4 million in PE 25601N, an
increase of $2.0 million to integrate the ENTR in the AARGM.
Emerging/critical interconnection technology
The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development but no
funds were requested for continuation of the electronic
interconnection research and development program.
The committee notes that printed circuit boards are
fundamental components of military navigation, guidance and
control, electronic warfare, missile, and surveillance and
communications equipment. The committee notes that printed
circuit boards for military systems have unique design
requirements for high performance, high reliability, and the
ability to operate under extreme environmental conditions that
require the use of high density, highly rugged, and highly
reliable interconnection technology. The committee also notes
that the commercial printed circuit board industry focuses on
the design and high-volume production of low-cost boards and
the United States has lost much of its printed circuit board
manufacturing capability to overseas sources. The committee
recognizes the need to enhance the U.S. capability for
development and production of high density, highly reliable
printed circuit boards for use in U.S. military systems.
Congress appropriated $3.5 million in fiscal year 2004 for this
program.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63236N to continue the program for development of emerging and
critical printed circuit interconnection technology. The
committee expects that the electronic interconnection research
and development program will be included in the Navy's core
research and development program in the fiscal year 2006 budget
request.
Enterprise resource planning
The budget request contained $109.5 million in PE 65013N
for information technology (IT) development, including the
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) program.
The Navy ERP program is intended to provide a standard set
of tools to Navy organizations to facilitate business process
reengineering and provide interoperable data for acquisition,
financial, and logistics operations. The committee understands
that this new program would converge the four existing ERP
pilot programs in various Navy commands into one larger ERP.
The committee believes the Navy should select the most
comprehensive ERP pilot for the entire Navy's use and terminate
the other three pilots. Accordingly, the committee recommends
$26.5 million in PE 65013N for IT programs, a decrease of $83.0
million for the ERP program.
Enterprise targeting and strike system
The budget request contained $3.6 million in PE 35208N for
the development of the Navy's enterprise targeting and strike
system (eTSS). This program will employ web-enabled enterprise
technologies across existing operational capabilities. By using
commercial e-business technologies, eTSS transforms the Navy's
targeting, strike and mission-planning systems by integrating
combat platforms and their support components into a single
hardware dispersed web-enabled enterprise. The committee
supports this non-proprietary, open standards solution that is
consistent with the Department of the Navy's other important
information technology programs. The committee also supports
the program's goal of supporting globally distributed, joint,
collaborative, time critical, strike operations within the
Global Information Grid (GIG) architecture.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $9.6 million in PE
35208N, an increase of $6.0 million, for the acceleration and
deployment of eTSS.
Evolved sea sparrow missile capability for large decks
The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 64755N for
ship self defense (detect and control) system development and
demonstration.
The committee notes the requirement for large deck
amphibious ships and aircraft carriers to be capable of
countering the anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) threat.
The committee notes that the Navy has identified the
Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) capability for large deck
amphibious ships as a critical unfunded requirement in the
fiscal year 2005 budget request. Additional funds are required
to develop the complete SSDS Mk 2 software configuration
modification for LHD 1 class ships; initiate integration of the
ESSM into the SSDS Mk 2 computer program; and procure the
Reconfigured NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System (RNSSMS), a Mk 29
missile launching system, an AN/SPQ-9B radar system, and a
cooperative engagement capability (CEC) system for the LHD 1.
The committee recommends the following to address the
Navy's unfunded requirement for providing the ESSM capability
on large deck amphibious ships:
(1) An increase of $15.3 million in PE 64755N for
SSDS Mk 2 system development and demonstration;
(2) An increase of $8.7 million for one Reconfigured
NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System (RNSSMS);
(3) An increase of $6.0 million for one AN/SPQ-9B
radar system; and
(4) An increase of $4.2 million for one cooperative
engagement capability system.
Formable aligned carbon thermosets
The budget request contained $63.7 million in PE 62236N for
warfighter sustainment applied research, but included no funds
for formable aligned carbon thermosets (FACTS).
The committee continues to support the development and
demonstration of FACTS, which employ stretch broken fibers to
give the composite material plasticity akin to metals. FACTS
also significantly eases the formation of composite parts for
use in aircraft and other construction where weight savings and
reduced operation and maintenance costs are desired. The use of
FACTS is expected to increase significantly the percentage of
airframes that can be fabricated from composites, reduce the
cost of the composite structure, permit the use of more
efficient designs, and significantly lower the weight of the
airframes.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62236N to continue the program for development and
demonstration of FACTS product technology.
Gallium nitride radio-frequency power technology
The budget request contained $49.2 million in PE 62271N for
radio frequency systems applied research.
Gallium nitride (GaN) radio frequency power
microelectronics is a wide band gap power semiconductor
technology that has several key advantages over radio frequency
component technologies now in use, including higher power
density, better heat dissipation, and increased bandwidth. This
new technology could lead to dramatic improvements in system
performance, such as significant increases in the range of
radar systems and enabling such systems to more effectively
identify threat signatures in the presence of terrain
background clutter. Congress authorized $3.0 million for GaN
microelectronics and materials development in fiscal year 2004.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62271N to continue the program for applied research in GaN wide
band gap semiconductor materials and power microelectronics.
Hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier
The budget request contained $6.9 million in PE 64771N for
medical system development and demonstration. No funds were
specifically requested to continue the development of
hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier technology.
The committee notes that there is currently no effective
method of providing front-line resuscitative treatment (i.e.
immediate oxygen-carrying support) for acute blood loss to
wounded soldiers on the battlefield and civilian trauma victims
in an out-of-hospital setting. The single major cause of death
in potentially salvageable battlefield casualties is hemorrhage
and blood loss, and early intervention to treat hemorrhage
provides the greatest opportunity for reducing mortality and
morbidity. Although blood transfusion is not practical in far
forward or out-of-hospital settings, hemoglobin-based oxygen
carriers have the characteristics of stability at room
temperature that overcome many of the medical and logistical
problems associated with red blood cell transfusion.
In fiscal year 2002 Congress initiated a program for
evaluation of hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers for the
treatment of trauma casualties. Based on the progress in the
program the U.S. Naval Medical Research Center is directing a
clinical development and trials program to evaluate the safety
and efficacy of a particular hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier.
The program is designed to serve as the basis for U.S. Food and
Drug Administration approval and subsequent licensing of the
product for military and civilian trauma applications.
The committee recommends an increase of $13.0 million in PE
64771N to continue the program for development and clinical
trials of hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers for treatment of
trauma casualties.
High temperature superconducting AC synchronous ship propulsion motor
The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology development, including
$16.0 million to continue development of a 36.5 megawatt class,
high temperature superconducting alternating current (AC)
synchronous motor.
The committee notes that development of component
technologies for the all electric warship is one of the major
goals of the Navy's science and technology program. In fiscal
year 2003, the Navy awarded a contract for development and
demonstration of high temperature, superconducting AC
synchronous motor technology in a 36.5 megawatt propulsion
motor and drive system that would be designed to be compatible
with Navy electric warship concepts and performance
requirements, and would be available to begin Navy evaluation
in fiscal year 2006. The committee is informed that the Navy's
budget request is not sufficient to maintain the program
schedule.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
63123N to maintain the schedule for development of the AC
synchronous high temperature superconducting motor.
Hybrid POSS composites development
The budget request contained $96.3 million in PE 62123N for
force protection applied research.
The committee notes that the use of composite materials in
naval aircraft continues to increase and the use of composites
for ship and submarine applications is becoming more
acceptable. Organic polymers are the main component of the
composite resin technology that iscurrently in use; however,
the limited capability of composites to survive the effects of a
shipboard fire is the main obstacle to more extensive use and there are
no resin systems which entirely meet military standards. The committee
notes that hybrid (organic-inorganic) POSS polymers have been
demonstrated that meet the fire retardance standard of Military
Specification 2031, but have not yet been qualified for use on board
ships. The committee is aware that in fiscal year 2004, the Navy has
committed to conduct a 1/4-scale demonstration of the fire retardancy
of hybrid POSS composite resins. The committee believes that it is
important that the POSS resin technology be fully demonstrated in
fiscal year 2005 in order to insure that the resin is qualified as a
candidate for use in the DD(X) multi-mission destroyer and the Littoral
Combat Ship.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62123N to continue applied research in the design, fabrication,
testing, and qualification of POSS composites for shipboard use
by the Navy.
Integrated personnel protection system
The budget request contained $98.8 million in PE 62114N for
power protection applied research.
The committee notes Navy requirements for improving the
protection of Navy ships and personnel from natural or combat
hazards ashore and afloat. Although many advances have been
made in personnel protection equipment for Navy personnel, many
situations exist in which current personnel protective
equipment is inadequate. The committee is aware of advances in
technologies for protection of Navy personnel from fire,
chemical, and biological hazards that, when combined with an
integrated individual display system and interconnected through
an ultra-wideband personnel communications network, would
provide enhanced situational awareness and communications
capabilities for the monitoring of personnel situations and
coordination of crew response in critical situations.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62114N for applied research in integrated personnel protection
systems.
Integrated radar optical surveillance and sighting system
The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 64755N for
ship self defense (detect and control) system development and
demonstration.
The committee notes that, in view of the current world
situation and the worldwide deployment of United States naval
forces, protection of high value surface assets has become
highly important.
The integrated radar optical surveillance and sighting
system (IROS3) integrates commercial-off-the-shelf systems in a
non-proprietary, network architecture to provide a digital
radar picture, electro-optical sensor, non-lethal deterrent,
and remote engagement by small arms and minor caliber guns. In
addition to providing a capability to detect and classify
asymmetric surface threats, maintain 360-degree situational
awareness around the ship, and effectively engage small close-
in threats, IROS3 would also enhance the capability for surface
warfare, navigation, maritime intercept operations and related
naval missions. Congress provided $4.2 million in fiscal year
2004 to continue development of the IROS3.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE
64755N for demonstration and evaluation of the IROS3 system.
Intermediate modulus carbon fiber qualification
The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development. No
funds were requested to continue the qualification of
commercially available intermediate modulus carbon fibers.
The committee supports efforts to transition new materials
and processes for use in present and future aircraft and
missile systems. The committee is encouraged by the Navy's
efforts to establish a second production source for
intermediate modulus carbon fiber to ensure more competitive
practices. In fiscal year 1997, the Navy initiated an effort to
develop a protocol for the qualification of new materials,
second source materials, and new processes for use on naval
aircraft and missile systems. The Navy has developed a
certification protocol for the qualification of commercially
available intermediate modulus carbon fibers, which are used to
strengthen aircraft and missile bodies. To date $5.5 million
has been provided for this qualification program.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63236N to complete the qualification program for commercially
available intermediate modulus carbon fibers.
Interrogator for high-speed retro-reflective communications
The budget request contained $98.8 million in PE 62114N for
power project applied research, but included no funding for a
high-speed retro-reflectometer communications data link.
The committee notes that the Naval Research Laboratory
(NRL) has been conducting extensive research into the use of
modulated retro-reflectors, which would eliminate the need for
an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to carry a laser for downlink
communications. NRL's progress to date is promising and
includes the development of a prototype interrogator with fine
steering optics and software, laser tracking algorithms,
hardware and software, electronics, and return signal
collection and demodulation to effectively test a ship-to-shore
communications scenario. A second prototype will be
demonstrated in an air-to-ground scenario.
The committee notes that additional funding in fiscal year
2005 would permit NRL to develop and demonstrate a miniaturized
prototype high-speed data link with an interrogator designed
for easy transport, setting the stage for demonstrations of
further system applications.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62114N to continue development of a laser interrogator for
high-speed retro-reflectometer communications data link.
Joint integrated systems technology
The budget request contained $573.1 million in PE 33109N
for Satellite Communications (SATCOM) operational system
development.
The Joint Integrated Satellite Communications (JIST) is a
web-based satellite communications planning and management
technology that utilizes the Department of Defense's existing
internet protocol router to expand the flexibility and
efficiency of military satellite communications across a broad
spectrum of radio frequencies. The committee continues to
believe that developmental systems like JIST, based on common
standards, are key to increased satellite communications
efficiency and maximizing the utilization of available spectrum
resources across legacy and follow-on satellite communications
systems.
The committee recommends $581.1 million in PE 33109N, an
increase of $8.0 million to continue the JIST program for
development of a uniform web-based architecture for SATCOM
mission planning and resource allocation.
Joint Strike Fighter
The budget request included $2,264.5 million in the
Department of the Navy and $2,307.4 million in the Department
of the Air Force for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program.
In order to maintain competition for the engine for the
JSF, Congress has mandated the funding of an alternate engine
program and the JSF Joint Program Office (JPO) is working with
the contractor propulsion teams to provide for completely
interchangeable engines.
The committee believes that the earliest possible engine
production lot competition is beneficial to the JSF program.
The committee directs the JSF JPO plan to compete, at the
earliest possible date, engine common hardware as well as the
turbomachinery, while maintaining PW F135 and GE F136 engine
interchangeability.
Laser radar data exploitation
The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for
power projection advanced technology development.
The committee notes that laser radar (LADAR) seekers
provide high-quality, high-resolution, three-dimensional
imagery of the target area that is used by the seeker for
autonomous target recognition (ATR) and location. The committee
also notes the development of LADAR imagery viewing software
for engineering analysis of the ATR algorithms and believes
that such technology can be exploited for intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance purposes. The imagery, if
down-linked or otherwise made available to the user, could be
used to support three-dimensional target area visualization,
aim point analysis, mission planning, and attack plan
rehearsal.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
63114N for the continued development of software tools for
laser radar imagery analysis and the development of concepts of
operations and procedures for exploiting LADAR imagery for
mission planning, mapping, and three-dimensional target area
visualization.
Littoral combat ship
The budget request contains $352.1 million in PE 63581N for
the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), including $244.4 million for
LCS development and $107.7 million for construction, using
RDT&E funds for the first ship of the LCS class.
The LCS is a planned new Navy surface combatant for
fighting in heavily contested littoral waters that would be the
smallest member of the DD(X) family of next-generation surface
combatants and has been identified in budget reviews as a key
component of Navy transformation. A fast, agile, and stealthy
surface combatant, LCS missions include mine countermeasures,
littoral anti-submarine warfare, and countering fast attack
craft (i.e. ``swarm boats'') in heavily contested littoral
waters. Secondary missions include intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance; homeland defense/maritime intercept;
special operations forces support; and logistics support for
movement of personnel and supplies.
LCS would be the first Navy ship to separate capability
from hull form. Modular mission payloads and open-system
architecture are intended to be used to configure the LCS for
particular missions. LCS would be much smaller and faster than
the Navy's current major surface combatants (2,000-3,000 ton
displacement and a maximum speed of 40 to 50 knots) and would
have a reduced crew size of 15 to 50 core members. Three
contractor teams are competing for the LCS prime contract and
two will be selected later this year for the next phase of the
competition. The Navy wants to procure 56 LCSs at an estimated
unit cost of $150.0 to $220.0 million for the ship alone and
$250.0 million, including a representative mission payload
package. The total acquisition cost for the program could
exceed $14,000 million. Congress provided $166.0 million for
LCS in fiscal year 2004. The Chief of Naval Operations has
identified an unfunded requirement of $74.7 million for LCS
mission module development in fiscal year 2005.
Prior to announcing the LCS program, the Navy did not
conduct a formal analysis of alternatives to demonstrate that a
ship like the LCS would be more cost-effective for performing
the stated missions than potential alternative approaches. In
the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on
H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-772), the conferees raised a number of
issues with respect to the development of LCS. The Secretary of
the Navy's report on those issues was a brief, summary document
that provided little detail with regard to the analysis
performed by the Navy in developing the requirement and the
concept for LCS. The Navy's March 2004 report on LCS
requirements, concepts of operations, acquisition strategy, and
systems that would be replaced by LCS was also a relatively
brief summary document that provided little new information
about the LCS program. Congress has directed the General
Accounting Office to report by March 1, 2005, on the LCS
program's analytical justification, concept of operations,
technical maturity, and potential costs.
The committee continues to have concerns about the lack of
a rigorous analysis of alternative concepts for performance of
the LCS mission, the justification for the force structure
sought by the Navy, and whether the program's acquisition
strategy is necessary to meet an urgent operational need. In
view of continued unfunded requirements for mission module
development and experimentation and what the committee believes
is the need for more thorough evaluation program, the committee
is concerned about the Navy's ability to resolve these issues
before committing to the design for the LCS and beginning
construction of the first ship. Finally, the committee is
concerned about whether the program schedule provides
sufficient time and capabilities for experimentation and
evaluation of the operational concepts for LCS before
committing to major serial production of the ship.
Consequently, the committee recommends $244.4 million in PE
63581N for the LCS, a decrease of $107.7 million for LCS
construction. The committee also recommends that the
construction of the first Flight 0 LCS be delayed until fiscal
year 2006.
Littoral support craft-experimental
The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology development, including
$10.2 million to continue development and demonstration of the
Littoral Surface Craft-Experimental (LSC-X).
The LSC-X or ``X-Craft'' is a science and technology
platform designed for experimentation with lifting bodies, drag
reduction and mission modularity. A high-speed, all-aluminum
catamaran, the LSC-X displaces 1,400 tons at full load.
Performance requirements are speeds of 50 knots at a combat
load of about 1,200 tons and 40 knots in sea state four, and
arange of 4,000 nautical miles without replenishment. The LSC-X will be
capable of landing two helicopters up to the size of the SH-60R,
transporting and operating autonomous vehicles, and carrying several
reconfigurable mission modules in standard twenty-foot-equivalent unit
boxes. The operating crew will be minimal and the vessel will be built
to commercial American Bureau of Shipping standards. As expressed in
the committee report on H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-436), the committee
continues to believe that an experimental vessel such as the LSC-X
would be an effective experimental test bed for many of the
technologies that might be chosen for use on the Littoral Combat Ship
(LCS). The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to carry out
such an experimentation program as a part of the process for developing
the operational and design requirements for the LCS.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.8 million in PE
63123N to complete construction of the LSC-X, high-speed
performance testing at-sea, and mission module demonstrations.
Low acoustic signature motor/propulsor
The budget request contained $64.1 million in PE 62747N for
undersea warfare advanced technology development.
The committee notes that the low acoustic signature motor
propulsor for electrically powered undersea vehicles (LAMPREY)
will demonstrate an integrated motor-propulsor and power
converter with extremely low acoustic signature for undersea
vehicles. When integrated with an already developed, high power
lithium-propulsion system, the LAMPREY program will represent a
new propulsion system for an upgraded MK-48 Advanced Capability
torpedo. The LAMPREY test vehicle will also represent a 1/20th-
scale submarine and will provide valuable data for a larger
scale version of the propulsion system that could ultimately be
used in Virginia class submarines. Congress provided $2.1
million in fiscal year 2003 and $1.8 million in fiscal year
2004 for the LAMPREY program.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE
62747N to complete on-range testing of the LAMPREY test vehicle
to verify acoustic performance of the propulsion system and
maximum speed, range, and maneuvering characteristics.
Low-cost terminal imaging seeker
The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for
power projection advanced technology development.
The committee notes that the Naval Air Warfare Center,
Weapons Division, China Lake is demonstrating a low-cost
precision guidance upgrade kit for a low-cost terminal imaging
seeker (LCTIS) that is an out-growth of the low-cost guided
imaging rocket (LOGIR) project. The committee believes that the
technology which would be demonstrated in the LCTIS could have
application to the advanced precision kill weapon system, the
joint common missile, and the small diameter bomb and would be
a risk reduction alternative for all three of these programs.
The committee notes that the plan for use of additional fiscal
year 2005 funding for the LCTIS project would include
development and test of seeker guidance and control
alternatives and seeker signal processing algorithms.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63114N for LCTIS advanced technology development and
demonstration.
Low-power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle processing engines
The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for
power projection advanced technology, but included no funding
for low-power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle
processing engines.
The committee continues to support the development of
improved signal processing capability for unmanned aerial
vehicles for precision targeting and other missions. The
committee notes that the massively parallel processing
technology being developed under the low-power mega-performance
unmanned aerial vehicle processing engines program should
provide significantly enhanced on-board sensor processing
capabilities that will address the difficult computational
challenge of on-board sensor processing capabilities for
unmanned aerial vehicles and will greatly enhance sensor
performance and surveillance capabilities. Congress
appropriated $1.5 million for the program in fiscal year 2004.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63114N to accelerate advanced technology development of low-
power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle processing
engines.
Marine mammal research program
The budget request contained $63.7 million in PE 62236N for
warfighter sustainment applied research, but included no funds
for continuation of the marine mammal research program.
The committee notes continuing public concern about the
effect of sound on the behavior and well-being of marine
mammals and continues to support research in these areas. The
marine mammal research program investigates the effects of
noise on dolphin hearing and dolphin biosonar capabilities,
conducts joint visual and acoustic surveys of the behavior of
humpback whales, and supports research in bioacoustical
oceanography.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.2 million in PE
62236N to continue the program for research in marine mammal
behavior, the effects of sound on marine mammals, and
bioacoustical oceanography.
Nanoscience and nanomaterials
The budget request contained $375.8 million in PE 61153N
for defense research sciences, including $65.8 million for
basic research in advanced naval materials sciences.
The committee notes continuing progress in research in
nanoscience and nanomaterials. The committee is also aware that
the application of these new concepts and technologies in
improved materials, novel structures, and integrated
multifunctional composite materials and structures that address
high priority Navy science and technology needs and future Navy
capabilities.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
61153N for basic research in nanoscience and nanomaterials.
One megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell demonstrator
The budget request contained $1.5 million in PE 63724N for
advanced component development and prototyping for the Navy
energy program. No funds were requested for the development and
demonstration of a one megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell.
The committee notes that reliable, grid-independent and
environmentally ``clean'' power plants would provide many
advantages for Department of Defense use. The ability of such
power plants to generate electricity independent from the local
electrical utilities would enhance base security by satisfying
the critical military need of providing uninterruptible
electrical service.
The committee recommends $7.5 million in PE 63724N, an
increase of $6.0 million for the development and demonstration
of a one megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell.
Open architecture warfare systems
The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 64755N for
ship self defense (detect and control) system development and
demonstration.
The committee notes that open architecture warfare systems
support the Navy's top priority of modernizing warfighting
capabilities to meet the concepts described in Sea Power 21 and
that open architecture is the technology enabler that supports
the Navy's FORCEnet and joint interoperability. Established in
a commercially based computing environment, open architecture
provides the common internet protocol technology base that will
be critical to the seamless interchange of information among
elements of the Navy's battle management command and control
systems and the operational and planning capabilities required
to make network-centric warfare effective.
The Navy has identified a requirement for $21.8 million in
fiscal year 2005 to fully fund the implementation of open
architecture and establish a single functional information
architecture for Navy surface forces. The committee notes that
providing these funds in fiscal year 2005 would complete the
engineering effort to modernize and report the software for
Ship Self Defense System Mark 2 (SSDS MK 2) combat system
applications and comply with the required technical and
functional system design standards that are the necessary
precursors for implementing the single integrated operational
picture.
The committee recommends an increase of $21.8 million in PE
64755N for the Navy's unfunded requirement for open
architecture systems development.
Open architecture wireless sensors
The budget request contained $9.3 million in PE 65013N for
information technology system development and demonstration.
The committee notes that the applications of wireless
networking have achieved significant cost reductions and
benefits to the U.S. Navy in ship building through the use of
wearable computers, personal data assistants, and wireless
communications devices that enable supervisors, engineers,
technicians, and construction workers to coordinate their
activities more efficiently. The committee believes that the
future insertion of wireless network applications through the
shipboard environment and the converging of multiple networks
into a single ship-wide network could facilitate significant
improvements in ship operations, damage control, maintenance,
and other activities.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
65013N for development and demonstration of open architecture
wireless sensors and their applications to improvements in ship
operations, maintenance and monitoring of ship systems, damage
control, and other activities.
Organ transplant technology
The budget request contained $16.7 million in PE 63729N for
warfighter protection advanced technology development. No funds
were requested for continuation of the organ transfer
technology program.
The committee continues to note progress in the development
of immune therapies by investigators at the Naval Medical
Research Center that have been shown to prevent the rejection
of tissue and organ transplants without the need for continuous
use of immuno-suppressive drugs. In fiscal year 2001, the Chief
of Naval Research initiated a program to capitalize on these
newly developed methods of treatment. The committee notes the
continuing progress in the clinical trials program. The
committee believes that the ability to transplant massive
tissue segments without rejection could revolutionize the
treatment of combat casualties who suffer significant tissue
loss or organ damage from blast, missile fragments, or burns.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63729N to continue the organ transfer technology clinical
trials program.
Project M
The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology development. No funds were
included for continuation of Project M.
The committee notes the progress in the Office of Naval
Research (ONR) program to evaluate the ability of Project M
technology to mitigate the high shock and vibration experienced
by the Navy SEALS Mark V patrol craft crew and passengers in
high-speed special operations. The committee is aware that at-
sea tests of the technology are scheduled for the summer of
2004.
The committee also notes the application of Project M
technology to reduce the magnetic signature of electric
propulsion motors. As the Navy places increased emphasis on the
introduction of the ``electric'' ship and the use of electric
motors for ship propulsion, reduction of the magnetic signature
of the ship as a defense against magnetic-influence mines,
particularly in littoral operations, will become increasingly
important. The committee strongly recommends that the Navy
consider the exploitation of the Project M technology for
magnetic signature reduction in new construction ships such as
the DD(X) destroyer and the Littoral Combat Ship.
The committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106)
directed the Secretary of the Navy and the Commander, Special
Operations Command, to report to the congressional defense
committees on plans for transition of Project M shock reduction
technology to potential operational use, and the Secretary to
report Department of the Navy plans for further development,
evaluation, and exploitation of Project M technology for
magnetic signature reduction. The committee expects the results
of the shock-mitigation at-sea trials to be included in the
report.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63123N to continue the development and demonstration of Project
M technology.
Rapid deployment fortification wall
The budget request contained $58.2 million in PE 63640M for
Marine Corps advanced technology demonstration. No funds were
requested to continue the development and evaluation of the
rapid deployment fortification wall.
In the fiscal year 2004 budget the committee initiated a
program for development and evaluation of a rapid deployment
fortification wall (RDFW) which would provide a significantly
faster means for force protection than the use of sand bags.
The RDFW has been selected for force protection evaluation at
Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. The committee is informed that
additional funding for the evaluation would permit its
evaluation as a vehicular barrier and a more comprehensive
evaluation of the speed of installation, labor savings,
construction, and structural integrity, and innovative uses of
the RDFW.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE
63640M to continue evaluation of the RDFW.
Real-time precision targeting radar
The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63271N for
radio frequency systems advanced technology development. No
funds were requested for the AN/APY-6 radar.
The committee notes the Navy's operational requirement for
reducing the targeting cycle for engaging time-critical mobile
targets and enhancing the ability to detect, locate and strike
these targets in all weather conditions. The committee also
notes as a part of the future naval capabilities program that
the Office of Naval Research is developing the AN/APY-6 multi-
mode, high-resolution surveillance radar as a real-time
precision targeting radar for all-weather surveillance,
detection and location of such targets. The objective of the
program is to provide the warfighter with a lightweight, low-
cost, high-resolution radar, with synthetic aperture radar and
ground moving target indicator capability for use in both
manned and unmanned platforms for reconnaissance, surveillance,
and targeting.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63271N for continuation of the development and demonstration of
the AN/APY-6 real-time precision targeting radar.
Reduced risk ordnance
The budget request contained $10.8 million in PE 63216N for
aviation survivability advanced component development and
prototyping, including $1.2 million for aircrew and ordnance
safety.
The committee notes that current submunitions in naval
weapon systems use fuzes that have reliabilities in the range
of 90 to 94 percent. As a result, a significant number of
deployed submunitions fail to detonate and become unexploded
ordnance that pose a safety hazard to warfighters who might
encounter the unexploded submunitions on the battlefield, to
technicians who must clear the battlefield, and to civilians
who might come upon them accidentally.
The committee notes that in the past, highly reliable fuzes
have been too expensive for use in submunitions. However, new
technologies are being developed for all-electronic fuzes that
would have a much higher reliability (approximately 99 percent)
and could be produced at a cost that would make such fuzes
affordable for use in submunitions.
The committee recommends $13.8 million in PE 63216N, an
increase of $3.0 million for development and demonstration of
highly reliable, all-electronic fuzes for use in submunitions.
Remote ocean surveillance system
The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63271N for
radio frequency systems advanced technology development.
The committee notes continued progress in the development
of high contrast, high resolution multi-spectral sensors and
image processing technology that indicates potential
capabilities for detection of objects in the ocean in real
time, at various depths, and with relatively high search rates.
Realization and employment of these technologies in littoral
areas, estuaries, and ports would provide the capability for a
remote ocean surveillance system to provide real-time
capabilities for mine detection and avoidance, force
protection, and identification and dissemination of information
on the surface and sub-surface threat to ports and harbors.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
63271N to continue the proof-of-concept development and
demonstration of multi-spectral sensor and image processing
technology for a remote ocean surveillance system.
Ship system component development
The budget request contained $19.0 million in PE 63513N for
ship system component advanced technology development and
prototyping.
The committee notes that with the integration of advanced
power systems into future combat ships there is a need to
address the manufacturing methods and process technology that
will improve the manufacturability and affordability of
advanced solid state power electronics systems early in the
development cycle. This effort should begin with the
manufacturing methods and processes for high density advanced
motors, solid-state switches, distribution systems, and other
power electronics systems that will be used in the DD(X) multi-
mission destroyer.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
63513N for development and demonstration of improvements in
manufacturing methods and process technology for high power
switches and conversion equipment that will be used in the
DD(X) program.
Spectral beam combining fiber lasers
The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63271N for
radio frequency systems advanced technology development.
The committee notes that high power lasers based on fiber
laser technology might be capable of providing U.S. armed
forces the same operational advantages as solid-state lasers,
but could offer potential breakthroughs in reduced size,
weight, complexity, and cooling requirements. The committee is
informed that recently demonstrated technology for spectral
beam combining fiber lasers, in which the outputs of a number
of low power fiber optic lasers are combined into a single,
high quality laser beam, could permit the construction of high
power lasers from an array of lower power fiber laser elements
at a significantly lower cost than conventional high power
lasers.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE
63271N for advanced development and evaluation of the
technology for spectral beam combining fiber lasers.
Submarine payloads and sensors program
The budget request contained $81.2 million in PE 63561N,
for advanced submarine systems development.
The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research
Project Agency/Navy submarine payloads and sensors program
resulted in the development of a number of innovative, but
realistic payload, sensor, and platform concepts that would
enable a revolutionary expansion of capabilities and allow the
submarine (Virginia Class and SSGN) to play a more decisive
role in joint force operations, especially in the ability to
exert greater influence over events on shore.
The committee recommends and increase of $10.0 million in
PE 63561N to continue the program for continued development and
demonstration of advanced submarine payloads and sensor
capabilities.
Superconducting direct current homopolar motor
The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology development, including
$42.7 million for advanced development of surface ship and
submarine hull, mechanical, and electrical systems, of which
$5.0 million would continue the development and demonstration
of an advanced main propulsion 36.5 megawatt prototype
superconducting direct current (DC) homopolar motor.
The development of component technologies for the all-
electric warship is one of the major goals of the Navy's
science and technology program. The committee also notes that
low temperature superconducting DC homopolar motor technology
has the potential technical advantages of being smaller,
lighter, and quieter than alternating current (AC) electric
motors, and, if realized, would make the superconducting DC
homopolar motor a potentially more suitable alternative for use
in submarines or in other ship applications where these
attributes are desired.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.2 million in PE
63123N to continue the program for development of a 26.5
megawatt prototype superconducting DC homopolar motor for ship
main propulsion.
Tactical E-field buoy development
The budget request contained $4.5 million in PE 63254N for
advanced component development and prototypes for anti-
submarine warfare systems, including the continued development
and evaluation of nonlinear dynamics and stochastic resonance
(NDSR) for acoustic, magnetic, and other anti-submarine warfare
sensor and signal processing applications.
The committee notes the continuing progress in the
application of nonlinear dynamics science and technology to
non-acoustic shallow water anti-submarine warfare and the
potential for greatly improving anti-submarine warfare systems
performance as a result of significantly increased
electromagnetic detection ranges, enhanced sonar target
discrimination, and improved signal processing. One result of
this program has been the establishment of the effectiveness of
E-field sensors using state-of-the-art sensor technology
coupled with nonlinear signal processing. The committee
believes that an air-launched tactical E-field buoy patterned
after the Air Deployed Active Receiver sonobuoy has great
potential for real-time target detection and classification.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63254N to continue the program for accelerated component and
prototype design, development, and laboratory and at-sea
testing of a tactical E-field buoy for littoral anti-submarine
warfare.
Task force anti-submarine warfare
The budget request contained $17.6 million in PE 63553N for
surface anti-submarine warfare (ASW).
Task Force Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW) was established in
2003 at the direction of the Chief of Naval Operations to
examine fleet shortcomings in anti-submarine warfare
operational capabilities and recommend improvements in
technology, operational concepts, and training techniques. The
program focuses on fundamentally changing the way ASW is
conducted, to render enemy submarines impotent against United
States and coalition forces. According to the Navy, changing
the calculus of antisubmarine warfare will require developing
off-board and distributed systems, minimizing force-on-force
engagements, reducing the time required to conduct an ASW
engagement, and supporting rapid maneuver of ASW forces.
The committee notes that the Navy plans a multi-level
trials program for development of active-passive distributed
sensor systems and promising technologies proposed by industry.
Two at-sea experiments are planned that would employ active-
passive distributed sensor systems to test hardware concepts,
evaluate candidate software algorithms, and collect the data
required for further software development. The plan also
includes advanced development of a minimum of two promising
industry-proposed technologies. The program has been
established as one of the Chief of Naval Operations highest
priority unfunded requirements.
The committee recommends an increase of $16.6 million in PE
63553N for Task Force ASW multi-level trials for technical and
operational evaluation of developmental ASW systems and
concepts of operation.
Theater undersea warfare initiative
The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 62235N for
common picture applied research. No funds were requested to
continue the theater undersea warfare initiative.
The committee notes that Congress has added a total of
$14.5 million in fiscal years 2003 and 2004 for the Theater
Undersea Warfare Initiative, which seeks to enhance the Navy's
network centric capability for maritime patrol aircraft (MPA)
and provide a near real-time, collaborative communication,
command, and control capability for MPA operations. The program
utilizes the High Performance Computing Center in Maui, Hawaii,
to support network- centric undersea warfare (USW) and as a
repository for tactical environmental data services; the
oceanographic and atmospheric master library, and sensor and
platform data bases. The committee notes that over the long
term the Office of Naval Research intends to use the program to
provide enhanced USW capabilities to the fleet and to transfer
the technology developed in the program to USW support
activities.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
62235N to continue the theater undersea warfare initiative.
Ultrasonic detection equipment
The budget request contained $19.0 million in PE 63513N for
shipboard system component advanced technology development and
prototyping.
The committee notes the recently completed shipboard
demonstration of a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) ultrasonic
tester aboard the USS Gunston Hall that evaluated the
effectiveness and the practicality of inexpensive ultrasonic
testers to assess the material conditionof specific shipboard
components and equipment. Areas examined during the demonstration
included watertight door integrity, fluid systems leakage, valve leak-
by identification, compartment integrity inspections, gear-train and
bearing inspections, faulty electrical component identification, and
rotating machinery integrity. The results of the demonstration
indicated that the use of relatively inexpensive, COTS ultrasonic
testers as a diagnostic tool to assist sailors in conducting periodic
maintenance is practical and cost-effective, and supports the
implementation of condition-based maintenance in the surface fleet.
Based on the results of the test, the committee recommends the adoption
of such testers for use in the fleet.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
63513N for fielding and evaluation of COTS ultrasonic testers
for use by the fleet.
VH-XX executive helicopter development
The budget request contained $777.4 million for the VH-XX
executive development program, a program that is developing a
replacement for the VH-3D helicopter.
The committee notes that the Department of the Navy has
delayed the decision to enter the system design and development
(SDD) phase of the VH-XX program from fiscal year 2004 to
fiscal year 2005, and understands that the VH-XX program SDD
phase would select one helicopter manufacturer to develop and
produce the VH-XX helicopter. The committee further understands
that this decision resulted principally from the awareness of
the complexities in equipping helicopter commercial variants
with the communication systems required to perform the VH-XX
mission. While the committee commends the Department for taking
the additional time necessary to further refine requirements
and to conduct design and integration planning, it notes that
the budget planned for both fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year
2005 assumed that the VH-XX SDD program would begin in the
third quarter of fiscal year 2004. Since the committee believes
that the VH-XX SDD program will not begin until at least the
second quarter of fiscal year 2005, it also believes that $26.0
million in fiscal year 2004 appropriations can be applied to
fiscal year 2005 requirements and that $194.0 requested for
fiscal year 2005 exceeds requirements.
Consequently, the committee recommends $557.4 million for
the VH-XX executive helicopter development program, a decrease
of $220.0 million.
Virginia class multi-mission modules
The budget request contained $143.2 million in PE 64558N
for Virginia class submarine design development system
development and demonstration.
The committee notes the experience gained in the
development, design, and implementation of multi-mission
capabilities in the USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23). The committee
believes that the modular design of the Virginia class
submarine continues to lend itself to the evaluation of multi-
mission module concepts for that submarine that could be
considered for insertion in selected hull numbers of the class
to increase payload capacity, capability for technology
insertion, and adaptability to new missions.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
64558N to continue the program for evaluation of modular
payload concepts and multi-mission modules for Virginia class
submarine variants that would increase payload capacity and
mission capability.
Virtual at-sea training initiative
The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development.
In view of recent reductions in the number of available
naval live-fire training ranges, the committee recognizes the
benefit of the Department of the Navy's program to develop a
technological solution to maintain fleet readiness in the area
of live fire targeting and ordnance delivery. The Office of
Naval Research's Virtual-at-Sea-Training (VAST) initiative is
an encouraging technology solution for solving the problem of
maintaining readiness despite the reduction in live fire
training ranges. The committee, therefore, supports the Navy's
continued development of VAST by the Office of Naval Research
for transition into a Department of Defense acquisition
program.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63236N for continued development of the VAST initiative.
Wide band gap semiconductor power electronics
The budget request contained $46.3 million in PE 62712E and
$3.5 million in PE 62271N for applied research in wide band gap
semiconductor electronics and wide band gap semiconductor
electronic devices. Section 212 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107)
requires the Secretary of Defense to carry out a cooperative
program to develop and demonstrate advanced technologies and
concepts for future Navy radar systems and other applications
with particular emphasis on development of high frequency and
high power wide band gap semiconductor materials and devices.
The committee notes the progress in the development of
silicon carbide and other wide band gap materials in the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency program and in the
Navy program and the potential for transition of the materials
technology to applications in advanced power and high frequency
semiconductor devices.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62271N for wide band gap semiconductor power electronics
applied research.
Air Force Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $21,114.7 million for Air
Force research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $21,528.0 million, an increase of
$413.3 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced vehicle and propulsion center and engineering research lab
equipment upgrade
The budget request contained $92.7 million in PE 62203F for
aerospace propulsion, but contained no funds for the advanced
vehicle and propulsion center and engineering research lab
oratory equipment upgrade.
The committee recognizes the value added to Air Force Space
Command projects through the Air Force Research Laboratory's
effort to merge modeling and simulation capabilities with
advanced technologies involving the advanced vehicle and
propulsion center. Additionally, the committee notes the need
to upgrade propulsion laboratory equipment to support the
exploration of emerging technologies.
The committee recommends increases of $8.5 million in PE
62203F for the advanced vehicle and propulsion center and $1.0
million for the engineering research lab equipment upgrade.
Advanced wideband signals intelligence geo-processor
The budget request contained $13.3 million in PE 35207F,
but contained no funding for the advanced wideband processor
and high frequency geo-processor (AWP/HGP).
The committee notes that our asymmetrical adversaries are
more commonly using widely available high-technology
communications for command and control networks. Airborne
collectors are experiencing an increasing challenge in
collecting these types of low probability of intercept (LPI)/
low probability or detection (LPD) signals in a dense co-
channel environment with rapid geolocation capability. The Air
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) has developed a promising
technology that enables signals intelligence collection suites
to collect against these signals and provide real-time geo-
coordinates of these signals. Flight testing is being conducted
and follow-on field testing needs to be accomplished with
subsequent integration of this capability into an operational
intelligence collector such as the RC-135.
Therefore the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in PE 35207F for the AWP/HGP project for the RC-135
aircraft.
B-2 development
The budget request contained $245.0 million in PE 64240F
for B-2 system development, but included no funds to develop
the extremely high frequency (EHF) satellite communications
(SATCOM) system, or for a global strike capabilities initiative
(GSCI). The B-2 is the Department of Defense's most advanced
long-range strike aircraft, capable of global force projection
in a highly defended target environment.
The EHF SATCOM system is being developed to provide high
bandwidth communications for both nuclear and conventional B-2
missions. The committee notes that the Congress appropriated
$12.6 million in fiscal year 2004 for this system, understands
that $24.0 million is required in fiscal year 2005 to complete
EHF SATCOM development. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $24.0 million for the EHF SATCOM system.
The GSCI would incrementally upgrade B-2 aircraft with
capabilities that address warfighting gaps identified by the
Air Force and Joint Force Commanders. For fiscal year 2005, the
committee understands that the most urgent capabilities
required through the GSCI would include: defensive management
system processor upgrades; integrated avionics block
development to address deficiencies in the standby flight
instruments; Link 16 information exchange between B-2 and other
aircraft, and flight management control processor software; and
global air traffic management system upgrades. Additionally,
the committee understands that the GSCI for fiscal year 2005
would begin development of small diameter bomb (SDB)
integration on the B-2, and expects that this effort would
eventually provide the B-2 with a capability to deliver 160 to
240 SDBs. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of
$74.0 million for the GSCI, and expects that $13.0 million
would upgrade the defensive management system, $51.0 million
would develop an integrated avionics block upgrade, and $10.0
million would provide for SDB design concepts and program
planning necessary to implement an SDB development and
integration program.
In total, the committee recommends $343.0 million for B-2
system development, an increase of $98.0 million.
Blue MAJIC
The budget request contained $35.4 million in PE 64855F for
operationally responsive launch, but included no funding for
Blue MAJIC.
The committee understands the importance of blue force
tracking in the effort to reduce fratricide and increase force
protection. The committee recognizes Blue MAJIC would provide
the field commander a significant tool to improve blue force
tracking. The committee also realizes that Blue MAJIC will
pursue a strategy that furthers the employment of responsive
launch and integrates current technology into operations.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
64855F for Blue MAJIC.
Cobra Ball
The budget request contained $13.3 million in PE 35207F for
the manned reconnaissance system, but contained no funds for
Cobra Ball.
The committee notes Cobra Ball's ability to exploit unused
spectral data content and its increased sensitivity and
accuracy in the medium wave infrared spectrum and believes it
necessary to accelerate this effort.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.5 million in PE
35207F for Cobra Ball.
Combat optical receiver for smart and loitering standoff weapons
The budget request included $78.8 million in PE 62204F for
aerospace sensors.
The committee directs that $2.0 million be made available
within funds authorized for PE 62204F for the combat optical
receiver for smart and loitering standoff weapons.
Collaborative information technologies
The budget request included $5.3 million in PE 62702F,
project 4917, for collaborative information technologies to
develop emerging technologies for the next generation of
distributed, collaborative command and control systems.
The committee recommends an additional $4.5 million in PE
62702F, project 4917, to develop an initial operational
capability for application of collaborative information
technologiesto joint and Air Force capability planning,
technology assessment, and enterprise management activities.
Common aero vehicle
The budget request contained $21.6 million in PE 64856F for
the Common Aero Vehicle (CAV).
The committee is aware that additional funding is required
to complete CAV analysis; ensure validation of system
components and operational capabilities; fund launch vehicle
procurement; and provides flight test planning and range safety
support.
The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 64856F, an
increase of $12.0 million for CAV.
Defensive electro-optical tracker countermeasures technologies
The budget request included $12.4 million in PE 63270F to
develop and demonstrate advanced warning and countermeasures
technologies to negate electro-optical, infrared, and laser
threats to aerospace platforms.
The committee recommends an additional $6.0 million in PE
63270F to increase the technology readiness levels to
accelerate transition of this capability to system development
and demonstration.
Distributed mission interoperability toolkit
The budget request contained $300,000 in PE 64740F for
integrated command and control applications, which includes the
Distributed Mission Interoperability Toolkit (DMIT) program.
The committee notes that the DMIT is a suite of tools that
enable an enterprise architecture for on-demand, trusted,
interoperability among mission-oriented command, control,
communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) systems based
on lessons learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The committee notes that this program leverages best
practices from the commercial sector to positively impact the
Department of Defense's C4I programs through the use of open
architectures, existing and emerging web standards, and state-
of-the-art technologies. The committee believes DMIT will
enable rapid and adaptive integration between legacy and new
information systems.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $6.3 million in PE
64740F, an increase of $6.0 million.
Enterprise availability and cost optimization system
The budget request contained $15.7 million in PE 65011F for
development of products and services to improve the performance
of aging aircraft systems but included no funds for the
enterprise availability and cost optimization system (EACOS).
The committee understands that the program offices
supporting aging aircraft systems are each generating their own
criteria and processes for identifying enhancements and
measuring success. The committee further understands that, as a
result of this situation, common problems are being addressed
and resolved multiple times in dissimilar manners, and believes
that the EACOS, can standardize this process and result in the
identification of common solutions.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million in PE 65011F.
F-15C/D active electronically scanned array radar
The budget request contained $115.2 million in PE 27134F
for F-15 development programs, but included no funds for the F-
15C/D active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.
The F-15C/D AESA radar, also known as the APG-63(V) 3
radar, would replace the current APG-63(V) 1 radar, and provide
a five hundred percent improvement in reliability while
reducing the APG-63(V)1's mobility requirements by eight
hundred percent. The committee understands that the F-15C/D
AESA radar would also provide significant operational
improvements and notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has
included the F-15C/D AESA as his highest unfunded priority for
fiscal year 2005.
Consequently, the committee recommends $132.4 million in PE
27134F, an increase of $17.2 million for F-15C/D AESA radar.
Global Hawk United States Southern Command demonstration
The budget request contained $336.2 million in PE 35220F
for the Air Force Global Hawk high altitude endurance, unmanned
aerial vehicle (HAE/UAV) program.
The committee notes that section 221 of the National
Defense Authorization Act of 2001 (Public Law 106-398) directed
the Secretary of Defense to require and coordinate a concept
demonstration of the Global Hawk HAE/UAV. The purpose of the
demonstration was to demonstrate the capability of the Global
Hawk to operate in an airborne surveillance mode, using
available, non-developmental technology in a counter-drug
surveillance scenario designed to replicate actual conditions
typically encountered in the performance of the counter-drug
surveillance mission of the U.S. Southern Command.
The committee believes the Department has not met the
requirements of this congressionally directed action.
The committee has received the Air Force January 28, 2004,
memorandum that states the directive will be met by utilizing
the HAE/UAVs existing ground target moving indicator (GMTI)
with surface search modes. The committee notes that the
specific intent of section 221, is to provide an airborne air
surveillance alternative for U.S. Southern Command through a
concept demonstration performed under actual conditions of
counter-drug airborne surveillance missions. Additionally, the
committee notes that the authorized funds were to also pursue
the initiation of concurrent development of an improved
surveillance radar, such as an airborne moving target indicator
(AMTI) capability, for this purpose.
The committee has determined that the Air Force's present
plan does not meet the mandated objective contained in section
221. The committee suspects the Air Force used the $18.0
million set aside in 2001 for the counter-drug demonstration to
meet other requirements of the Global Hawk development program.
The committee concludes that $18.0 million of Global Hawk
requirements, as presented in the 2005 budget request, have
been met through the use of the funds set aside for the
counter-drug demonstration, and therefore has reduced funds for
Global Hawk requirements accordingly.
The committee directs, once again, the Secretary of Defense
to conduct a long endurance air-to-air radar surveillance
mission concept demonstration of the Global Hawk HAE/UAV that
meets the congressional intent of section 221 of Public Law
106-945.
The committee recommends $318.2 million in PE 35220F, a
reduction of $18.0 million based on the failure of the
Department to conduct a demonstration of the Global Hawk UAV
for the Southern Command's airborne surveillance concept
demonstration for the drug-interdiction mission.
Global positioning system
The budget request contained $148.3 million in PE 35165F
for the global positioning system, including $40.6 million for
the global positioning system block III (GPS III).
Lessons learned from recent operations have confirmed the
value of precision guided munitions in warfare. The committee
understands this success relies greatly on the support provided
by GPS. Development of GPS III would enhance accuracy,
availability and anti-jam capability, while reducing system
life-cycle costs. The committee strongly supports this
development effort, but is concerned that the first launch,
scheduled for fiscal year 2012, is unnecessarily delayed. The
committee recommends acceleration of block III satellites
consistent with program priorities.
The committee recommends the budget request.
High accuracy network determination system
The budget request contained $6.3 million in PE 63444F for
the Maui space surveillance system, but included no money for
the High Accuracy Network Determination System (HANDS).
The committee recognizes that HANDS would reduce the
potential for collisions of space assets by reducing errors in
the current space-object maintenance catalog.
The committee recommends $16.3 million in PE 63444F, an
increase of $10.0 million for HANDS.
Identification of time critical targets
The budget request included $28.5 million in PE 63789F for
Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (C3I),
including $5.4 million to develop and demonstrate advanced data
and information fusion capabilities for identification of time
critical targets (targets under trees).
The committee supports the need for enhanced fusion of
intelligence data. Increased funding in fiscal year 2005 would
permit the demonstration of fusion technologies for continuous
tracking of time critical targets and track continuity to
provide more accurate common operational pictures through the
use of the Distributed Common Ground System.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 63789F for data fusion technologies enabling
identification of time critical targets.
Integrated cooling and power system magnetic bearing technology
The budget request included $92.7 million in PE 62203F for
Aerospace Propulsion Systems, including $2.2 million to
continue development of advanced bearing concepts for turbine
engine applications.
Advanced avionics, electronic warfare systems, and radars
in new and upgraded tactical aircraft and unmanned aerial
vehicles provide significantly increased capability, but demand
advanced solutions to meet power and cooling requirements. One
enabling technology to meet these requirements is a magnetic
bearing turbo-generator.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in PE 62203F for integrated cooling and power system
magnetic bearing technology.
Integrated control for autonomous space systems
The budget request contained $88.9 million in PE 62601F for
space technology, but contained no funds for integrated control
for autonomous space systems (ICASS).
The committee notes that ICASS is intended to provide
advanced satellite control and measurement technologies. The
committee realizes ICASS has the potential to greatly expand
the Department of Defense capability to deploy and control
super-compact structures.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62601F for the development of ICASS.
Intelligent free space optical satellite communication node
The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but contained no funds for the
intelligent free space optical satellite communication node.
The committee is concerned about the development risk of
the transformational communications architecture and notes that
any laser-based satellite communication system will also
require a radio-frequency (RF) capability. The committee
believes additional risk-mitigation development is warranted
for RF and laser-capable routers and low-cost adaptive
switching.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
63401F to develop an intelligent free space optical
communications node.
Joint surveillance target attack radar system blue force tracking and
combat identification
The procurement budget request contained $45.3 million for
various E-8C joint surveillance target attack radar system
(JSTARS) modifications, but included no funds for the blue
force tracking and combat identification (CID) upgrade.
Additionally, the research, development, test and evaluation
(RDT&E) budget request contained $89.2 for JSTARS development,
but also included no funds to develop the JSTARS blue force
CID.
The committee understands that, as a result of Operation
Iraqi Freedom, the Department of the Air Force has identified
critical needs to prosecute mobile targets; provide a common
operating picture of friendly and enemy forces to warfighting
decision makers; and accurately distinguish between friendly
and enemy forces. The committee also understands that the
JSTARS blue force tracking and CID upgrades would network
friendly forces in real time with the JSTARS E-8C aircraft in
all weather conditions to address these critical needs.
Consequently, the committee recommends $55.3 million for E-
8C procurement modifications, an increase of $10.0 million for
the JSTARS blue force tracking and CID upgrade; and $100.2
million in PE 27581F, an increase of $11.0 million to develop
the JSTARS blue force combat tracking and CID components.
KC-10 global air traffic management development
The budget request contained $18.5 million in PE 41219F for
the KC-10 global air traffic management (GATM) development
program.
The KC-10 GATM program is an engineering and manufacturing
development (EMD) program that would improve the navigation and
communication systems used on KC-10 aircraft. Subsequent to
submission of the budget request, the Department of the Air
Force canceled the GATM development program due to cost
increases. As a result of this decision, the Department
informed the committee that it would prefer to transfer these
funds into the procurement appropriation to acquire, among
other systems, two flight training devices for $7.8 million and
a high-frequency data link for $1.2 million. While the
committee supports the procurement of flight training devices
and communication systems, it believes that existing flight
training devices are adequate to meet requirements and that the
high-frequency data link can be deferred until fiscal year
2006.
Consequently, the committee recommends $9.4 million in PE
41219F, a decrease of $9.1 million, for the KC-10 GATM
development program.
Lightweight modular support jammer
The budget request included $28.3 million in PE 63270F for
electronic combat technology, including $12.4 million for
electro-optical, infrared warning and countermeasures
technology.
Countering the threat posed by infrared missiles remains a
high priority for the military services. The lightweight
modular support jammer (LMSJ) provides a scalable, open
architecture, digital receiver and jammer capability for
multiple electronic warfare programs and platforms. Additional
funding would permit the integration of LMSJ with the Advanced
Threat Alert and Response receiver and accelerated testing of
the end-to-end system concept.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63270F for LMSJ.
Metals affordability
The budget request included $34.3 million in PE 63112F for
advanced materials for weapon systems.
The committee supports the continued government-industry
collaboration provided through the Metals Affordability
Initiative, providing significant improvements in the
manufacturing of specialty metals for aerospace applications
for the private and government sectors of the aerospace
industry.
The committee recommends an additional $14.0 million in PE
63112F for the Metals Affordability Initiative.
Next generation bomber program
The budget request contained no funds in PE 64015F for the
next generation bomber program.
In the committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) for
fiscal year 2004, the committee noted both the increasing age
of the Department of the Air Force's B-52 bomber fleet and
existing plans to begin a next generation bomber program
between the years of 2012 to 2015. The committee concluded that
Air Force deferral of a next generation bomber program to 2012
to 2015 would be too late to assure a sufficient bomber force
structure to meet future requirements for long-range strike in
light of the prospect that future basing for shorter range
aircraft may not be assured. Consequently, the committee
recommended an increase of $100.0 million for this purpose and
notes that $45.0 million was appropriated. However, the
committee is dismayed that budget justification documents
accompanying the fiscal year 2005 budget request reveal that
these funds would be used to develop, mature and study
integration of next generation style technologies with the
existing bomber fleet, rather than beginning a next generation
bomber program that would develop, and eventually procure, new
bomber aircraft to meet future long range strike requirements.
For fiscal year 2005, the committee notes that, despite its
expectation that the Department of the Air Force would begin a
program to develop and procure a next generation bomber
beginning in fiscal year 2004, the Department does not include
any funds for this purpose until fiscal year 2008, with
additional funding planned for fiscal year 2009. While the
committee recognizes that the Department of the Air Force has
accelerated its next generation bomber plan from the 2012 to
2015 timeframe to fiscal year 2008, the committee remains
steadfast in its prior year view that development of a next
generation bomber aircraft needs to be initiated, since most of
the Air Force's bomber fleet consists of 94 B-52 aircraft which
are now approximately 42 years old.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $100.0 million in PE
64015F for the next generation bomber program, and strongly
urges the Department of the Air Force to budget for a next
generation bomber program each year in its Future Years Defense
Program.
Operationally responsive launch
The budget request contained $35.4 million in PE 64855F for
operationally responsive launch.
The committee strongly supports an operationally responsive
launch capability and its objective of developing an
affordable, reliable, time responsive launch system, including
Scorpius. The committee believes integration of operationally
responsive launches would greatly increase the speed of
delivering critical space capabilities to the warfighter.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
64855F for development of an operationally responsive launch
capability, including Scorpius.
Satellite simulation toolkit
The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but contained no funds for
integrated control for a satellite simulation toolkit (SST).
SST provides value to the acquisition and development of
space systems via coherent systems engineering and virtual
prototyping. The committee is aware of the need to complete
development and integration of new and legacy models for the
full implementation of SST based effects.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63401F for SST.
Satellite tool kit technical integration concept of operations for
tactical satellite
The budget request contained $88.9 million in PE 62601F for
space technology, but contained no funds for satellite tool kit
technical integration.
The committee notes that satellite tool kit technical
integration would provide tactical data to the warfighter
indicating when a satellite overflight will occur to allow
single pass tasking and downlink of time-sensitive surveillance
information. This program would benefit in-theater warfighters
by enabling immediate access to tactical intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance assets to enable the collection
and delivery of timely surveillance information to enable
battlefield superiority. Additionally, these assets provide
surge capability to augment existing national assets or help
reconstitute space capabilities lost due to enemy action.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62601F for satellite tool kit technical integration.
Space-based infrared system
The budget request included $508.4 million in PE 64441F for
development of the space-based infrared system (SBIRS).
When finally deployed, SBIRS will provide improved early-
warning capabilities and technical intelligence. The committee
notes that the SBIRS program has had persistent cost, schedule
and technical problems over the last three years of its
development. Unexpected technical difficulties on the first
SBIRS payload resulted in cost overruns and schedule delays.
These problems and further technical difficulties have in turn
resulted in a delay of at least one year for the first launch
of a SBIRS satellite into geostationary orbit.
The committee notes that the Commander of United States
Strategic Command testified to the Strategic Forces
Subcommittee in February, 2004 that continuation of the SBIRS
program is absolutely essential to his command. The committee
remains supportive of the SBIRS program because of the critical
nature of its mission. The committee notes the recent technical
issues with the geosynchronous sensors and concurs with the
recovery plan as presented by the Undersecretary of the Air
Force.
The committee recommends an increase of $35.0 million in PE
64441F to address the SBIRS budget shortfall, overcome
development difficulties and minimize the schedule delay.
Space-based radar
The budget request contained $327.7 million in PE 63858F
for space-based radar (SBR).
The committee recognizes the benefits SBR will provide
through a persistent, near real-time, high resolution
surveillance capability deep into enemy territory and denied
areas, benefiting both military and intelligence communities.
The committee believes the country cannot afford separate SBR
systems to address the needs of these two communities and, as
such, it is imperative to develop this system with full support
and involvement of the Department of Defense and the
Intelligence Community (IC). The committee strongly urges the
Department and the IC to work in a joint manner toward the
development of a SBR capability.
The committee notes unfavorable schedule and cost
performance of several space system acquisition programs. As a
result of this trend, the committee recommends a legislative
provision (sec. 216) affecting the progression to Milestone B
for SBR.
The committee recommends the budget request.
Space cadre
The committee is committed to the development of highly
skilled and knowledgeable professionals to address the
acquisition, policy, and technology aspects of space necessary
to ensure United States preeminence in tomorrow's space
environment. The committee is aware of the ongoing effort by
the Department of Defense to institute the space human capital
resources strategy as described in the February 2004 report to
the congressional defense committees titled, ``Space Human
Capital Resources Strategy.''
The committee notes that this three-phased strategy will
initiate the development of a professional space cadre. The
committee supports this effort and encourages the Secretary of
Defense to continue this effort. The committee recommends that
the Department include in its strategy a thorough review of
education, training, and the development of a robust, joint
space curriculum.
Space situational awareness initiative
The budget request contained $161.8 million in PE 35910F
for Spacetrack, but included no funds for the space situational
awareness initiative.
The committee notes the importance of this upgrade for the
future of the counter space mission. Moreover, the committee
understands the effort will require nearly eight years to
achieve a full operational capability and believes it is
prudent to initiate this effort immediately.
The committee recommends $170.8 million in PE 35910F, an
increase of $9.0 million for the space situational awareness
initiative.
Streaker small launch vehicle
The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funds for the
Streaker small launch vehicle (SLV).
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense
desires to develop this capability to affordably launch small
satellites to low earth orbits for a variety of purposes. The
committee notes that the Streaker SLV has the potential to
provide affordable responsive launch for small satellites.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63401F for the Streaker SLV.
Transformational satellite communications
The budget request contained $774.8 million in PE 63845F
for the transformational communications satellite (TSAT)
system.
The General Accounting Office expressed concerns in report
GAO-04-71R about the immaturity of the TSAT technology and the
significant engineering challenges facing a laser-based
satellite communications system. The committee remains
concerned that the TSATsystem is still being driven by an
aggressive schedule that does not adequately take into account the
immaturity of several key enabling technologies and challenging
integration issues.
While the committee supports the goal of TSAT and
recognizes the modest steps the Air Force has taken to address
the concerns raised in the committee report on H.R. 1588 (H.
Rept. 108-106) last year, the committee believes a slower, more
realistic schedule for this program is warranted.
The committee recommends $674.8 million in PE 63845F, a
decrease of $100.0 million for the TSAT program.
Ultra short pulse laser technology
The budget request contained $36.5 million in PE 62605F for
directed energy technology, but included no funding for ultra
short pulse laser technology.
The committee is aware that ultra short pulse laser
technology has the potential to be a breakthrough in size,
weight and effectiveness for many applications.
The committee recommends $46.5 million in PE 62605F, an
increase of $10.0 million for ultra short pulse laser.
Upper stage engine technology
The budget request contained $51.1 million in PE 63500F for
multi-disciplinary space technology, but contained no funds for
upper stage engine technology.
Upper stage engine technology supports the Air Force's goal
to improve liquid oxygen/hydrogen simulation and forecasting
tools. The committee recognizes this goal will reduce the risk
associated with new technology transition into upper stage
engines for reusable and expendable launch vehicles.
The committee recommends $58.1 million in PE 63500F, an
increase of $7.0 million for upper stage engine technology.
Wideband gapfiller system
The budget request included $73.5 million in PE 63854F and
$40.3 million in Missile Procurement, Air Force, for the
wideband gapfiller satellite (WGS) communications system.
WGS will provide a significant increase in communications
bandwidth for warfighters. The committee notes the Air Force's
plan to acquire and launch three satellites over the course of
fiscal years 2005 and 2007. The committee also notes plans
during fiscal year 2005 to negotiate a contract to acquire two
additional satellites that would be launched starting in fiscal
year 2009. This plan could leave a three-year production gap
between the third and fourth satellites, a gap that could
increase program risk and cost resulting from parts
obsolescence, personnel fluctuations, and the potential need to
re-qualify subcontractors. The committee also notes that the
Department of Defense supplements its satellite communications
network by leasing commercial satellite communications capacity
at a cost of about $300.0 million per year. The committee
believes that deferring additional military satellite
communications acquisition may not be cost effective.
The committee believes that the Air Force decision to
proceed with WGS acquisition is correct, but the acquisition
strategy that results in this production gap is not well
considered.
The committee recommends $88.5 million in PE 63854F, an
increase of $15.0 million for additional WGS spare parts.
Worldwide infrastructure security environment
The budget request contained $79.6 million in PE 33140F for
information security systems programs, but included no funding
for the worldwide infrastructure security environment (WISE).
The committee supports this initiative to provide
protection and response to attacks that exploit our reliance on
computers. This program will manage the complex interactions
between physical access, network access, authentication,
monitoring, and environmental controls to provide defense
against sophisticated hackers. This program also addresses the
cyber threat of the year 2010 and beyond with a unique approach
to protect information on the Global Information Grid through
transaction authentication.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $87.6 million in PE
33140F, an increase of $8.0 million for WISE.
Defense-Wide Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Overview
The budget request contained $20,739.8 million for Defense-
wide research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
The committee recommends $20,769.3 million, an increase of
$29.4 million to the budget request.
Items of Special Interest
Accelerating transition and fielding of advanced technologies for
emerging critical operational needs
The pace at which new technology moves from the laboratory
to a fielded system has been an area of continuing concern to
the Department of Defense and to Congress. Scaling technology
up in size and integrating it with other technologies can
present problems, not identified in the laboratory, that delay
a program and/or greatly increase program costs. More emphasis
and an increased share of the science and technology program
have been directed toward the use of technology demonstrations
and joint experiments to solve these problems before beginning
an acquisition program and speeding the transition of new
technology to operational capabilities the user faster and at
less cost.
The transition of technology from discovery and
demonstration to development and fielding is also difficult
because the Department's planning and budgeting process
frequently creates a funding gap. Revolutionary technologies
that ``change minds'' and ways of doing things often occur
faster than the present defense budget and the appropriations
process can respond. Additionally, it is difficult to
reallocate fiscal funding for a revolutionary technology within
current year funding. The institutional process within the
Department lacks the flexibility at all levels: service
laboratory; research; development and engineering center;
systems command; military departments, and the defense
secretariat--to capitalize on new discoveries in academia or
institute, service or national laboratory, large industry or
small business, and to rapidly develop, demonstrate, and
transition the new technology to the military user. There are a
number of initiatives underway to address this problem: the
Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program, the Army's
Rapid Fielding Initiative, the congressionally sponsored
Technology Transition Initiative and the Defense Challenge
program. Section 806 of the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314)
requires the Secretary of Defense to prescribe rapid
acquisition and deployment procedures. Section 1443 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public
Law 108-136) provides special emergency procurement authority
for use in support of contingency operations or in response to
a nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological attack. During
the committee hearing on the Defense science and technology
budget request for fiscal year 2005, the Director, Defense and
Engineering testified about the establishment of the quick
reaction special projects program, which he characterized as a
flexible continuum of technology transition projects that moves
products from the Department to the warfighter quickly.
Many of these initiatives are at an early stage and changes
to acquisition and budgeting systems to provide the Department
with greater flexibility to take advantage of rapidly
developing technology are slow to be institutionalized. The
committee is encouraged by many of the improvements in the
rapid fielding of technology to support the war on terrorism,
but also recognizes that there is much to be done. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the
congressional defense committees by December 31, 2004, any
additional recommendations for measures to accelerate the more
rapid transition and fielding of advanced technologies to meet
emerging critical needs.
Advanced metal casting technology
The budget request contained $27.5 million in PE 78011S,
for manufacturing technology research and development,
including $2.3 million for procurement readiness optimization--
advanced casting technology.
The committee notes the success of collaborative problem
solving environments that have been prototyped in several of
the military services' engineering support activities, each of
which has been custom designed to reflect the needs of the
weapons systems and processes used by the military services.
The committee also notes the development of casting technology
for cost reduction, including advances in steel casting,
development of a foundry tooling database, use of casting
software visualization tools to reduce trial and error,
improvements in melting and molding processes, use of cheaper
tooling materials for short run production, and other
technologies for reducing production time. The committee
considers these interrelated programs to be of great value to
the Department of Defense and to the national industrial base
as well.
The committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense
and the secretaries of the military departments to allocate
additional resources in future budgets for development of
further improvements in collaborative problem solving and
casting manufacturing technologies.
Advanced sensor applications program
The budget request contained $17.6 million in PE 63714D8Z
for the advanced sensor applications program. The committee is
concerned that promising projects executed by the Navy's PMA
264 program office are appreciably underfunded for special
programs under development.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in PE 63714D8Z for the advanced sensor applications
program. Additional details are contained in the classified
annex to this report.
Advanced tactical laser program
The committee supports the efforts across the Department's
science and technology community to develop tactically useful
directed energy weapons. The committee believes that the
attributes of such weapons, such as stealth, precision, and
minimal collateral damage, make high powered laser tactical
weapons ideal in the fight against terrorism. The committee is
concerned, however, that the research effort is not directed as
precisely as the weapons themselves. For example, the committee
understands that chemical laser systems are the most highly
developed high powered lasers, but that several efforts are
underway to develop more tactically feasible solid state high
powered laser systems. Given the large size of chemical laser
systems, the committee believes that the Special Operations
Command's (SOCOM) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration
(ACTD) for the development of a chemical laser system for an
AC-130 gunship may not lead to a militarily useful system
before solid state systems mature.
Accordingly, the committee will continue to carefully
monitor the SOCOM ACTD, and directs the Secretary of Defense to
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services should the military utility
assessment for the advanced tactical laser be delayed beyond
fiscal year 2007.
Anti-radiation drug and trials program
The budget request contained $2.1 million in PE 63002D8Z
for medical advanced technology development, including $120,000
for development of the 5-adrostendiol (5-AED) advanced
radioprotectant (``anti-radiation'') drug.
The committee notes progress in the development of 5-AED,
the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute leading
candidate for a whole body radioprotectant drug compound: pre-
clinical safety and toxicity assessments, small and large
animal trials, and extension of the work to pre-clinical trials
in a large animal model have been initiated.
The committee recommends $7.1 million in PE 63002D8Z, an
increase of $5.0 million to support final efficacy and human
toxicity trials of the 5-AED radioprotectant drug.
Asymmetric protocols for biological defense
The budget request contained $147.5 million in PE 62383E
for biological warfare defense applied research.
A military or terrorist scenario in which aerosolized
biological agents such as anthrax spores or smallpox virus are
used would almost certainly result in mass casualties.
Weaponized forms of the agents offer significant challenges to
medical treatments that are not found in naturally occurring
forms. While antibiotics are the only approved method for
treating anthrax, the 2003 bioterrorist anthrax attack in
Washington, D.C., showed that antibiotics are unfortunately not
adequate to provide full treatment against inhalation anthrax.
The committee also notes that there are a number of biological
agents that could, with appropriate development and
weaponization, be used in biological warfare or in a terrorist
attack. Developing specific protection against all possible
biological agents presents a significant challenge. As a
result, the committee believes there is a need for therapeutics
that would provide broad spectrum protection against a range of
possible biological agents and also work in concert with other
methods of treatment.
The committee notes research in therapeutics that shows
good results from laboratory testing in mice against pox virus
and against anthrax and appears to have the potential for
providing broad spectrum protection. Other tests have involved
therapeutics that may reinforce the innate immunity of the
host. The committee believes that the results of the research
to date are promising and the research should continue, but
also believes that the research protocols and results to date
should undergo an independent peer review. The committee
directs the Director of Defense Research and Engineering to
conduct such a review and report the results of the review to
the congressional defense committees by December 31, 2004.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
62383E to continue research in asymmetric protocols that would
provide broad spectrum protection for biological defense.
Ballistic missile defense
The budget request contained $9,200.0 million for ballistic
missile defense.
The committee notes that the budget request reflects an
increase of $1,500.0 million over the fiscal year 2004 budget
request and recommends a reallocation of the fiscal year 2005
request to focus on near term missile defense capability
development and testing.
The committee recommends $9,023.0 million, a reduction of
$177.0 million.
Advanced concepts
The budget request contained $256.2 million in PE 63879C
for Advanced Concepts, Evaluations and Systems, an increase of
$106.0 million from the fiscal year 2005 projection in the
fiscal year 2004 budget request.
The committee has reservations that such an increase is
justified or that it can be effectively executed. The committee
encourages the Department of Defense to focus their advanced
concepts work on earlier block applications.
The committee recommends $206.2 million in PE 63879C, a
decrease of $50.0 million.
Boost defense segment
The budget request contained $492.6 million in PE 63883C
for boost defense. The committee notes with approval the
Department of Defense restructuring of the Airborne Laser (ABL)
program in late 2003. The committee also recognizes that the
future of the ABL program depends upon successful completion of
the ground laser test and the flight test of the beam-control
fire control system. These milestones must be completed in
order for the committee to further support the program after
fiscal year 2005. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees by February 1, 2005, on the status of these
two major component tests as well as a recommendation for the
future of the program.
The committee recommends the budget request for boost
defense.
Core
The budget request contained $479.8 million in PE 63890C
for system core activities.
The committee notes that funding for the systems
engineering and integration effort has increased significantly
from fiscal year 2004. The committee recommends $449.8 million,
a decrease of $30.0 million. The committee encourages the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to focus the
national team on the near term block 2004 and 2006 efforts.
The committee also understands that development of wide
bandwidth technology is critical for the MDA to transmit test
data over extensive distances in support of the test and
evaluation program. The committee is encouraged by the recent
success of a feasibility demonstration of seamless
collaboration utilizing mobile satellite communications from
the Reagan Test Site to the Joint National Integration Center.
Within the funds available, the committee recommends $4.0
million for the development of wide bandwidth technology in
support of the MDA test program.
Midcourse defense segment
The budget request contained $4,384.8 million in PE 63882C
for the ballistic missile defense (BMD) midcourse defense
segment.
The Navy has previously funded research and development
efforts for an S-band radar prototype. Development of a Solid
State S-Band Radar will support future Aegis BMD system
capability.
The committee recommends $4,414.8 million in PE 63882C, an
increase of $30.0 million for the development of a Solid State
S-Band Radar to support Aegis BMD system radar capability.
Post Ramos Project
The committee notes that the Department of Defense
announced its intention to terminate the Russian-American
Observation Satellite (RAMOS) program earlier this year. The
committee also understands that the Department desires to
explore other opportunities for missile defense cooperative
programs with the Russian Federation that build upon the
experience gained in the RAMOS program.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63884C to explore future opportunities for missile defense
cooperation with the Russian Federation.
Products
The budget request contained $418.6 million in PE 63889C
for products.
The committee notes that the request represents a $113.0
million increase from a fiscal year 2005 projection in the 2004
budget request. The committee also notes that the funding for
Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications
(C2BMC) has increased significantly from fiscal year 2004 with
C2BMC efforts spread across blocks 2004, 2006 and 2008, even
though block 2004 has not undergone full operational testing.
While the committee supports in principle the concept of spiral
development, it also notes that development of C2BMC software
is complex and that successful spirals are grounded in
successful testing of an initial baseline.
The committee recommends $358.6 million in PE 63889C, a
decrease of $60.0 million and urges the Department of Defense
to focus C2BMC efforts on near term block requirements.
Sensors
The budget request contained $592.0 million in PE 63884C
for sensors.
The committee notes that funding in PE 63884C for block
2006 ballistic missile defense radars has increased by $156.0
million from the fiscal year 2004 budget request.
The committee is concerned with the projected costs of the
Forward Deployable Radar (FDR) since the FDR program uses radar
technology already developed for the Terminal High Altitude
Area Defense system.
The committee recommends $536.0 million in PE 63884C, a
decrease of $56.0 million for sensors.
System interceptor
The budget request contained $511.3 million in PE 63886C
for system interceptor. The committee notes that the request
reflects a $360.2 million increase from the fiscal year 2004
authorization.
The committee supports pursuing the land-based Kinetic
Energy Interceptor (KEI) in block 2010 as an alternative to the
Airborne Laser for boost phase defense. However, the committee
also notes that the request contains funds for block 2012 even
though the block 2010 effort just started in 2004. The block
2012 program includes options for a sea-based KEI. The block
2012 sea-based element is designed to integrate the block 2010
land-based KEI element into operational sea-based platforms.
The committee notes that block 2010 will serve as the
foundation for the block 2012 program and that progress must
first be achieved in the land-based KEI program prior to
beginning work in earnest on future sea-based programs. The
committee also notes that designation of a platform for the
sea-based interceptor is dependent upon future decisions on
future Navy force structure and ship design. At this stage of
the KEI program, the committee views funding for a sea-based
platform option as premature.
The committee recommends $436.3 million, a decrease of
$75.0 million for system interceptor. The committee authorizes
no funding for sea-based options in block 2012 until 30 days
after the Department of Defense has submitted a report to the
congressional defense committees that contains a Navy-approved
plan for future force structure and existing ship and/or future
ship design requirements to support operational deployment of
the sea-based interceptors envisioned for block 2012.
The committee understands that the boost phase defense
element is the least mature of the elements within the layered
defense. Given the importance of intercepting a ballistic
missile in the boost phase, the committee believes that the
Department should be open to considering additional options for
boost phase defense. The committee notes the speed with which
United States and coalition forces have established air
superiority in recent military operations. The committee is
further encouraged by the successful operational demonstration
of long duration unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) such as Global
Hawk and the employment of the Predator UAV to remotely engage
ground targets.
The committee observes that the Air Force has conducted
some preliminary studies into the feasibility of using the
advanced medium range air-to-air missile launched from tactical
aircraft to intercept missiles in boost phase ascent. The
committee believes that tactical aircraft or UAVs may offer an
alternate launch platform for air intercept missiles for boost
phase defense.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
63886C for assessments and demonstrations related to the use of
tactical aircraft or UAVs as platforms from which to interdict
threat ballistic missiles in their boost phase using ``hit-to-
kill'' technologies. The committee directs the Secretary of the
Air Force to provide all required test equipment and logistical
support including aircraft and range support to facilitate this
demonstration.
Technology
The budget request contained $204.3 million in PE 63175C
for ballistic missile defense technology.
The committee is aware of the requirement for missile
defense command and control elements to transmit large amounts
of data to interceptors. The committee recognizes that high
density optical networks can provide this capability for
defense satellite systems.
The committee recommends $208.3 million in PE 63175C, an
increase of $4.0 million for research into massively parallel
optical interconnects.
Terminal defense segment
The budget request contained $937.7 million in PE 63881C
for the ballistic missile defense terminal defense segment.
The committee notes that the Terminal High Altitude Area
Defense (THAAD) program was negatively impacted by the boost
motor propellant explosion in 2003. As a result of
theexplosion, a number of block 2004 program activities were deferred.
The committee is particularly concerned with the deferral of risk
reduction activities and schedule delays.
The committee recommends $984.7 million in PE 63881C, an
increase of $47.0 million to reduce program risks and to
prevent schedule delays in the THAAD program.
Business management modernization program
The budget request contained $94.8 million in PE 65016D8Z
for research, development, testing and evaluation for the
business management modernization program (BMMP), a Department-
wide initiative to transform business processes while
standardizing and integrating information systems using common,
network centric processes and portfolio management.
The committee supports such business transformation
initiatives that would enable interoperability among financial,
accounting, human resources, logistics, acquisition,
information technology infrastructure, and strategic planning
and budgeting systems. In addition, the committee believes the
business enterprise architecture, once implemented and
controlled, will be a good start towards achieving this goal.
However, the committee has serious concerns that the final cost
of this program will amount to almost $1.0 billion by fiscal
year 2009. Additionally, the committee is also concerned that
the enterprise architecture is still incomplete at the present
time. Furthermore, the Department has yet to devise a strategy
to monitor the progress of this program or measure the
program's development. It remains unclear whether this program
will meet the Department's 2007 deadline for providing a clean
financial audit opinion.
The committee notes that the Department's inability to
control its business information technology investments has
serious implications, including the continuous spending of
billions of dollars on service-specific or non-interoperable
system solutions that do not address longstanding business
problems.
Additionally, the committee has serious concerns that this
program lacks adequate accountability and management oversight
to manage the Department's business system investments of
roughly $5.0 billion in the fiscal year 2005 budget request.
The committee believes it is critical that the Department gain
more effective control and accountability over its business
systems funding and insists on a clear direction and an
overarching architecture before funding at the level suggested
in the budget request is approved.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $45.8 million for PE
65016D8Z for business management modernization, a decrease of
$49.0 million.
Chemical/biological defense research, development, test and evaluation
program
The budget request contained a total of $559.9 million for
chemical/biological defense research, development, test, and
evaluation, including $36.8 million in PE 61384BP for basic
research, $104.4 million in PE 62384BP for applied research,
$117.3 million in PE 63384BP for advanced technology
development, $104.2 million in PE 63884BP for advanced
component development and prototypes, $152.4 million in PE
64384BP for system development and demonstration, $42.7 million
in PE 65384BP for RDT&E management support, and $2.2 million in
PE 67384BP for operational systems development. The budget
request also contained $147.5 million in PE 62383E for the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) biological
warfare defense research program.
The committee notes that the changing chemical and
biological threat, both to U.S. armed forces on the world's
battlefields and to U.S. homeland security, places more
emphasis on the need for responsive technology options that
could address the threat; the ability to quickly assess,
develop, and demonstrate the technology; and then, the ability
to rapidly insert or deploy the technology in fielded systems.
The committee also continues to note the wealth of new concepts
and technologies of varying levels of maturity that emerge
annually from the nation's science and technology base. The
committee recommends the continuation of two chemical and
biological defense research and development initiatives
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), one in the applied
research category and one in the advanced technology
development category, and the establishment of a third
initiative in chemical and biological defense basic research,
that would provide the opportunity for emerging technologies
and concepts to compete for funding on the basis of technical
merit and on the contribution that the technology could make to
the chemical and biological defense capabilities of the armed
forces and to homeland defense. During its review of the fiscal
year 2005 budget request the committee received proposals for
establishment of a number of projects that the committee
recommends be considered for possible funding under the
appropriate initiative.
Accelerating the research, development, and acquisition of
medical countermeasures against biological warfare
agents
In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2002 (Public Law 107-107), Congress directed the Secretary of
Defense to accelerate the Department's efforts to develop
medical countermeasures (licensed by the Food and Drug
Administration) against biological warfare agents. In addition,
Congress directed the Secretary to contract with the Institute
of Medicine and the National Research Council (IOM/NRC) for a
study of the review and approval process for new medical
countermeasures in order to identify new approaches to
accelerate that process and to identify methods for ensuring
that new countermeasures would be safe and effective.
IOM/NRC report ``Giving Full Measure to Countermeasures--
Addressing Problems in the DOD Program to Develop Medical
Countermeasures against Biological Warfare Agents-2004,''
raises a number of issues concerning the current efforts of the
Department of Defense chemical and biological defense program
to produce medical biodefense countermeasures.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
and evaluate the IOM/NRC report and to report the results of
that review to the congressional defense committees by December
31, 2004. The Secretary's report shall contain an analysis of
the recommendations made in the IOM/NRC report and the actions
planned by the Department with respect to each of the
recommendations.
Elsewhere in this report the committee has directed the
Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense
committees on the actions taken to implement the authorities
granted in Title XVI of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-186). The Act provides the
authority for the Secretary to establish an enhanced biomedical
countermeasures program within the Department to protect
members of the Armed Forces from attack with chemical,
biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agents. The
committee has also recommended a provision (section 1005) that
would remove funding restrictions on the development of medical
countermeasures against biological warfare threats and enable
the Department to respond more effectively to the increased
threat that could be posed by rapid advances in bio-technology.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide
to the congressional defense committees, with the submission of
the fiscal year 2006 defense budget request, the Department's
strategic plan detailing its response to recommendations
contained in the IOM/NRC report: the implementation of the
additional authorities granted in Title XVI for accelerated
research, development; the procurement of advanced biomedical
countermeasures; and the repeal of funding restrictions on the
development of countermeasures against biological warfare
threats. This plan should provide the basis for the development
by the Secretary of Defense of a strategic plan for the rapid
development of biomedical countermeasures for protection of
members of the Armed Forces against current and future
biological agent threats.
Chemical/biological defense basic research initiative
The committee recommends that the technologies to be
considered for funding under the basic research initiative
include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Engineered pathogen identification and
countermeasures (``Bug to Drug'');
(2) Fluorescence activated sensing technology; and
(3) Multi-purpose biodefense immunoarray.
The committee recommends $51.8 million in PE 61384BP, an
increase of $15.0 million for the chemical/biological defense
basic research initiative.
Chemical/biological defense applied research initiative
The committee recommends that the projects and technologies
to be considered for funding under the applied research
initiative include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Adaptive infrared imaging spectroradiometer-wide
area-detector;
(2) Air containment monitoring technology;
(3) Automated system for liquid phase detectors of
toxic compounds;
(4) Genomic-based bioterrorism agent detection and
countermeasures;
(5) Heat shock protein vaccine creation process;
(6) LHA-SAW biosensor prototype development;
(7) Low cost chemical-biological protective shelters;
(8) Membrane research for next generation chemical-
biological protective suits;
(9) Mustard gas antidote (STIMAL);
(10) Rapid anti-body based biological
countermeasures; and
(11) Rapid decontamination system for nerve agents.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE
62384BP for the chemical/biological defense applied research
initiative.
Chemical/biological defense advanced technology development
initiative
The committee recommends that the projects and technologies
to be considered for funding under the advanced technology
development initiative include, but not be limited the
following:
(1) Hand-held biological agent detection system;
(2) Immuno biological/chemical threat agent detector;
(3) Non-invasive vectored vaccine development; and
(4) Recombinant protein vaccines.
The committee recommends $152.3 million in PE 63384BP, an
increase of $35.0 million for the chemical/biological defense
advanced technology development initiative.
Joint biological point detection system
The budget request contained $152.4 million in PE 64384BP
for chemical and biological defense system development and
demonstration, including $8.6 million for joint biological
point detection system (JBPDS) system development and
demonstration.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
64384BP for continued product improvement and enhancement of
the JBPDS.
Joint service lightweight standoff chemical agent detector
The budget request contained $152.4 million in PE 64384BP
for chemical and biological defense system development and
demonstration, including $20.1 million for joint service
lightweight standoff chemical agent detector (JSLSCAD) system
development and demonstration.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
64384BP to continue development and evaluation of the JSLSCAD.
Connectory for rapid identification of technology resources
The budget request contained $27.5 million in PE 63712S for
generic logistics research and development technology
demonstrations, but included no funding for the connectory of
rapid identification of technology sources for the Department
of Defense. The connectory pilot would provide the Department
with instant access to the industrial technology base,
permitting rapid identification of promising sources of new,
creative technical solutions for current combat and anti-
terrorism problems.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
63712S for connectory for rapid indentification of technology
resources.
Counter-terrorism technology support
The combating terrorism technology support program develops
technology and prototype equipment that address needs and
requirements with direct operational application in the
national effort to combat terrorism. The program addresses
defense, interagency, and international requirements for
combating terrorism technology. Projects support antiterrorism,
counter terrorism, intelligence and terrorism consequence
management activities to: conduct tactical operations; protect
military forces, civilian personnel, installations,
infrastructure elements and the general population from
terrorist attack; detect, neutralize, and mitigate the effect
of conventional and unconventional devices; conduct
surveillance and tracking of terrorists; conduct threat and
incident assessments; and process and disseminate information.
The committee notes and highly commends the contributions
made by the Technical Support Working Group (TSWG) in the
development, demonstration, and fielding of advanced
technologies for the fight against terrorism. The committee
encourages the TSWG to coordinate with counterpart activities
within the government of the United Kingdom and the government
of Israel to take advantage of the experience of their
activities in the development and fielding of advanced
technologies for force protection and for combating terrorism.
In title XV of this report, the committee has recommended
an increase of $75.0 million for combating terrorism technology
support. In addition, the committee directs that, of the funds
provided in title II of this report for the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, up to $25.0 million may be made
available for the establishment of cooperative programs with
the government of the United Kingdom and the government of
Israel for the development of advanced technologies and
prototype equipment for combating terrorism. The committee
further directs the Secretary of Defense to give priority
consideration to the experience of the government of Israel and
the government of the United Kingdom in establishing such
programs.
Defense advanced research projects agency
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has
been a leader and innovator in basic scientific research and
defense science and technology for decades. The committee has
supported ever-increasing funding for DARPA as the only agency
not tied to a military service mission and the demands of a
service budget to produce quick results. The committee
encourages DARPA to continue to examine the ``far side,'' and
investigate concepts that may never come to fruition.
Nevertheless, DARPA remains a Defense Agency and must be
closely attuned to real defense requirements. Furthermore, the
pursuit of the more futuristic technologies on the ``far side''
must be tempered by the hard fact that we are a nation at war.
Our commanders and troops in Iraq have immediate needs for
innovative technical solutions across a variety of disciplines.
The committee commends DARPA on its quick reaction support and
fielding of advanced innovative technologies to meet emerging
critical operational needs of our forces in Operation Iraqi
Freedom and elsewhere in support of the global war on
terrorism.
The committee believes, however, that DARPA should redirect
some of its more futuristic efforts to the solution of today's
combat problems. Those immediate needs involving detection,
sensing, protection, surveillance and a host of other issues
may well be ``DARPA hard'' problems that the Agency should be
examining, rather than some of the more futuristic efforts in
the DARPA program.
The committee recognizes that DARPA receives input from the
military departments, Joint Staff, combatant commanders, and
other defense agencies, as the agency leadership builds a
program to address national-level problems, operational
dominance, and exploitation of high-risk, high-payoff
technologies. The committee commends the director of DARPA for
his outreach program and operational liaison initiatives. The
committee believes, however, that increased emphasis needs to
be placed on liaison with the combatant commanders and directs
the director of DARPA to establish continuing contact with
engaged combatant commanders to determine how DARPA may assist
in solving today's real world combat problems, while at the
same time continuing promising research into long term creative
technologies. In support of these liaison initiatives, the
committee strongly recommends that additional military billets
be assigned to DARPA and that military officers assigned to
DARPA be given joint service credit at the completion of their
tour of duty with the agency.
Although the committee is pleased with the overall progress
in the defense science and technology program, the committee
believes that increased priority must be given to the nearer-
term requirements of the combatant commanders and U.S. armed
forces in the field. Consequently, the committee makes a series
of recommendations for general reductions in DARPA programs:
[In millions of dollars]
62301E--Computing systems and communications technology..........(20.0)
62702E--Tactical technology......................................(10.0)
62712E--Materials and electronics technology.....................(10.0)
63285E--Advanced aerospace systems...............................(20.0)
63739E--Advanced electronics technology...........................(5.0)
63760E--Command, control and communications systems..............(20.0)
63762E--Sensor and guidance technology...........................(25.0)
63765E--Classified DARPA programs................................(25.0)
63766E--Network-centric warfare technology.......................(15.0)
These recommendations are made without prejudice to the
particular account identified.
Defense science and technology funding
The budget request contained $10.6 billion for the
Department of Defense (DOD) science and technology program,
including all defense-wide and military service funding for
basic research, applied research, and advanced technology
development. The request included $1.8 billion for the Army,
$1.7 billion for the Navy, $1.9 billion for the Air Force, and
$5.1 billion for Defense Agency science and technology,
including $3.1 billion for the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA). The committee recommends $11.1 billion
for the Department of Defense science and technology program,
an increase of $874.0 million to the budget request. The
committee's recommendation includes $2.1 billion for the Army,
an increase of $304.8 million; $1.8 billion for the Navy, an
increase of $ 201.7 million; $2.0 billion for the Air Force, an
increase of $114.0 million; and $5.2 billion for Defense agency
science and technology, an increase of $64.5 million (including
$2.9 billion for DARPA, a decrease of $204.0 million).
Elsewhere in this report the committee has recommended a
provision (section 214) that would transfer funding for the
joint experimentation program from the Navy to a Defense-wide
account.
The committee regards defense science and technology
investment as critical to maintaining U.S. military
technological superiority in the face of growing and changing
threats to U.S. national security interests around the world.
Adjusted for inflation, the fiscal year 2005 request represents
an increase of about $200.0 million, but shows a decline from
the fiscal year 2004 appropriation of $12.2 billion. The
committee notes that the budget request at a level of 2.6
percent of the total DOD budget, does not meet the goal of 3
percent established by the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review.
However, the committee received testimony from DOD witnesses
during the committee hearing on the defense science and
technology program that confirmed that the goal for science and
technology funding remains 3 percent of the total DOD budget.
The committee notes that the military departments are
responsible for approximately 51 percent of the defense science
and technology budget (Army 17 percent, Navy 16 percent, and
Air Force 18 percent) and Defense Agencies account for 49
percent, including 29 percent in DARPA. Defense agencies focus
on science and technology specific to the particular agency or,
in the case of DARPA, on national-level problems, operational
dominance, and exploitation of high-risk, high-payoff
technologies. The military departments' science and technology
programs focus on the development and transition of more mature
technologies into future weaponssystems that are key to the
ability of the individual military departments to achieve their
transformation objectives.
The past year has provided numerous examples of successful
technology development and deployment. The men and women of the
U.S. armed forces are better equipped, trained, and protected
because of revolutionary breakthroughs emerging from the
technology base. The committee commends the Department for the
response of the Defense science and technology base to the
emerging critical operational needs in support of the global
war on terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Elsewhere in this
report the committee has recommended increased funding to
further accelerate the transition of advanced technologies.
Despite the positive aspects of the Department's science
and technology program, the committee is concerned about long-
term projections for reductions in DOD science and technology
as a percentage of total obligation authority and in short-term
trends in the science and technology accounts of some of the
military departments and defense agencies. The committee cannot
emphasize too strongly the need for the Department to maintain
a strong and robustly funded science and technology program
that will provide the advanced technologies needed to assure
technical dominance of our armed forces on any current or
future battlefield.
Expanding the role of small businesses in the defense acquisition
process
The committee subscribes to the view that small businesses
are the nation's engine of technology innovation. The
Department of Defense (DOD) spends significant sums annually on
Phase I and Phase II Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR)
technology development. In many cases, however, successful
results of the department's investment have not been
transitioned into the mainstream of system acquisition
programs.
The committee believes that our soldiers, sailors, airmen,
and marines deserve to have the best tools possible as they
wage the global war on terrorism. The committee notes the
recent Navy-Marine Corps quick-response SBIR solicitation
seeking immediate innovative technology approaches for
protecting Marines from improvised explosive devices, rocket-
propelled grenades, mortars, rockets, and missiles during
combat. Broader participation by the nation's small business
community is needed now to meet emergent DOD requirements in
support of the global war on terrorism, as well as to improve
the capability and lower the cost of weapon systems through
application of advanced technologies developed by small
businesses.
The committee strongly endorses the President's Executive
Order 13329, Encouraging Innovation in Manufacturing, directing
that SBIR awards involving manufacturing and manufacturing
technology be given priority. This is an essential step in
broadening the defense industrial base and creating new
manufacturing capacity in the United States. In recent years
Congress has clarified SBIR Phase III contracting authority and
data rights provisions in an attempt to clear the way for the
military services to transition promising Phase I and Phase II
SBIR technology development efforts to the mainstream of
defense acquisition. The committee is encouraged by the small
cadre of DOD program managers who have effectively transitioned
SBIR technology into their programs through award of Phase III
contracts. The committee believes that strong leadership from
the Office of the Secretary of Defense is necessary in order to
ensure that all the benefits from the Department's significant
annual SBIR technology development investment are realized.
The committee recognizes that an essential element of
acquisition reform is the continuing evolution of the
acquisition culture in the Department by program managers who
possess the insight and commitment to take advantage of small
innovative businesses through Phase III transition of SBIR
technology. The committee directs that the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD (AT&L))
encourage DOD acquisition program managers and prime
contractors to make significantly more SBIR Phase III contract
awards than has been done in the past. The committee further
directs the USD (AT&L) to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees, by March 31, 2005, to (1) provide
information on DOD SBIR Phase III awards during the past three
years; (2) describe what action the Office of the Secretary of
Defense has taken to encourage DOD acquisition program managers
to award SBIR Phase III contracts at a higher rate and to make
award of SBIR Phase III contracts a priority within the Defense
Acquisition system; and (3) identify specific Phase III
transitions that have been conducted or are planned in fiscal
year 2005.
High-speed/hypersonic reusable demonstration
The budget request contained $339.2 million in PE 62702E
for tactical technology applied research, including $15.0
million for the high-speed/hypersonic reusable demonstration.
The committee supports the objectives of the high-speed/
hypersonic reusable demonstration. However, because there are
higher priority, near-term requirements associated with the
global war on terrorism, the committee believes that the DARPA
high-speed, hypersonic reusable demonstration should be
deferred.
The committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million in PE
62702E, and no funding for the high-speed/hypersonic reusable
demonstration.
Horizontal fusion
The budget request contained $214.2 million in PE 35199D8Z
for Net Centricity, which includes the horizontal fusion
program, and $23.3 million for Washington Headquarters Services
major equipment, which includes $10.5 million for horizontal
fusion. The committee is aware that horizontal fusion reflects
a significant shift in the Department of Defense's (DOD)
approach to intelligence data. Currently intelligence analysts
process and analyze data before delivering it to the field for
use. The Department realized the more efficient way to provide
timely intelligence to the warfighter is to post data quickly,
allowing analysts in the field to do unit specific analysis.
This philosophical shift necessitates significant changes in
the systems that hold the information and form the basis of the
DOD network.
However, the committee is concerned that the scale of the
Department's undertaking is unprecedented, even compared to the
commercial sector's use of metadata, which tags data with
descriptive information and lists it in a central registry, to
manage its applications. The committee is concerned that the
scope of this program to exploit data on this level without a
systems architecture to define data and terms to ensure that
the information is consistent for all users could compromise
intelligence and cause technological failures. The committee
believes the Department must set the rules, standards,
protocols, and other parameters to determine who or what entity
is ultimately responsible for the data, before the funding at
the level proposed in the budget request can be productively
expended.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $144.2 million in PE
35199D8Z for continued research, a reduction of $70.0 million,
and $18.9 million for Washington Headquarters Services major
equipment procurement, a reduction of $4.4 million for
horizontal fusion.
Implementation of defense biomedical countermeasures
Title XVI of the National Defense Authorization Act for
2004 (Public Law 108-186) provides authority for the Secretary
of Defense to establish an enhanced biomedical countermeasures
program within the Department of Defense to protect members of
the Armed Forces from attack with chemical, biological,
radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agents. This title of Public
Law 108-136 parallels H.R. 2122, the Project Bioshield Act of
2003, which was developed in response to the Bioshield
initiative announced by the President in his State of the Union
address to the Congress on January 20, 2004; passed in the
House of Representatives; and introduced in the Senate. Title
XVI addresses research and development, procurement, and
emergency use of biomedical countermeasures.
Section 1601 requires the Secretary of Defense to establish
a program to accelerate research and development of biological
countermeasures to CBRN threats and provides authorities to
speed research.
Section 1602 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to enter
into an interagency agreement with the Secretaries of Homeland
Security and Health and Human Services to provide for
acquisition by the Secretary of Defense for use by the Armed
Forces of biomedical countermeasures procured for the Strategic
National Stockpile by the Secretary of Health and Human
Services. Section 1602 also authorizes the Secretary of Defense
to transfer those funds to the Secretary of Health and Human
Services that are necessary to carry out such agreements and
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to expend any such
transferred funds to procure such counter-measures for use by
the Armed Forces, or to replenish the stockpile.
Section 1603 establishes conditions under which the
Secretary of Health and Human Services may authorize emergency
use by the general public of certain drugs, devices, or
biological products based on a determination by the Secretary
of Defense that there is a military emergency involving a
heightened risk to United States military forces of attack with
specified CBRN agents. Section 1603 would also authorize the
President to waive the right of service members to refuse the
administration of such a biomedical countermeasure.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to
the congressional defense committees by December 31, 2004, on
the actions taken to implement the authorities granted in title
XVI of the Act.
Man portable air defense system defense program
The budget request included $14.1 million in PE 64618D8Z
for systems development and demonstration (SDD) for a network-
centric, portable, ground-based, counter-man portable air
defense system (MANPADS).
SDD programs require validated requirements and
technologies that have been demonstrated in at least a
laboratory or test range environment. There are no validated
requirements for this program, nor have any technologies been
demonstrated. Further, the committee understands the concept
for this program was considered by the Department of Homeland
Security for its on-going program to protect civilian aircraft
from the MANPADS threat and was rejected. Consequently, this
program would be unique to the military services. Finally, the
committee believes the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)
should not be managing programs that are inherently within the
purview of the military services.
If OSD, in its oversight role, believes that there is
sufficient merit in the concept engendered in this request, it
should mandate incorporation of the concept within one of the
several counter-MANPADS programs resident within the military
services and defense agencies as part of their research and
development programs.
The committee recommends no funds in PE 64618D8Z for fiscal
year 2005, a decrease of $14.1 million.
Measures and signatures intelligence consortium
The budget request contained no funds in PE 35884L for
intelligence planning and review for the Measures and
Signatures Intelligence (MASINT) Consortium.
The MASINT Consortium, led by the Defense Intelligence
Agency, began in fiscal year 2003 by congressional directive to
coordinate basic and applied science research as it relates to
the Intelligence Community (IC) and the Department of Defense.
The committee believes this is an IC requirement that
encourages the advancement of basic and applied systems
research within the MASINT discipline. Amplifying information
on this issue may be found in the classified annex to this
report.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
35884L for the MASINT Consortium.
Medical free electron laser
The budget request contained $9.7 million in PE 62227D8Z
for medical free electron laser applied research.
The committee notes that the medical free electron laser
program seeks to develop advanced, laser-based applications for
military medicine and related materials research. Because free
electron lasers provide unique pulse features and tunable
wavelength characteristics that are unavailable in other laser
devices, their use broadens the experimental options for the
development of new laser-based medical technologies. The
program is a merit-based, peer-reviewed, competitively awarded
research program, the majority of which is focused on
developing advanced procedures for rapid diagnosis and
treatment of battlefield related medical problems.
The committee recommends $19.7 million in PE 62227D8Z, an
increase of $10.0 million to continue the merit-based, peer-
reviewed, competitively awarded program in medical free
electron laser applied research.
Multi-wavelength surface scanning biologics sensor
The budget request contained $17.6 million in PE 63714D8Z
for the advanced sensor applications program.
The committee notes on-going research in the use of multi-
wavelength excitation spectral technology for the detection and
identification of biologic agents that are not discernible with
conventional sensors. The committee understands that successful
demonstration of this technology for two dimensional
fluorescence that spectrally resolve the target in both
excitation and emission dimensions could provide the capability
to detect and identify biological agents and a significant
improvement in the scanning and screening of potentially
contaminated locations. Congress appropriated $2.0 million in
fiscal year 2004 to continue previously funded work on the
technology and support evaluation of a laboratory test bed
system with a wide range of simulated and target bacteria and
pathogens and environmental backgrounds. The committee
understands that the success of these efforts has motivated
further testing of the laboratory testbed prototype to support
the design and development of a second generation or ``beta'' system
with significantly expanded capabilities.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
63714D8Z to continue the program for development and
demonstration of two-dimensional fluorescence spectral sensing
instruments for the real-time detection and identification of
pathogens.
National Defense University technology pilot program
The budget request contained $30.6 million in PE 65104D8Z
for the Office of the Secretary of Defense technical studies,
support, and analysis.
The committee notes that the National Defense University
(NDU), supported by funding provided by the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering, has established a pilot research and
analysis program focused on defense policy issues that have
significant technology elements. The committee further notes
that the objective of this program is to determine how the
United States can maintain its competitive edge against other
military adversaries at a time when commercial information
technology (IT) is readily available on the global market. The
committee is interested to learn the results of NDU's proposed
pilot programs for fiscal year 2005 which include the use of IT
for stabilization efforts and reconstruction operations in
Iraq, and homeland security.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $31.6 million for PE
65104D8Z, an increase of $1.0 million for the NDU technology
pilot program.
Nuclear weapons effects applied research
The budget request contained $249.8 million in PE 62716BR
for applied research in weapons of mass destruction defeat
technology, including $67.8 million for applied research in
weapons effects technology.
The committee continues to note that the budget for nuclear
weapons effects applied research has declined dramatically
since the early 1990s and the decline in the budget has been
accompanied by a decline in the capability for and expertise in
analysis of nuclear weapons effects. The current program uses a
combination of computer analysis, simulation and protection
technology to address key issues regarding the survivability of
critical U.S. systems in a potential nuclear environment,
including missile defense interceptors, satellite electronics,
and warfighting command, control, communications and
intelligence (C3I) systems and facilities. The committee
believes that the U.S. nuclear weapons effects analysis
capability needs to be revitalized to address emerging 21st
Century threats, such as the potential for terrorist use of
radiological dispersion devices (``dirty bombs'') or crude
nuclear weapons in an urban environment; the potential effect
of electromagnetic pulse generated by a nuclear weapon on C3I
and other electronic systems; the potential use of small
nuclear weapons for defeat of chemical or biological agents, or
for defeat of hard and buried targets; and analysis of
requirements for defense of critical assets.
The committee recommends $259.8 million in PE 62716BR, an
increase of $10.0 million for nuclear weapons effects applied
research.
Operationally responsive satellite
The budget request contained $19.6 million in PE 65799D8Z
for Force Transformation Directorate, but contained no funds
for operationally responsive satellites.
With the advent of operationally responsive launches, the
committee believes research and development should begin on the
use of satellites that would fit this new family of launch
vehicles and address near-term warfighter requirements. These
new satellites should provide critical capabilities from space
in an affordable, reliable, and timely manner. This new
perspective on satellite acquisition represents a truly
transformational strategy and, as such, should be managed by
the Secretary of Defense's new Office of Force Transformation.
The committee recommends $44.6 million in PE 65799D8Z, an
increase of $25.0 million for the development of operationally
responsive satellites.
Smart machine platform initiative
The budget request contained $11.0 million in PE 78011S for
Industrial Preparedness, of which no funds were requested for
the Smart Machine Platform Initiative.
The committee has been encouraged by the efforts of the
machine tool industry to develop breakthrough technology for
defense manufacturing applications by which the next generation
of machine technology will provide the capability to monitor
and modify a work plan during the production process. This
smart machine technology would substantially reduce both the
cost and time to develop defense products.
The committee recommends $23.2 million for PE 78011S, an
increase of $12.2 million for the Smart Machine Platform
Initiative.
Space and missile defense command simulation center
The budget request contained $186.7 million for the high
performance computing modernization program, which includes the
Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC) Simulation
Center. The center is a mission critical computer facility
established to provide supercomputer computational assets with
high performance network and storage support for the
development, testing, and integration of strategic defense
technologies and simulations including computational physics
and chemistry, weapons design, and force modeling for SMDC, the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA), and the military services. The
committee understands that the SMDC needs to upgrade its
information technology systems to meet computational demands
for simulation, testing, and evaluation of advanced
interceptors and sensors. The committee believes the technology
upgrades are important to the work the SMDC is presently
conducting.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $192.7 million in PE
63755D8Z, an increase of $6.0 million for the SMDC.
Special operations advanced technology development
The budget request contained $48.8 million in PE 116402BB
for special operations advanced technology development, but
contained no funding for development of long term battery-free
power sources, the advanced target identification capability
for AC-130U gunships, the ANGELFIRE active protection system,
and the surveillance augmentation vehicle-insertable on request
(SAVIOR) system.
The committee is aware of the need for power sources that
may be used to supply power to remote monitoring and
surveillance sensors for long periods of duration. Furthermore,
thecommittee understands that promising technology exists that
may meet that military requirement by converting ambient light to
power.
The advanced target identification system is a significant
enhancement to the gunship radar and will enable the crew to
make accurate and near instantaneous identification of friendly
and enemy vehicles on the battlefield. To complete the project,
funding is needed to fully integrate identification software
with a family of ground and airborne systems.
ANGELFIRE is a promising integrated sensor and
countermeasure package with the potential to provide increased
protection to lightly protected military aircraft and vehicles
in hostile environments. Such systems are urgently needed in
today's increasingly lethal operating environments.
The SAVIOR system also promises to increase force
protection for troops operating in cluttered, urban
environments. SAVIOR is a mobile, intelligent sensor suite that
can alert ground forces to the presence of a threat with its
intensive surveillance network.
The committee recommends $64.8 million for PE 1160402BB
special operations advanced technology development, increases
of $4.0 million to develop battery free power sources for
sensors, $3.0 million for the advanced identification
capability for AC-130 gunships, $6.0 million to develop the
ANGELFIRE active protection system, and $3.0 million for
development of the SAVIOR system.
Special operations technology development
The budget request contained $13.1 million in PE 116401BB
for special operations technology development, but included no
funding for shoulder fired smart round (SPIKE) urban warfare
system development. The SPIKE missile fills a critical need for
a low-cost, light-weight fire and forget missile for ground
troops to use against lightly armored and other material
targets and has possible maritime application as well.
The committee recommends $16.1 million in PE 116401BB, an
increase of $3.0 million for SPIKE missile development.
Stimulated isomer energy release
The budget request contained $339.2 million in PE 62702E
for tactical technology applied research, including $4.0
million for stimulated isomer energy release.
The committee is aware that the Defense Advanced Research
Project Agency (DARPA) is funding research to investigate the
feasibility of stimulating the release of energy stored in
nuclear isomers. The committee understands that the DARPA-
sponsored research is investigating two of the most difficult
technical challenges in this program and that the research is
being conducted in the national laboratories, the Department of
Energy, the military service laboratories, and other
facilities. Given the significant policy issues associated with
any eventual use of an isomer weapon and given the inability of
distinguished scientists to replicate the reported successful
triggering experiment of 1998, the committee believes that the
Department of Defense should not be engaged in this research.
The proper agency to investigate the feasibility of this
technology is the National Nuclear Security Administration and
its national laboratory complex. The committee questions the
utility of this research in any circumstances and is
particularly skeptical of research into nuclear isomer
production before triggering is shown to be possible.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to terminate this program, and recommends no funding for the
stimulated isomer energy release in PE 62702E, a reduction of
$4.0 million.
Tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination of SYERS-2 data
The budget request contained no funding in PE 35102BQ for
defense imagery and mapping.
The committee is concerned that multi-spectral data from
the SYERS-2 sensor is not being exploited by the National
Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA).
The committee recommends $3.0 million in PE 35102BQ, an
increase of $3.0 million to permit the NGA to fully process,
exploit, and disseminate SYERS-2 data.
Use of research and development funds to procure systems
The committee has observed the increasing use of funds
designated for research and development (R&D) purposes to
acquire operational platforms. The fiscal 2005 budget proposal
would take the practice to unprecedented levels, with three
DD(X) and two LCS ships, three E-2C aircraft, and eleven VH-XX
helicopters proposed for acquisition with R&D funds.
The use of R&D funds for prototypes and truly developmental
items is both proper and prudent. This practice also makes
sense when, following the completion of testing, a test asset
still has useful capability to bring to the operational fleet.
However, it is difficult to believe that nearly half of the VH-
XX fleet, for example, qualifies as prototypes or dedicated
test assets. The fact that the platforms may occasionally be
used for some testing purposes does not, in the committee's
view, qualify them as research craft. Indeed, the committee
would be surprised were the department actually proposing to
regularly carry the President on prototype aircraft.
While the committee recognizes the increased flexibility of
R&D funds in acquiring platforms, there is concern that placing
acquisition programs in the R&D budget, particularly at their
early, least stable stage, threatens other programs,
particularly in science and technology. The R&D budget is a
very small pool from which to fund acquisitions of large items
like ships, and as procurements are must-pay bills, typical
procurement cost-growth would put the rest of the R&D budget at
risk.
The committee's action with regard to particular programs
funded in R&D should therefore be seen not only as a reflection
of the merits of those items, but also as an expression of
concern over the rapidly expanding portion of the R&D budget
being used for purposes other than R&D.
Walrus
The budget request contained $339.2 million in PE 62702E
for tactical technology applied research, including $10.0
million for the Walrus program, and $361.0 million in PE 63285E
for advanced aerospace systems advanced technology development,
including $10.0 million for the Walrus program.
The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) Walrus program would combine
technologies for high-strength and low structural weight
airframes, high efficiency propulsion systems; and heavy-lift
cargo transport investigated in earlier DARPA programs. The
Walrus program would develop and evaluate a very large
``hybrid'' airlift vehicle concept that is designed to fly
through a combination of aerodynamics and gas buoyancy. The
first phase of the program would include system studies and
development of a notional objective vehicle and would be
followed by a competitive second phase that would lead to the
development, design, build, and initial flight test of an
advanced technology demonstration air vehicle with air lift
capability comparable to a C-130 aircraft. As envisioned, an
objective vehicle would be capable of lifting over 500 tons
across intercontinental distances.
The committee acknowledges the Department of Defense's
objective of being able to deploy quickly to overseas theaters
from the continental United States. Nevertheless, the committee
is also aware of previous programs in the late 1980s and early
1990s that envisioned very large, long-endurance airship
concepts for inter-theater lift, which after some initial
enthusiasm were not pursued because of the large costs
associated with the development and production of such systems.
The committee has also received no estimates of the potential
development and production costs for the Walrus concept.
Because there are higher priority, near-term requirements
associated with the global war on terrorism, the committee
believes that the work on the DARPA Walrus program should be
deferred.
Accordingly, the committee recommends no funding for the
Walrus program, a reduction of $10.0 million in PE 62702E and a
reduction of $10.0 million in PE 63285E.
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
Overview
The budget request contained $305.1 million for Operational
Test and Evaluation, Defense.
The committee recommends $305.1 million, no change to the
budget request.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would establish research, development, test
and evaluation authorization levels for the Department of
Defense for fiscal year 2005.
Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology
This section would establish defense science and technology
authorization levels for the Department of Defense for fiscal
year 2005.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Section 211--Future Combat Systems Program Strategy
This section would limit authorization of appropriations
for Future Combat Systems (FCS) in fiscal year 2005 to $2.2
billion until the following is submitted to Congress prior to
the Milestone B update:
(1) An independent program cost estimate;
(2) A report on the maturity levels of critical
technologies;
(3) A report on the status of the network and
command, control, communications, computers,
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
components; and
(4) The key performance parameters.
This section would also require the Secretary of the Army
to certify that the following requirements are applied to the
Future Combat Systems program:
(1) At the design readiness review, 90 percent of
engineering drawings will be releasable to
manufacturing;
(2) Before production facilitization and long lead
items are contracted for, the performance of the
information network is demonstrated to be acceptable,
including the contributions of complementary programs
such as the Joint Tactical Radio System and the
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical;
(3) Before the initial production decision,
prototypes of each system demonstrate their collective
ability to meet system of system requirements when
integrated with the network.
FCS is a revolutionary system of systems that the Army is
developing to equip its future forces. FCS consists of an
information network that links a suite of 18 new smaller and
lighter manned and unmanned ground vehicles, air vehicles,
sensors, and munitions. The success of FCS depends on the
ability of the network to collect, process, and deliver vast
amounts of information such as imagery and communications and
the performance of the individual systems themselves.
The committee supports the Army's transformation goals and
the desired capabilities that the FCS program promises.
However, the committee is greatly concerned about the Army's
ability to deliver these capabilities within cost and schedule
estimates. The Army has never managed any program of the size
and complexity of FCS: 18 systems, 32 critical technology
areas, 34 million lines of code, 129 trade studies, and 157
other necessary systems outside of the FCS program structure.
In its March 2004 report, the General Accounting Office
indicated the FCS program has many of the same risk markers
that have led to problems on other programs. These include:
(1) An extremely challenging and unforgiving
requirement to outperform the current heavy force at a
fraction of the weight and logistics footprint;
(2) Reliance on numerous advanced yet immature
technologies to meet the requirement; and;
(3) A schedule that proceeds to production in an
unprecedented 5\1/2\ years.
The committee is aware of the fiscal realities that make it
difficult to fund simultaneously the development of
transformational future military systems and the maintenance
and sustainment of current military systems. FCS will field 15,
brigade like, Units of Action by 2025. This will constitute
about one-third of the active component of the Army. The Army
does not have a plan and has not budgeted funds to sustain the
current force through 2025. The committee believes that the
current force must be provided with a sufficient sustainment
and modernization budget such that this force remains capable,
reliable, interoperable, and relevant until FCS can assume the
majority of the responsibility for the Army's mission.
Section 212--Collaborative Program for Research and Development of
Vacuum Electronics Technologies
This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish a program for research and development in advanced
vacuum electronics technology to meet Department of Defense
(DOD) requirements for radio frequency electromagnetic systems.
The program would be carried out collaboratively by the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, the Secretary of
the Navy, the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the
Army, and other appropriate elements of the Department of
Defense. The provision would also increase the fiscal year 2005
budget request for vacuum technology research and development
by a total of $15.0 million, an increase of $10.0 million in PE
62771N for vacuum electronics applied research and an increase
of $5.0 million in PE 63771N for vacuum electronics advanced
technology development.
The committee has long recognized the unique needs of the
Department of Defense for high power vacuum electronics for
radar and other electromagnetic systems, and has advocated
increased funding for research and development in advanced
vacuum electronics technology. The committee reports on H.R.
1402 (H. Rept. 106-162) and on H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-436)
noted the committee's support for a robust vacuum electronics
research and development program in the Department of Defense
and other federal agencies. The committee has reviewed the
results of the Secretary of the Navy's report to Congress on
the DOD vacuum electronics program and the Department's April
2001 Technology Area Review and Assessment (TARA) on creating a
balanced tri-service investment strategy for RF vacuum
electronics and solid-state power electronics technologies. In
the committee report on H.R. 4546, the committee endorsed the
TARA views on the criticality of support for both vacuum
electronics and solid-state power electronics technologies. The
committee notes the TARA review's recommendations for increased
funding in the tri-service vacuum electronics program and for
establishment of a combined tri-service initiative to rapidly
advance wide band gap semiconductor device technology to enable
advanced military radar and other systems requiring power
electronics in the mid-to-long term.
Section 212 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) required the Secretary of
Defense to establish a collaborative program for development of
advanced radar systems, which has focused on developing the
technology for high frequency and high power wide band gap
semiconductors recommended in the TARA review. Section 212 of
this Act would implement the TARA recommendation for the tri-
service vacuum electronics program.
The committee expects the Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics), acting through the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, to ensure a
balanced investment strategy for vacuum electronics and solid
state power technologies that will meet DOD requirements for
current and future systems that use radio frequency power
electronics.
Section 213--Annual Comptroller General Report on Joint Strike Fighter
Program
This section would establish an annual review of the Joint
Strike Fighter system development and demonstration (SDD)
program by the Comptroller General to be submitted to Congress
by March 15, of each year. The report would include the extent
to which such SDD program is meeting established performance,
cost, and schedule goals; the plan for such SDD for the next
fiscal year; and a conclusion whether such SDD program is
likely to be completed at a cost not in excess of the most
recent Selected Acquisition Report. The final report required
by this section would be submitted on March 15, 2009.
Section 214--Amounts for United States Joint Forces Command to be
Derived Only from Defense-wide Amounts
This section would transfer funding for the joint warfare
experimentation program and related Joint Forces Command
programs from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
to a Defense-wide account.
In 1998, the Secretary of Defense chartered the combatant
commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command, as the executive agent
for conducting joint warfighting concept development and
experimentation within the Department of Defense. The committee
believes that, as the Department's executive agent for joint
warfighting concept development and experimentation, the
command's budget for joint warfare experimentation and related
programs should be independent of, and separate from the
budgets of the military departments. The committee also notes
that the precedent that has been established by the Department
in maintaining the budgets for the Joint Staff and defense
agencies separate from the budgets of the military departments.
The committee also observes that maintaining the budget for the
joint warfare experimentation and transformation programs as a
part of budget request for the Navy's science and technology
program tends to create a false impression of funding levels
for the latter.
The committee directs the transfer of funding for the Joint
Forces Command joint experimentation, joint warfare experiments
and joint warfare transformation programs from Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy to Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, as follows:
(1) $167.7 million for Joint Experimentation from
Navy PE 32727N to Defense-wide PE 63xx1;
(2) $26,000 for Joint Warfare Experiments from Navy
PE 63757N to Defense-wide PE 63xx2, and;
(3) $22.5 million for Joint Warfare Transformation
Programs from Navy PE 64787N to Defense-wide PE 63xx3.
Section 215--Authority of Director of Defense Research and Engineering
to Award Prizes for Advanced Technology Achievements
This section would amend the process by which the Secretary
of Defense carries out a program to award cash prizes in
recognition of outstanding achievements in basic, advanced, and
applied research, technology development, and prototype
development that have the potential for application to the
performance of the military missions of the Department of
Defense. The amendment would provide that the program would be
carried out by the Secretary of Defense, acting through the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, rather than
through the Director, Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency.
Section 216--Space Based Radar
This section would prohibit the Space Based Radar program
from proceeding to Department of Defense acquisition milestone
B. The program may not proceed until 30 days after meeting the
requirement to notify the congressional defense committees and
the intelligence committees of the completion of an independent
cost estimate, a technology maturity and readiness assessment,
and the system design concept.
Section 217--Mark-54 Torpedo Product Improvement Program
This section would provide $2.0 million of funds authorized
in Navy, Research and Development for the Mark-54 Product
Improvement Program.
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense
Section 221--Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities
This section would allow the Department of Defense to use
research, development, test and evaluation funding to develop
and field ballistic missile defense capabilities with funds
appropriated in fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
The committee is concerned with the Department's plans to
transition program elements of the ballistic missile defense
program from the Missile Defense Agency to the military
services. The committee notes that section 223(a) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public
Law 108-136) requires the Secretary of Defense to submit with
the annual budget request the potential date of availability of
individual ballistic missile defense program elements for
fielding, and the estimated date for the transfer of individual
ballistic missile defense system elements from the Director of
the Missile Defense Agency to the secretary of a military
department. The committee expects that the fielding and
acquisition strategy provided by the Department will assist the
committee in considering future requests by the Department to
use research, development, test and evaluation funds for the
development and fielding of ballistic missile capabilities.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $140.6 billion for operation
and maintenance funds throughout the Department of Defense
(DOD). The committee reviewed this request to evaluate whether
readiness accounts are properly funded and managed for a
peacetime environment. The committee conducted a focused review
on joint training, logistics transformation, prepositioned
assets, as well as the overall readiness of military units.
The committee believes the Secretary of Defense and DOD
leadership recognize the importance of joint training and are
taking appropriate action to implement the Joint National
Training Capabilities program. DOD leadership also appears
committed to improving logistics and providing total asset
visibility of supplies and personnel to the combatant
commanders. The committee will continue in its oversight role
to evaluate whether various training exercises and logistics
systems migrate toward a joint environment or whether military-
unique training and stove-piped logistics systems continue to
be the norm. The committee believes any program identified as
joint, total, or global will face some level of resistance. The
burden will be on the Secretary of Defense and the secretaries
of the military departments to adopt and endorse programs that
benefit the Department as a whole, rather than merely
benefiting a particular service or agency.
The committee also believes the Secretary of Defense and
the secretaries of the military departments have a unique
opportunity to replenish their prepositioned materials and
equipment in a manner most beneficial to global security. Many
lessons were learned as to the value of prepositioned equipment
and how to manage such assets. The committee hopes DOD
leadership takes advantage of these lessons and adjusts its
prepositioning program accordingly.
Finally, the committee notes the challenge of evaluating a
peacetime budget when the nation is at war. The budget request
contained no additional funds to support the operating tempo
for units deployed for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
Enduring Freedom. Title XV of this bill accordingly addresses
this issue and the need for additional operational and
maintenance funds.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Budget Request Adjustments--Readiness
The committee recommends the following adjustments to the
fiscal year 2005 budget request:
[In millions of dollars]
Department of the Army Adjustments:
BA-1 Hydration on the Move....................................+3.0
BA-1 Military Skills Engagement Training Simulator (Laser Shot
Software)....................................................+1.0
BA-1 Vehicle Batteries........................................+2.5
BA-1 Tactical Exploitation System............................(4.0)
BA-1 Contractor Logistic Support--unjustified growth........(10.0)
BA-1 Combat Training Centers--unjustified growth............(10.0)
BA-3 Satellite Communications for Learning Project (SCOLA)....+3.0
BA-3 Training Support--unjustified growth...................(15.0)
BA-4 Administration--unjustified growth.....................(19.5)
Unobligated Balances.........................................(52.3)
Civilian Pay Overstatement...................................(82.0)
Army Reserve--Family Assistance Centers........................+5.6
Army National Guard--Hydration on the Move.....................+1.0
Army National Guard--Family Support Programs..................+30.0
Army National Guard--Unobligated Balances....................(14.5)
Department of the Navy Adjustments:
BA-1 Stainless Steel Sanitary Spaces..........................+4.0
BA-1 NULKA Electronic Decoy Cartridge.........................+2.0
BA-1 Technical Publications.................................(25.0)
BA-1 Fleet Response Plan Efficiencies.......................(15.0)
BA-1 Combatant Commanders Program-unjustified growth........(40.0)
BA-4 Small Ship Registry......................................+1.5
Unobligated Balances.........................................(97.7)
Civilian Pay Overstatement...................................(12.0)
United States Marine Corps Adjustments:
BA-1 Hydration on the Move....................................+1.0
BA-1 Vehicle Batteries........................................+2.5
BA-1 Tent Lighting System.....................................+2.0
Department of the Air Force Adjustments:
BA-1 B-1A Lancer Bombers....................................+157.4
BA-1 Hydration on the Move....................................+2.0
BA-1 Joint Crew Protection Mask...............................+1.4
BA-1 KC-767 Tankers...........................................+3.5
BA-1 Combat Air Systems Activities...........................(9.0)
BA-1 Foreign Nat'l Indirect Hires--unjustified growth.......(10.5)
BA-1 NORTHCOM--unjustified growth...........................(26.2)
BA-1 Combatant Commander Intel Capabilities..................(4.0)
BA-4 Personnel Programs......................................(9.5)
BA-4 Base Support-unjustified growth........................(30.4)
Civilian Separation Incentives...............................(40.8)
Unobligated Balances.........................................(49.4)
Civilian Pay Overstatement...................................(29.5)
Depot Maintenance Realignment to ANG.........................(78.8)
Air National Guard Depot Maintenance Realignment..............+78.8
Air National Guard Unobligated Balances......................(33.7)
Defense-wide Activities Adjustments:
Joint Chiefs of Staff--unjustified growth....................(38.9)
Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities............+15.0
Rapid Frequency Identification Technology......................+4.0
Hydration on the Move..........................................+1.0
Defense Technology Security Administration.....................+1.0
Defense Threat Reduction Agency................................+8.7
Washington Headquarters Services--BRAC Commission............(10.0)
Office of Secretary of Defense--FEHB..........................+10.0
Office of Secretary of Defense--Persistent Stratospheric
Vehicles.....................................................+4.2
Office of Secretary of Defense--Research Technology Protection.+4.8
Office of Secretary of Defense--Counterintelligence Law
Enforcement Watch Center.....................................+4.0
Office of Secretary of Defense--Paralyzed Veterans Association.+1.0
Office of Secretary of Defense--unjustified growth...........(95.8)
Defense Security Service.....................................(50.0)
Unobligated Balances.........................................(59.5)
Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities
The committee continues to support the Commercial
Technologies for Maintenance Activities (CTMA) program. The
Department of Defense (DOD) created the CTMA program in 1998 as
the only program designed to bring the most modern and advanced
manufacturing processes used by commercial industries to the
DOD maintenance depots and organic maintenance activities. It
is the committee's understanding that depot commanders support
the economic efficiencies this program can provide.
Therefore, the committee recommends the addition of $15.0
million for the Defense Logistics Agency to continue the CTMA
program. The committee believes the addition of these funds
will allow depot-level activities to continue the successful
participation in manufacturing technology demonstration
projects in collaboration with more than 150 of the leading
U.S. manufacturers.
Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan
The budget request contained $51.0 million for the
Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General, to
implement the Mid-Range Improvement Plan. The committee
understands the goal of this plan is for the Department of
Defense to obtain clean and auditable financial statements in
fiscal year 2007. To date, the committee has not received any
information estimating the cost of this plan in future fiscal
years. As addressed elsewhere in this report, the committee
cannot support the plan until additional information is
provided, and thus recommends a decrease of $51.0 million to
the Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General.
Paralyzed Veterans of America
The committee supports programs sponsored by the Paralyzed
Veterans of America (PVA) designated for servicemen and women
returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
Freedom. Programs such as the PVA Outdoor Sports Heritage Fund
encourage and assist soldiers to get out of the hospitals and
engage in outdoor activities. Accordingly, the committee
recommends $1.0 million for the Secretary of Defense to provide
to the PVA Outdoor Sports Heritage Fund to continue this
worthwhile effort.
Spare Engines
The budget request contained no funds to purchase Navy
spare aviation engines. Instead, the Secretary of the Navy
intends to purchase these engines with obligation authority
within the Department of Defense working capital fund. In the
past, engines were purchased with appropriated aviation
procurement funds. The committee believes it is inappropriate
to fund spare aviation engines within the working capital fund.
The proposed mechanism would delay using appropriated funds to
purchase these engines. The committee notes that section 8041
of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public
Law 108-87) states, ``[T]he fiscal year 2005 budget request
shall be . . . submitted to the Congress on the basis that any
equipment which was classified as an end item and funded in the
procurement appropriation account in this act shall be budgeted
for the proposed fiscal year 2005 procurement appropriation and
not in the . . . Department of Defense Working Capital Funds.''
Therefore, the committee recommends a transfer of $59.0 million
from the defense working capital fund to the Department of the
Navy's aviation procurement account.
Working Capital Funds
Working capital funds serve a vital role in providing
financial transaction flexibility for working capital fund
activities and its customers. When working capital activities
achieve a surplus in the annual operating result, consideration
should be given to adjusting customer rates. Working capital
activities that do not adjust rates are not appropriately
returning surplus funds to customers. In addition, the
committee is aware that many working capital fund activities
have cash in excess of the Department of Defense rules. The
committee, therefore, recommends the following reductions.
[In millions of dollars]
Air Force Working Capital Fund, Supply Management...............(150.0)
Air Force Working Capital Fund, Transportation..................(917.2)
Information Technology Issues
Overview
The committee strongly believes information technology (IT)
is a critical enabler for the Department of Defense (DOD) to
meet and defeat both conventional and asymmetric threats in
21st Century warfare. The committee supports the Department's
goal to have joint, network-centric, distributed forces to
provide rapid reaction for any situation. However, the
Department is far from achieving that objective.
While the Department has implemented and expanded the
Global Information Grid's (GIG) potential capabilities, which
will be an enormous enhancement in supporting our military
forces, the committee remains concerned that warfighters may
not be able to utilize these capabilities if individual service
architectures, investments, and service specific systems limit
interoperability. The crux of the issue is DOD execution,
enforcement and evolution of its systems architecture to allow
warfighters to capitalize on IT investments that use command,
control, communications, computers, intelligence,
reconnaissance, surveillance systems (C4ISR) which are enabled
through the GIG.
The committee supports the Department's design and
implementation of an enterprise architecture to build and
support a fully functioning network that every serviceman or
woman can access and exploit. Such a network is intended to
resolve the interoperability issues that currently plague the
military services.
The committee is concerned that the Department has not
maintained adequate oversight and scrutiny over its business
systems investments to ensure funds are spent on joint
solutions that would provide the best value. While the
Department is presently taking several actions to improve the
situation, the committee is concerned that it has not put into
place the organizational structure and process controls to
properly align business systems investments with the business
enterprise architecture. Therefore, the various military
services and defense agencies have continued to make their own
investment decisions, each following different criteria by
designingand procuring its own business IT systems. This lack
of an institutionalized investment strategy has contributed to the
Department's current complex, error-prone, non-integrated IT systems
environment.
The committee proposes legislation that would increase the
level of scrutiny and responsibility exercised by the business
domain owners, and recommends a series of reductions in
apparently redundant or legacy IT programs and those that lack
proper justification to explain growth from last year's budget
request.
Information Technology Specific Reductions
The Department of the Defense budget request for
information technology (IT) includes both IT and national
security systems (NSS). While the committee supports network
centric operations and warfare initiatives that support
military missions, as well as operational and organizational
changes that have the net effect of supporting our warfighters,
the committee remains concerned about the Department's lack of
control and management oversight of the development and
investments in business IT systems. The committee is also
concerned that the Department has created joint IT systems
whose program offices lack authority to devise, implement, and
enforce systems architectures; control expenditures; or execute
programs according to schedule and performance standards. The
committee believes the Department needs to better manage and
oversee many of the IT and NSS systems to prevent the
proliferation of service-centric systems that do not
interoperate with one another. Therefore, the committee
recommends adjustments in the following programs:
[In millions of dollars]
Department of the Army Adjustments:
Training Instrumentation for Air and Missile defense (AMD Units+5.0
Army National Guard Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Program.+3.5
Army National Guard Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network
(NDFON)......................................................+6.0
Deputy Chief of Staff for Information Management and Director of
Information Management (DCSIM/DOIM) Staff Operations........(2.2)
Installation Management Activity.............................(10.0)
Network Enterprise Technology Command (EAC Support)...........(9.0)
Visual Information Support...................................(13.0)
MEPCOM Management Information Reporting System...............(10.0)
Recruiting Information Support System.........................(4.0)
Army Human Resources Command Core Automation Support.........(20.0)
Army Knowledge Enterprise Architecture........................(4.0)
Army Personnel Electronic Records Management System...........(7.0)
Defense Civilian Personnel Data System-Sustainment............(2.2)
Information Technology Agency................................(12.4)
Logistics Modernization Program...............................(2.7)
Logistic Post Production Software Support.....................(3.5)
Management Headquarters Information Management...............(13.0)
Personnel Transformation.....................................(13.0)
Department of the Navy Adjustments:
Navy Air Logistics Data Analysis.............................(15.0)
Navy Converged Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Program....(15.5)
Navy/USMC Base Level Communications..........................(27.0)
Other Navy Military Personnel and Readiness (Training and
Recruiting)................................................(12.0)
Other Navy Military Personnel and Readiness (Admin and
Servicewide Activities)....................................(16.0)
Department of the Air Force Adjustments:
Air Force Base Level Communications Infrastructure, Air Combat
Command.....................................................(8.0)
Air Force Base Level Communications Infrastructure, Pacific...(9.0)
Air Force Base Level Communications Infrastructure, Europe...(10.0)
Air Force Engineering and Installations, Air Combat Command...(5.6)
Air Force Engineering and Installations, Space Command........(4.0)
Air Force Engineering and Installations, Air Mobility Command.(6.3)
Air Force Engineering and Installations, Pacific..............(5.0)
Air Force Engineering and Installations, Europe..............(10.0)
Air Force Combat Information Transport System.................(6.4)
Air Force Military Personnel Data System......................(2.4)
Air Force Pentagon Communications Agency.....................(20.0)
Defense-wide Activities Adjustments:
Chief Information Officer Programs, OSD......................(12.0)
Comptroller Business Management Modernization Program........(25.4)
Health Program...............................................(50.0)
Horizontal Fusion.............................................(3.4)
Enterprise Resource Planning Program--Army National Guard
The budget contained no funding for the Army National Guard
enterprise resource planning program (ERP) which would identify
the business processes in the Army National Guard and compare
them to the Army ERP programs.
The committee believes this may be a valuable study and
could benefit the Army National Guard to determine how it may
leverage existing Army and other Department of Defense's
initiatives, to include the Business Management Modernization
Program (BMMP). Such ERP would also allow the Army National
Guard to do collaborative planning between national
headquarters and the various state guard bureaus.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $3.5 million for the
Army National Guard enterprise resource planning program, and
directs the Chief, Army National Guard to use the BMMP and the
defense business enterprise architecture as the baseline and
standards for this program's development and integration.
Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network
The budget request contained no funding for the Nationwide
Dedicated Fiber Optic Network (NDFON) for the Army National
Guard.
This program will provide a dedicated high-speed, high-
bandwidth fiber optic network backbone to service National
Guard communications operations. NDFON will be a secure,
reliable, and survivable network capable of supporting current
and projected communications requirements. The committee notes
that this program has the capability to provide the National
Guard armories with a robust communications backbone to provide
rapid, coordinated response to potential incidents. The
committee understands that NDFON will comply with the Global
Information Grid's architecture to maximize communications,
networking, and collaboration between the armories and the
Department of Defense.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in operation and maintenance for the Army National
Guard to complete engineering studies for the NDFON program.
Navy Marine Corps Intranet
The budget request contained $1.6 billion for the Navy
Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI). The committee notes that over
300,000 users are now supported by this program. The program is
providing support and connectivity to hundreds of deployed
troops in the Iraqi war zone.
The committee notes that the focus of NMCI has changed from
deploying systems to achieving efficient steady-state
operations, as shown by the Department of the Navy and its
contractor conducting negotiations to improve the execution of
the $7.0 billion NMCI contract for all users. The contract
presently supports a larger number of legacy systems for longer
periods of time than envisioned when first awarded. The
committee is aware the Navy may have underestimated the number
of software applications in its inventory, initially estimating
that it had only 5,000 applications, when the real number may
be as high as 67,000. Additionally, the committee notes that
the Navy has not practiced due diligence to identify and turn
off these legacy applications and their associated computer
networks. The committee is concerned because to date, only two
legacy networks whose functionality is intended to migrate to
the NMCI have been terminated. The committee understands the
Navy operates other information technology systems that were
never intended to operate in the NMCI environment.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to complete the migration or terminate all legacy networks
and applications whose functionality is intended to migrate to
the NMCI environment by September 30, 2005. If this transition
is not completed by such date, the Secretary of the Navy will
provide a report as to how the Department of the Navy plans to
fund these legacy systems beyond September 30, 2005. The
committee believes the contractor should not be held
responsible to support those legacy networks and applications
the Secretary of Navy does not migrate to the NMCI environment
by this date.
Other Matters
Core Logistics Capability
Under section 2464 of title 10, United States Code, the
Department of Defense must maintain a core logistics
capability. The committee understands that until recently, the
Department of the Navy considered the maintenance and repair of
subsystems to aviation mission essential weapon systems as a
core logistics capability and thus performed at a public depot.
The committee is concerned that the practice referred to above
has been cancelled, yet a new policy is not in place. Thus, the
committee directs the Secretary of Navy to continue with the
older practice used to identify core logistics capability,
until the Secretary notifies the Senate Armed Services
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee of the new
policy.
Fire Emergency and Services Program
The Department of Defense, Inspector General, cited in its
report, ``DoD Fire and Emergency Services Program,'' D-2003-
121, that staffing and apparatus shortfalls could adversely
impact firefighter safety and installation missions. The
committee is concerned that fire houses, personnel, and other
fire suppression resources at military bases may be below
minimal safety standards. The committee believes it is
imperative that military base commanders operate fire
departments at or above National Fire Protection Association
standards as they apply to staffing, equipment and other
readiness capabilities, and fulfill all of the Inspector
General's recommendations.
Jinapsan Beach Properties in Guam
The committee is concerned with a long-standing, unresolved
issue regarding public access to Jinapsan Beach, Guam. This
area of land is privately owned and accessible only through
Department of Air Force or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service owned
land. In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, the Air Force closed the public road through Andersen Air
Base to Jinapsan Beach. The Department then initiated an
environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate three
alternative access routes. The EIS is still not complete. The
Department and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are in
disagreement over the timing and circumstances of the EIS. The
committee urges the parties to resolve this dispute and
encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to employ the
services of an outside organization conversant with these
issues in order to expedite completion of the EIS and determine
a permanent alternative route of access to privately-owned
properties at Jinapsan Beach.
Moving Household Goods--Families First
The Department of Defense spends more than $1,700.0 million
annually on moving military families. The committee believes
that the Department has long experienced problems with moving
household goods. In November 2002, the Secretary of Defense
submitted to various congressional committees three initiatives
to improve the moving household goodsprogram, which would add
an additional 13 percent over current program costs. The Comptroller
General reviewed this report and concluded that all three initiatives
offer solutions to several long standing problems and should be
implemented (U.S. General Accounting Office, ``Monitoring Costs and
Benefits Needed While Implementing a New Program for Moving Household
Goods,'' April 2003). The Comptroller General raised a concern,
however, on whether the three initiatives could be implemented within
the proposed 13 percent cost increase. The committee, therefore,
directs the Secretary to reevaluate its cost estimate, to quantify the
risk or likelihood of achieving its goals within 13 percent cost
projection, and to develop the range of possible cost increases
associated with the risk, by December 1, 2004. The committee also
directs the Comptroller General to review and report to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services,
by February 2, 2005, whether the Secretary has adequately performed the
committee's directed task.
New Mexico Training Range Initiative
The Committee is pleased with the Department of Air Force's
progress towards the establishment of the New Mexico Training
Range Initiative (NMTRI), including Melrose Range, Sumner Air
Traffic Control Assigned Airspace and the Pecos and Taiban
Military Operations Areas. It is the committee's understanding
that the Air Force is projected to complete an environmental
impact statement (EIS) by September 2005. The Committee
encourages the Air Force and all other parties involved to
continue to pursue September 2005 as the final deadline for the
completed EIS with regards to the NMTRI at Melrose Range.
Tents
There are 36 major types of tents used in the military
services. The Director, Defense Logistics Agency, is
responsible for purchasing these tents, primarily from small
businesses. There is, however, no regular or consistent
requirement for additional or new tents. Thus, the small
businesses that make up a significant portion of this
industrial base have difficulty meeting surge requirements. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by February 1, 2005, on what actions the
Secretary can take to promote a more consistent requirement for
tents or to assist the small business industrial base in
meeting surge requirements.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization Of Appropriations
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding
This section would authorize $119.8 billion in operation
and maintenance funding for the military departments and
defense-wide activities.
Section 302--Working Capital Funds
This section would authorize $2.8 billion for working
capital funds of the Department of Defense and the National
Defense Sealift Fund.
Section 303--Other Department of Defense Programs
This section would authorize $20.2 billion for other
Department of Defense Programs for (1) the Defense Health
Program; (2) Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction; (3)
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-Wide;
and (4) the Defense Inspector General.
Section 304--Reimbursement of Members of the Armed Forces Who Purchased
Protective Body Armor during Shortage of Defense Stocks of Body Armor
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
reimburse soldiers who purchased protective body armor for use
while deployed in connection with Operation Noble Eagle,
Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi Freedom, if the
soldier did not receive the protective body armor before
engaging in such operations where such body armor might be
necessary. Reimbursement would be available to soldiers who
purchased the body armor between September 1, 2001, and
December 31, 2003.
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions
Section 311--Report Regarding Encroachment Issues Affecting Utah Test
and Training Range, Utah
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to provide a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services, within one year of
enactment of this Act, on the current and anticipated
encroachments on the use and utility of the special use
airspace of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR), including
encroachments initiated by other executive agencies. The report
would include recommendations the Secretary considers
appropriate, including legislation that would address
encroachment-related concerns.
Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues
Section 321--Simplification of Annual Reporting Requirements Concerning
Funds Expended for Depot Maintenance and Repair Workloads
This section would amend section 2466(d) of title 10,
United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to Congress a report on the percentage of funds expended
or expected to be expended for depot maintenance and repair
workloads in the public and private sectors. This report would
cover prior, current, and budget years in which data is more
reliable. The Comptroller General recommended such a change in
its September 15, 2003, audit report, ``Depot Maintenance:
DOD's 50-50 Reporting Should be Streamlined,'' (GAO-03-1023).
Section 322--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement Concerning
Management of Depot Employees
This section would repeal section 2472(b) of title 10,
United States Code, which currently requires the Secretary of
Defense to report annually to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services the number
of Department of Defense employees employed and expected to be
employed during that fiscal year to perform depot
levelmaintenance and repair of materiel. The committee agrees to repeal
this annual report and understands that the Secretary shall readily
provide such data upon request.
Section 323--Public-Private Competition for Work Performed by Civilian
Employees of Department of Defense
This section would amend section 2461(b) of title 10,
United States Code, to ensure the Secretary of Defense formally
compares the cost of civilian employee performance with the
costs of contractor performance before converting a function
performed by 10 or more civilians. This section would also
require the Secretary to conduct a formal comparison before
modifying, reorganizing, dividing, or changing any function
within the Department of Defense. Finally, this section would
authorize the Secretary to waive the requirement of a formal
comparison when there is a written determination that national
security interests are so compelling as to preclude a
comparison. The waiver would be required to be published within
the Federal Register.
Section 324--Public-Private Competition Pilot Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a two-year pilot program under which 10 percent of all
functions that are considered new are competed pursuant to
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 (A-76). In those
instances where the winning party is a small business or a
contractor whose employees are represented by a private labor
union, the Department of Defense shall not receive credit
towards compliance with the 10 percent requirement. This
section would also require the Secretary to conduct A-76
competitions to determine whether work currently performed by a
contractor should be performed by government employees. The
Secretary shall conduct such studies so that the number of
contractor employee studies are approximately 10 percent of the
number of government employees studied. The Secretary does have
authority to waive these requirements when national security
interests are so compelling as to preclude compliance. This
waiver would be required to be published in the Federal
Register. This section would also require the Department of
Defense, Inspector General, to report to Congress on the result
of the pilot program.
Section 325--Sense of Congress on Equitable Legal Standing for Civilian
Employees
This section would express the sense of Congress that
Department of Defense civilian employees should receive legal
standing to challenge a public-private competition before the
General Accounting Office or the United States Court of Federal
Claims.
Section 326--Competitive Sourcing Reporting Requirement
This section would require the Department of Defense,
Inspector General, to submit a report to Congress addressing
whether the Department of Defense employs a sufficient
workforce to conduct public-private competitions and whether
the Secretary of Defense has implemented a tracking system to
asses the cost and quality of service contractors. The system
shall be made available to the public and updated quarterly.
The tracking system shall include the cost to conduct a study
under Office and Management and Budget Circular A-76; the cost
of employee performance before the study began; the cost of the
most efficient organization; the anticipated cost of contractor
performance; the cost for the performance of the function by
the contractor; a description of the quality control process
used to monitor contract performance with an assessment whether
contractor achieved, exceeded, or failed to achieve the quality
control standards.
Subtitle D--Information Technology
Section 331--Preparation of Department of Defense Plan for Transition
to Internet Protocol Version 6
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
prepare a transition plan to evaluate how the Department of
Defense's (DOD) information technology (IT) systems may be
impacted by the Department's decision to transition from the
current protocols to Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6). The
committee is well aware that this decision affects every piece
of network equipment that is used by DOD's Global Information
Grid (GIG). While the committee is not a proponent of any
particular protocol, the committee seeks to ensure that IPv6
will provide, at a minimum, the same capabilities that are
available today. Therefore, the committee has raised concerns
about the possible implications of the Department's decision to
move to this protocol, including quality of service issues and
the use of best commercial practices to adopt this protocol.
This section would also direct the Secretary to use the Naval
Research Lab, in conjunction with the United States Strategic
Command, to conduct and manage the tests required in this
section.
Section 332--Defense Business Enterprise Architecture, System
Accountability, and Conditions for Obligation of Funds for Defense
Business System Modernization
This section would repeal section 1004 of the Bob Stump
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public
Law 107-314), that requires the development and implementation
of a defense business enterprise architecture, and requires
obligations over $1.0 million for defense business system
modernization initiatives to be certified as consistent with
that enterprise architecture. This section would, instead,
establish accountability for defense business systems by
assigning defense domains, or designated Department of Defense
(DOD) officials, the authority and responsibility for their
business systems, including the establishment of domain-
specific investment review processes. In addition, this section
would improve transparency in defense business systems
investments by requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit an
annual budget that identifies such systems, the funds devoted
to them, and the officials responsible for such systems. This
section would also charge the domain owners for implementing
and evolving their portion of the single DOD business
enterprise architecture. The committee is concerned that the
Department continues to invest billions of dollars in systems
that fail to provide integrated business systems, timely and
reliable information, and other important financial and
business information for the daily operations. The committee
believes the explicit assignment of management for the business
enterprise architecture and definitive domain accountability,
authority, and control is necessary to effectively achieve
integrated business operations and systems to support the
warfighter.
Section 333--Establishment of Joint Program Office to Improve
Interoperability of Battlefield Management Command and Control Systems
This section would establish a joint program office to
manage the Department of Defense's myriad of battlefield
management command and control systems to provide a common
operational picture of the battlefield for all users. The
committee understands that the Department has struggled for
many years to develop and field command, control,
communications, computers, and intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems that interoperate effectively
across all of the military services. A primary reason for this
struggle is that the military services and other defense
agencies plan and acquire systems to meet their own operational
requirements, and not necessarily joint warfighting concepts.
The committee notes that the Department recently drafted a
Joint Battle Management Command and Control Roadmap that is
intended to lead to a more integrated, interoperable set of
command and control and battlespace awareness capabilities for
joint force commanders to use in military operations. The
committee understands that initially the United States Joint
Forces Command (JFCOM) was given oversight and directive
authority for the Family of Interoperable Operational Pictures
(FIOP), which will eventually integrate air, ground, maritime,
and possibly space into one common operational picture.
Unfortunately, JFCOM estimates that it will take up to two
years to develop a joint architecture, by which time, several
hundred million dollars will have been spent on the single
integrated air picture program, while the other supporting
systems that the FIOP is intended to integrate will also be in
various stages of development under the funding and direction
of the military services.
Furthermore, while JFCOM has authority to direct the FIOP
development efforts, the actual program implementation will be
done by the military services under separate program offices.
The committee is deeply troubled by the lack of joint
responsibility over program implementation that may jeopardize
the possibility of achieving standardization and integration
among these systems, and is concerned that funding for the
various programs is the responsibility of the military
services.
Subtitle E--Readiness Reporting Requirements
Section 341--Annual Report on Department of Defense Operation and
Financial Support for Military Museums
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
include in the annual budget justification materials a complete
inventory of military museums operated with funds appropriated
to the Department of Defense (DOD) or the military services.
For each museum, this section would require the Secretary to
provide:
(1) A description of the museum facility;
(2) Funds requested to operate, maintain, and repair
the museum facility;
(3) The number of DOD civilian personnel and
uniformed service members employed or assigned to the
museum;
(4) A list of non-museum functions performed at the
facility;
(5) Justification for continued DOD funding; and
(6) Funds received from organizations other than the
Department to operate, maintain, and repair the museum.
The committee recognizes that museums provide and preserve
important records, perspectives, and relics of military
history. Due to the large number of museums supported with
appropriated funds, however, the committee believes it is
important for Congress to have greater visibility over the cost
and mission of these museums. The committee notes that the
Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard operate 122
museums; and the Army has requested $25.0 million to operate
its museums in fiscal year 2005.
Section 342--Report on Department of Defense Programs for
Prepositioning of Material and Equipment
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
evaluate and report to the congressional defense committees by
October 1, 2005, the Department of Defense's strategic
objectives for the military department's preposition programs.
In recent operations, the United States dictated the time of
the engagement and the tempo of operations, which allowed
proper planning and measured decisions on how to deliver combat
equipment, combat support and sustainment equipment. The
committee believes if the timing of a future engagement is not
within the control of U.S. forces, the value of an effective
prepositioned strategy could be the difference in dictating the
initial stages of a conflict.
Presently, a majority of the prepositioned stocks are in
use. The committee does not believe that restocking the
existing preposition configuration will meet the Secretary's
stated goal of deploying to a distant theatre in ten days,
defeating an enemy within thirty days, and being ready for an
additional conflict within another thirty days. The current
strategy also fails to incorporate concepts of joint doctrine.
The Department has a unique opportunity to reassess and
reconfigure these programs in the context of the new deployment
goals.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Section 351--Extension of the Arsenal Support Program Initiative
This section would amend Section 343 of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public
Law 106-398) to authorize the Secretary of the Army to extend
the Arsenal Support Initiative Program through fiscal year
2008. This section would also require the Secretary to report
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2007, the benefits of
the program, the extent to which the program met its goals, and
whether the program should be made permanent.
Section 352--Limitation on Preparation or Implementation of Mid-Range
Financial Improvement Plan
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
obligating operation and maintenance funds to implement the
Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan until the Secretary
provides information to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
and the House Committee on Armed Services an explanation of how
the operation and maintenance funds are to be utilized in
fiscal year 2005 and the estimated cost for this plan in future
fiscal years.
Section 353--Procurement of Follow-On Contracts for the Operation of
Five Champion-Class T-5 Tank Vessels
This section would require the Secretary of Navy to limit
the next competition for the operation and maintenance of the
five champion class T-5 fuel tankers to a United States
corporation, partnership, or association, as defined in section
2 of the Shipping Act, 1916 (42App. U.S.C. 802). The committee
strongly supports the Secretary of the Navy's intent to receive the
best value using negotiated competitions.
Section 354--Sense of Congress on America's National World War I Museum
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
Liberty Memorial Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, is recognized
as ``America's National World War I Museum.''
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Study of High Demand Low Density Military Units and Personnel
Both the active and reserve components are undergoing
various transformation initiatives in order to provide lighter,
more lethal forces to meet the national security challenges of
the 21st century. The global war on terrorism has compelled the
services to begin efforts to divest structure and forces from
the Cold War era and to develop and establish forces that are
more responsive to current requirements. In this new
environment, the armed forces have found certain units and
personnel are experiencing extraordinary levels of deployment
and utilization. These so called high demand-low density units
and personnel include, for example, military police, civil
affairs, intelligence, psychological operations, and linguists.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to determine the
extent of the reliance on these active and reserve component
high demand low density units and personnel to meet new
national security requirements, and to identify the
effectiveness of the efforts by the armed forces to reduce or
eliminate reliance on high-demand-low density units and
specialties. Furthermore, the Comptroller General will assess
whether additional units and resources beyond current levels
are necessary to meet current and future demands. The
Comptroller General should report the findings and
recommendations of the assessment to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 31, 2005.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for active duty personnel of the armed forces as of September
30, 2005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2005 Change from
FY 2004 ------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2005 FY 2004
and floor Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................................ 482,400 482,400 482,400 0 0
Navy........................................ 373,800 365,900 365,900 0 -7,900
USMC........................................ 175,000 175,000 175,000 0 0
Air Force................................... 359,300 359,700 359,700 0 400
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD................................... 1,390,500 1,383,000 1,383,000 0 -7,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the fiscal year 2005 end strengths
authorized by this section for the Army and the Marine Corps,
sections 1531 and 1532 increase Army and Marine Corps end
strengths by 10,000 and 3,000 respectively.
Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength Minimum
Levels
This section would establish new minimum active duty end
strengths for the Navy and the Air Force as of September 30,
2005. These changes in minimum strengths reflect the committee
recommendations shown in section 401.
Section 403--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized To Be on
Active Duty for Operational Support
This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b)
of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of reserve
component personnel who may be on active duty or full-time
national guard duty during fiscal year 2005 to provide
operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count
against the end strengths authorized by sections 401 or 412.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2005
Service committee
recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard..................................... 10,300
Army Reserve............................................ 5,000
Naval Reserve........................................... 6,200
Marine Corps Reserve.................................... 2,500
Air National Guard...................................... 10,100
Air Force Reserve....................................... 3,600
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total......................................... 37,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 404--Accounting and Management of Reserve Component Personnel
Performing Active Duty or Full-Time National Guard Duty for Operational
Support
This section would establish the requirement for an annual
congressional authorization of the maximum number of reserve
component personnel to be on active duty or full-time national
guard duty providing operational support. The committee makes
this recommendation to provide a new, comprehensive approach
for managing and accounting for reserve component members on
active duty in support of operational missions. The section
would eliminate the current 180-day strength accounting metric
that requires all reservists on active duty beyond that limit
to count against active component end strengths. In its place,
the section would authorize reserve component members who are
voluntarily on active duty to serve for up to three years, or a
cumulative three years over a four-year period, before counting
against active end strengths. The section would also exempt
reserve component personnel authorized by this section from
certain officer and enlisted grade limits. The committee
believes that such flexibility will encourage the use of
volunteers both during normal peacetime operations, as well as
during times of national emergency. The section would also
require the Secretary of Defense to evaluate programs whose
reserve component personnel are exempt from counting against
any statutory manpower authorizations and report to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services andthe House Committee on Armed
Services by June 1, 2005, the Secretary's recommendations for including
these personnel within such statutory manpower authorizations.
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for selected reserve personnel, including the end strength for
reserves on active duty in support of the reserves, as of
September 30, 2005:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2005 Change from
FY 2004 ------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2005 FY 2004
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard......................... 350,000 350,000 350,000 0 0
Army Reserve................................ 205,000 205,000 205,000 0 0
Naval Reserve............................... 85,900 83,400 83,400 0 -2,500
Marine Corps Reserve........................ 39,600 39,600 39,600 0 0
Air National Guard.......................... 107,030 106,800 106,800 0 -230
Air Force Reserve........................... 75,800 76,100 76,100 0 300
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total................................... 863,330 860,900 860,900 0 -2,430
Coast Guard Reserve......................... 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of
the Reserves
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves as of
September 30, 2005:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2005 Change from
FY 2004 ------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2005 FY 2004
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard......................... 25,599 26,476 26,476 0 877
Army Reserve................................ 14,374 14,970 14,970 0 596
Naval Reserve............................... 14,384 14,152 14,152 0 -232
Marine Corps Reserve........................ 2,261 2,261 2,261 0 0
Air National Guard.......................... 12,191 12,225 12,225 0 34
Air Force Reserve........................... 1,660 1,900 1,900 0 240
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................. 70,469 71,984 71,984 0 1,515
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee's recommendation would provide for a 2.1
percent growth in the strength of these full-time reservists
above the levels authorized in fiscal year 2004.
Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30,
2005:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2005 Change from
FY 2004 ------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee
(floor) Request recommendation FY 2005 FY 2004
(floor) request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard......................... 24,589 25,076 25,076 0 487
Army Reserve................................ 6,949 7,299 7,299 0 350
Air National Guard.......................... 22,806 22,956 22,956 0 150
Air Force Reserve........................... 9,991 9,954 9,954 0 -37
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................. 64,335 65,285 65,285 0 950
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee's recommendation would provide for a 1.5
percent growth in the strength of military technicians above
the levels authorized in fiscal year 2004.
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2005 Limitation on Number of Non-Dual Status
Technicians
This section would establish the maximum end strengths for
the reserve components of the Army and Air Force for non-dual
status technicians as of September 30, 2005.
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 421--Military Personnel
This section would authorize $1,046.5 million to be
appropriated for military personnel. This authorization of
appropriations reflects both reductions and increases to the
budget request for military personnel that are itemized below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount (in
Military personnel dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
617: Reform Critical Skills Retention Bonuses......... 5,000,000
615: Reform Enlistment and Reenlistment Bonuses....... 15,000,000
616: Revised Foreign Language Proficiency Pay......... 2,000,000
619: Authorize Lateral Skills Training Bonus for 3,000,000
Reserves.............................................
618: Authorize Officer Accession Bonus for Reserves... 5,000,000
605: Reserve Income Replacement Plan.................. 60,000,000
620: Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay Military 9,630,000
Firefighters.........................................
631: Expansion of Travel for Survivors to Attend 2,000,000
Burials..............................................
632: Enhanced Family Member Travel to Visit Wounded... 3,000,000
551: College First Delayed Enlistment Program......... 5,000,000
526: Continue Loan Repayments Following Commissioning. 1,000,000
525: Educational Assistance for Officers Commissioned 1,500,000
from Military Junior Colleges........................
GAO estimate FY 2005 Active Component unexpended funds -230,000,000
GAO Army Guard Underexecution due to Mobilization..... -20,000,000
GAO Naval Reserve Underexecution due to Mobilization.. -15,000,000
Army Rotational Travel................................ -1,500,000
Air Force General Officer Personal Money Allowance.... -9,630,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 422--Armed Forces Retirement Home
This section would authorize $61,195.00 million to be
appropriated for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement
Home during fiscal year 2005.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
OVERVIEW
The committee recommends changes in this title to address
not only matters of long-term military personnel policy reform,
but also present near-term policy and process solutions to
issues highlighted as a result of the global war on terrorism.
For example, that war has required the mobilization of hundreds
of thousands of reserve component members using an inefficient
Cold War-era system that imposed undue stress on reserve
component personnel and their families. The committee's
recommendations would take substantial steps toward reforming
that mobilization process. The committee is also recommending a
series of reforms in the management of general and flag
officers to permit these highly qualified officers increased
opportunity for service in critical positions. To better
recognize the service by military personnel in Afghanistan and
Iraq, the committee would recommend the establishment of
separate service medals. To facilitate recruiting and
participation in the Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps, the
committee recommends several measures to improve access to
college and university campuses.
The committee recommendations also include reforms for both
joint officer management and joint professional military
education. The committee's Report of the Panel on Military
Education of the One Hundredth Congress, dated April 21, 1989,
laid the foundation for joint officer development. That report,
commonly known as the Skelton Report after the panel chairman,
Rep. Ike Skelton, was the product of extensive study, and
provided the analytical and philosophical foundation upon which
to base both joint officer management policies and joint
professional military education requirements. Since that time,
the results of that study have enabled the Department of
Defense to progress from operations in which the effort was to
simply deconflict the services in the execution of their
separate missions to the point today where recent combat
experience demonstrates that the services have generally
achieved integration in the execution of joint operations.
Much of what the Skelton Report identified as requirements
for joint officer management and joint professional military
education clearly remains relevant today. However, the
committee also understands that as the nature of warfare
evolves so that future operations become more complex and joint
at lower levels than before, the framework for developing
persons skilled in joint matters must also evolve. Thus, while
the committee's recommendations contained in this title are
first steps in the construction of that evolving framework,
much more analysis is required before any additional changes
are enacted.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Civilianization or Contracting Out of Military Chaplain Positions
The committee is disturbed to learn that the military
services are considering replacing military chaplains with
civilian or contractor personnel. The committee believes that
the implementation of such conversions would significantly
undermine the ability of the military services to provide not
only for the religious needs of uniformed personnel, but also
for their families at home and overseas. The work of military
chaplains is multifaceted. Regardless of the uniform they wear,
chaplains share a common bond with their fellow soldiers,
sailors, airmen, Marines and coast guardsman in the field.
Regardless of their religion, they are brothers in arms.
Military chaplains provide more than spiritual guidance. They
are counselors and confidants to those who have witnessed first
hand the horrors of war. Beyond this, military chaplains
provide credible support and guidance to the families enduring
the stress of deployments, and they comfort those who mourn the
loss of loved ones. For these reasons, the committee does not
believe that civilian or contract chaplains could adequately or
effectively replace military chaplains. Therefore, the
committee urges each of the secretaries of the military
services to abstain from implementing any recommendations to
civilianize or contract out military chaplain positions.
Curricula for Post-conflict Resolution
The committee recognizes the important work that Department
of Defense educational institutions have done in promoting
inter-agency training for post-conflict operations. The
committee recommends that curricula for joint training of
military and civilian personnel continue to be developed and
that the Department explore the utility of establishing a
center for post-conflict reconstruction operations to pursue
the following mission: (1) train key inter- agency personnel in
assessment, strategy development, planning and coordination for
post- conflict reconstruction; (2) develop and certify a cadre
of post-conflict reconstruction experts who could be called to
participate in future operations at both the headquarters and
field levels; (3) provide pre-deployment training to
interagency personnel tapped for specific operations; (4)
develop a cadre of rapidly deployable training packages for use
in the field; and, (5) conduct after-action reviews of real-
world operations to capture lessons learned, best practices and
tools and designing mechanisms to feed them back into training
and education programs.
Federal Voting Assistance Program
The committee is very concerned that the Department of
Defense (DOD) is not fully committed to securing the right to
vote for the men and women in uniform serving our nation around
the globe. Following the many absentee voting problems
experienced by military members during the national election in
2000, Congress included a provision in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107)
that expanded and improved the policies and procedures
supporting the DOD-administered Federal Voting Assistance
Program (FVAP) and DOD mail systems that carry voting materials
between state and local voting officials and the service
members.
Reports from the United States General Accounting Office
(GAO)(GAO-04-484) and the Inspector General of the Department
of Defense (DOD IG)(D-2004-065, March 31, 2005) clearly
demonstrate that the Department is not allocating the resources
and management attention necessary to make the mail systems and
the FVAP operate effectively. The GAO found that many of the
problems from the Persian Gulf War of 1991 were repeated during
Operation Iraqi Freedom because the United States Central
Command's plan for postal service contained flawed assumptions,
was not adequately resourced, and was not fully implemented.
The DOD IG found that of the voting assistance programs at 10
installations visited, 3 were partially effective and 7 were
ineffective. Additionally, 58 percent of the respondents to a
questionnaire did not know who their unit voting officer was.
The committee believes that immediate command emphasis is
required at all levels to ensure that mail systems are improved
and the FVAP is fully implemented in time to protect the voting
rights of service members during the national election in
November 2004. Accordingly,the Secretary of Defense shall
submit report's to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services on August 1, 2004 and October 1, 2004 on
his actions to ensure that DOD mail systems and the FVAP are operating
effectively in support of absentee voting for service members and his
perspective regarding the status of military voting on that date.
In addition to improving the military postal system for the
purposes of supporting military absentee voters, the committee
sees another, equally important, purpose in supporting the
morale of our deployed troops and their families. Mail destined
for deployed members of the armed forces that is delayed for
long periods of time, or not delivered at all, negatively
affects the morale of our deployed forces and their families at
home. The Department of Defense should improve the military
mail systems so that they comply with the Department's own
wartime standards for 1st class mail delivery.
Joint Advertising and Market Research
The committee believes that the Department of Defense has
an important corporate-level role to play in complementing the
recruiting and advertising programs of the individual services.
In that light, the committee believes that the Department's
joint advertising and market research reinvention effort can
have a direct, positive long-term impact on the ability of the
Department and the military services to recruit quality
personnel. The committee believes that such a capability is
especially critical at a time when the recruiting efforts of
the military services could soon be challenged by a range of
factors. For that reason, the committee recommends an increase
of $10.0 million to the budget request for the Department's
joint advertising and market research effort.
Meeting Department of Defense Requirements for Personnel with Foreign
Language and Regional Expertise
The committee notes that recent operational requirements
with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, as
well as the global war on terrorism, place more emphasis on the
need for foreign language and regional expertise among military
personnel. The committee is concerned that the education and
training provided to officers both before commissioning and
throughout their careers may not adequately prepare military
leaders with the skills needed for these and similar future
operations. The committee is also interested in the degree to
which officers with regional expertise and language ability are
promoted and utilized within the force. The committee directs
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study of these matters,
including current practices for education and training in
language and regional studies, numbers who are so trained,
types of languages and areas studied, and comparative promotion
rates. The study should also provide recommendations for the
enhancement of language and regional studies within the officer
population. The committee directs the Secretary to submit this
report by March 31, 2005 to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.
The committee is also aware of the Department's efforts to
transform its overall capability in foreign language and
regional expertise. However, given the variety of required
languages and extensive number of locations where DOD military
and civilian personnel are operating and may operate, as well
as the importance of these language and regional capabilities
to overall defense strategy, this transformation will require a
robust and sustained effort. The committee therefore directs
the Secretary to establish a Defense Language Office within the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to ensure a strategic focus on meeting present and
future requirements for language and regional expertise among
military personnel and civilian employees of the Department.
This office should establish and oversee policy regarding the
development, management, and utilization of civilian employees
as well as members of the armed forces; monitor the promotion,
accession and retention of individuals with these critical
skills; explore innovative concepts to expand capabilities; and
establish policies to identify, track, and maximize the use to
meet requirements for language and regional expertise.
National Program for Citizen Soldier Support
The committee believes that the increasing reliance on the
National Guard and reserves that has occurred during the global
war on terrorism requires the Secretary of Defense to take
extraordinary measures to ensure that there is an effective
support structure for reserve component personnel, their
families and employers. The committee commends the Secretary
for the broad efforts already underway to provide such support.
The committee believes that the effectiveness of these support
efforts could be enhanced and refined by incorporating the
capabilities of university and community based organizations.
The committee understands that the North Carolina based
National Program for Citizen-Soldier Support is developing a
comprehensive program that could prove useful to the Department
of Defense in extending the reach and effectiveness of existing
military-sponsored support agencies. The committee directs the
Secretary to closely examine the National Program for Citizen-
Soldier Support and others like it to determine how they might
be integrated into the Department's ongoing efforts.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--General and Flag Officer Matters
Section 501--Length of Service for Service Chiefs
This section would authorize the President to extend the
term of an officer serving as the Chief of Staff of the Army,
the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Air
Force, or the Commandant of the Marine Corps for a period of up
to two-years beyond the initial four-year appointment. In time
of war or national emergency, the President would be able to
extend the term of office for such additional periods as the
President determines necessary. However, the section would
limit the total period of an officer's term as a service chief
to eight years under any circumstance. Under current law, the
chief of a military service is appointed for a four-year term
and may only be reappointed during wartime or national
emergency for up to four additional years.
Section 502--Repeal of Requirement that Deputy Chiefs and Assistant
Chiefs of Naval Operations Be Selected from Officers in the Line of the
Navy
This section would require that candidates for selection as
deputy chiefs and assistant chiefs of naval operations be
chosen from the officers of the Navy on active duty. Current
law specifies that candidates for deputy chiefs and assistant
chiefs of naval operations be chosen only from among officers
in the line of the Navy on active duty.
Section 503--Increase in Age Limit for Deferral of Mandatory Retirement
for Up to 10 Senior General and Flag Officers
This section would increase from 64 to 66 the mandatory
retirement age for senior general and flag officers whom the
President had previously retained on active duty beyond the
statutory limits on either time in grade or age. Under current
law, not more than ten deferments of the mandatory retirement
of three- and four-star general and flag officers may be in
effect at any one time.
Section 504--Increased Flexibility for Voluntary Retirement for
Military Officers
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense and
the secretaries of the military departments greater flexibility
in determining the grade in which active duty and reserve
officers may be retired. Specifically, the section would:
(1) Require officers serving in grades above colonel,
or captain in the Navy, to serve a minimum of one year
time-in-grade before being allowed to retire in that
grade;
(2) Replace the requirement for the Secretary of
Defense to notify Congress that officers have performed
satisfactorily in grades above major general, or rear
admiral (upper half) in the Navy, before being allowed
to retire in those grades with an authority for the
secretary of the military department concerned to
approve retirement of officers in those grades with the
concurrence of the Secretary of Defense.
Section 505--Repeal of Requirement that No More than 50 Percent of
Active Duty General and Flag Officers be in Grades Above Brigadier
General and Rear Admiral (Lower Half)
This section would repeal the limitation that no more than
50 percent of general and flag officers in a military service
on active duty can be in grades above one-star, that is above
brigadier general and rear admiral (lower half). There is no
explicit statutory limitation on the numbers of two-star
general and flag officers on active duty, and this section
would not change either the total numbers of general or flag
officers allowed on active duty or the statutory limits on the
numbers of general and flag officers serving on active duty in
three- and four-star grades. Therefore, the effect of the
proposed repeal would be to permit each of the military
services some additional flexibility in managing the
distribution of one- and two-star general and flag officers.
Section 506--Revision to Terms for Assistants to the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff for National Guard and Reserve Matters
The section would authorize the assistants to the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for national guard and reserve
matters to serve an initial term of four years. Under current
law, the initial term is two years.
Section 507--Succession for Position of Chief, National Guard Bureau
This section would establish a chain of succession when
there is a vacancy in the office of the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau, or in the event that the chief is unable to
perform the duties of the office. In such cases, the most
senior ranking officer of the Army National Guard or of the Air
National Guard on duty with the National Guard Bureau would
serve as acting chief.
Section 508--Title of Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau Changed
to Director of the Joint Staff of the National Guard Bureau
This section would change the title of the Vice Chief of
the National Guard Bureau to better reflect the duties of the
position now that the staff of the National Guard Bureau has
been reorganized as a joint organization.
Section 509--Two-Year Extension of Authority to Waive Requirement that
Reserve Chiefs and National Guard Directors Have Significant Joint Duty
Experience
This section would extend for two years, until December 31,
2006, the authority of the Secretary of Defense to waive the
requirement that the chiefs of the reserves and the directors
of the Army and Air National Guard must have significant joint
duty experience to be eligible for appointment.
The requirement for officers to have significant joint duty
experience as a condition of service in these most senior of
reserve component general and flag officer positions was
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). In recognition of the
challenge that reserve component officers face in getting joint
duty experience, the public law provided the Secretary
temporary three-year authority to waive the requirement. That
waiver authority was extended in 2000, with the expectation
that the Department and the military services would make a
concerted effort to develop a system for ensuring reserve
officers obtained the requisite joint experience. The
committee, therefore, was disappointed when the budget request
for fiscal year 2005 sought to make permanent the Secretary's
waiver authority.
The committee believes that a concerted effort must be made
to develop a system to provide significant joint duty
experience to those officers who will be candidates for the
senior military leadership positions of the reserve components.
For that reason, this section would also require that the
Secretary develop a plan to ensure that officers selected after
December 31, 2006, to be the chiefs of the reserves and the
directors of the Army and Air National Guard, have significant
joint duty experience.
Section 510--Repeal of Distribution Requirements for Naval Reserve Flag
Officers
This section would repeal the prescribed distribution of
the 48 flag officers authorized for the Naval Reserve, thereby
permitting greater flexibility for the Department of the Navy
to adapt its reserve flag officer inventory to meet current
requirements. Current law mandates the allocation of these flag
officers among the line, Medical Department Staff Corps,
Chaplain Corps and Judge Advocate General's Corps.
Subtitle B--Other Officer Personnel Policy Matters
Section 511--Transition of the Active-Duty List Officer Force to All
Regular Status
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
commission all new officer accessions as regular officers and
transition all officers on the active-duty list to regular
status.
Section 512--Mandatory Retention on Active duty to Qualify for Retired
Pay
This section would clarify that section 12686 of title 10,
United States Code, does not require that reservists serving on
active duty with over 18 years of reserve service be retained
on active duty for the purpose of qualifying the member for
reserve retirement.
Section 513--Distribution in Grade of Marine Corps Reserve Officers in
an Active Status in Grades Below Brigadier General
This section would correct a technical discrepancy in the
grade table for the Marine Corps Reserve that has
inappropriately limited the number of officers authorized in
each grade below brigadier general.
Section 514--Tuition Assistance for Officers
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to waive for reserve component officers
the two-year active duty service obligation required as a
condition for receipt of tuition assistance while on active
duty. This section would also repeal the limit on the amount of
tuition assistance that the Secretary of the Army was
authorized to pay officers of the selected reserve who are
pursuing a baccalaureate degree. At present, the Secretary is
limited to paying for such officers not more than 75 percent of
the charges of an educational institution.
Subtitle C--Reserve Component Matters
Section 521--Revision to Statutory Purpose of the Reserve Components
This section would clarify that the purpose of the reserve
components is to provide trained units and qualified persons
not just as the result of involuntary mobilizations but
whenever more units and persons are needed than are in the
active components. The revision recommended by this section
more accurately reflects recent and future employment of the
reserve components.
Section 522--Improved Access to Reserve Component Members for Enhanced
Training
This section would authorize units and members of the
reserve components to be involuntarily mobilized for the
purposes of training. Current law prohibits mobilizations for
training, reflecting a Cold War construct that assumed, in the
face of predictable threats, that there would be an extended
period available for training reserve units and individuals
prior to deployment. The global war on terrorism has pointed
out the need to repeal the prohibition in order to increase the
readiness of the reserve component units, shorten time between
mobilization and deployment and provide for a more orderly,
predictable and effective mobilization process that reduces
stress on individuals, families and employers. To that end, the
section would authorize units and individuals to be ordered to
active duty to conduct required training. However, the section
would require that the time spent in such training be counted
against the mobilization time limits that are established in
law.
Section 523--Status Under Disability Retirement System for Reserve
Members Released from Active Duty Due to Inability to Perform within 30
Days of Call to Active Duty
This section would clarify that mobilized reserve members
may be separated when they are identified within 30 days as
being unable to serve the full period for which they were
mobilized due to preexisting medical conditions that were not
aggravated while on active duty. Such member would be
considered as serving under an order to active duty for a
period of 30 days or less.
Section 524--Federal Civil Service Military Leave for Reserve and
National Guard Civilian Technicians
This section would eliminate the restriction on the use of
military leave specified in section 6323 of title 5, United
States Code, during a war or national emergency declared by the
President and would authorize reserve component members who are
federal employees to participate in a leave status in
operations outside the United States.
Section 525--Expanded Educational Assistance Authority for Officers
Commissioned Through ROTC Program at Military Junior College
This section would allow commissioned officers who graduate
from a military junior college to receive additional financial
assistance to complete their baccalaureate degree requirements.
Individuals who participate in this program would be attached
to a Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps unit in order to
ensure that they maintain their military training, bearing and
education as they complete their post-secondary education.
Section 526--Effect of Appointment or Commission as Officer on
Eligibility for Selected Reserve Education Loan Repayment Program for
Enlisted Members
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
continue to repay educational loans for enlisted members in a
reserve component after they are commissioned as officers if
the members continue to serve the period specified in the
original loan repayment agreement.
Section 527--Number of Starbase Academies in a State
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense,
based on criteria he would prescribe, to permit a state to have
more than two Starbase academies.
Section 528--Comptroller General Assessment of Integration of Active
and Reserve Components of the Navy
This section would require the Comptroller General to
review the Navy's implementation plans for the integration of
the service's active and reserve components. The Comptroller
General shall submit a report of the results of that assessment
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and House Committee
on Armed Services by March 31, 2005.
Section 529--Operational Activities Conducted by the National Guard
Under Authority of Title 32
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
provide funds to the governor of a state to employ national
guard units and personnel to conduct operational activities
that theSecretary determines to be in the national interest.
This section would also establish a process by which the governor of a
state may request funding from the Secretary for the operational
activities of that state's national guard. The committee makes these
recommendations in order to provide the Secretary with clear authority
to more effectively incorporate national guard units and personnel into
the planning and implementation of homeland security and other
operational missions.
Section 530--Army Program for Assignment of Active Component Advisers
to Units of the Selected Reserve
This section would reduce from 5,000 to 3,500 the minimum
number of Army active component advisers that are required to
be assigned to support the training and readiness of selected
reserve units of the Army. The committee understands that the
Chief of Staff of the Army requested this reduction in order to
provide active component officers and non- commissioned
officers as cadre for the new brigade units of action that the
Army is creating. The committee supports that initiative.
However, the committee is concerned that such a reduction of
active component support could have both short- and long-term
negative effects on the training and readiness of combat and
key support elements of the Army reserve components. The
committee is also concerned that the Army has neither fully
assessed those effects, nor developed a plan to address them.
For that reason, this section would prohibit the Secretary of
the Army from making any reductions in the numbers of active
component advisors until the Secretary reports to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services, by March 31, 2005, on the impact of the reduction and
his plan to remediate any negative impact on training and
readiness.
Subtitle D--Joint Officer Management
Section 531--Strategic Plan to Link Joint Officer Development to
Overall Missions and Goals of Department Of Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, with
the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to
develop a strategic plan linking future requirements for
military personnel trained and educated in joint matters to the
resources required to develop those persons, in terms of
manpower, formal education and practical experience and other
requirements. Additionally, the strategic plan would identify
the method or methods the Secretary will use to fulfill those
requirements.
Over the past several years, the committee has received
multiple proposals from the Department of Defense to change
significant aspects of joint officer management and joint
military professional education enacted as a result of the
Report of the Panel on Military
Education from the One Hundredth Congress. The committee
has consistently rejected these proposals because they were not
offered in a coherent, comprehensive context--a context that
presented the Department's overall vision for joint management
and education. The strategic plan required by this section
would provide the framework within which to consider what, if
any, future changes to joint officer management and joint
professional military education, are required.
The strategic plan would consist of two phases. Phase I
would focus on what has been traditionally referred to as
``joint officers.'' This section would require the Secretary to
submit phase I of the strategic plan to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
January 1, 2006. However, the committee believes that the
requirement for persons trained and educated in joint matters
is not confined to just the active component officer ranks.
Therefore, phase II would address the roles that reserve
component officers, non-commissioned officers, and civilians
play in future joint matters, identify the resources required
to develop them, and clarify the methods used by the Department
as they integrate and manage persons trained and educated in
joint matters. The section would require the Secretary to
submit a report of his proposal for phase II to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services by January 15, 2007.
Section 532--Joint Requirements for Promotion to Flag or General
Officer Grade
This section would extend from September 30, 2007, to
September 30, 2008, the date after which an officer must be
selected for the joint specialty before promotion to the grade
of brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half). The
committee is aware of the difficulties some services may have
in meeting this requirement but believes with close management
each service will be able to comply with the extended
implementation date. Furthermore, the committee believes that
secretaries of the military departments must be more proactive
in properly managing officers early in their careers to ensure
that they receive the opportunities for joint professional
military education at points that align them properly for
consideration for promotion, without the use of waivers, to
grades that have a joint education or service requirement.
This section would also eliminate the requirement that an
officer serve in a joint assignment at least 180 days prior to
the convening of a promotion board for appointment to the grade
of brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half).
Section 533--Clarification of Tours of Duty Qualifying as a Joint Duty
Assignment
This section would modify the definition regarding the term
``tour of duty'' to allow officers to continue accumulating
joint credit if they serve consecutive joint duty assignments,
even if those assignments are not within the same organization.
Section 534--Reserve Joint Special Officer Qualifications
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
award the joint specialty officer designation to reserve
officers who have met the prescribed requirements for such
designation. The section would also require that reserve
officers be included in Department of Defense management
policies, procedures and practices for joint specialty
officers.
This section would exclude reserve officers who have or
have been nominated for the joint specialty from being counted
for against the joint officer promotion policy objectives.
Subtitle E--Professional Military Education
Section 541--Improvement to Professional Military Education in the
Department of Defense
This section would establish a chapter in title 10, United
States Code, that combines new and existing sections of law
related to professional military education. This new title
containseight sections, sections 2151 through 2158. Section
2151 would define the terms ``joint professional military education,''
``intermediate level service schools,'' and ``senior level service
schools''. Section 2152, 2153 and 2154 would modify slightly and codify
the Statement of Congressional Policy related to professional military
education contained in section 1123 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (P.L. 101-189; 103
Stat. 1556). The committee believes these provisions have a permanence
and continuing importance that warrant codification. Section 2155 would
require that the secretaries of the military departments use a written
examination as a portion of the evaluation criteria in selecting
officers for full-time attendance at intermediate level service
colleges. This section would also provide that an officer selected by
his service to attend an intermediate level service college would be
eligible for attendance at all intermediate level service colleges. It
is not the committee's intent to standardize school selection criteria
across the services but to encourage the introduction of intellectual
rigor in that selection process. Selection criteria based solely on a
junior officer's record of duty performance at the tactical level in a
single service environment or simply as a random result of the service
assignment process is not a sufficient basis to identify those officers
who have the best potential to grasp the complex intellectual concepts
of joint matters and to ultimately excel in a joint operational
environment. Additionally, the committee believes that one of the
fundamental pillars of joint professional military education is an
officer's personal continuing education program when not assigned to a
formal school environment. The committee believes that a written
entrance examination requirement for matriculation at the intermediate
level service schools would provide a focus for such a continuing
education program so that officers will prepare themselves for further
formal education, well in advance of the actual school selection
process. Section 2156 would require that after September 30, 2009, an
officer must have completed joint professional military education phase
I before attending phase II. This section would also prescribe phase II
curriculum. Additionally, it would prescribe student and faculty ratios
when phase II is taught at a senior level service school. It is the
committee's intent to preserve the unique character of each of the
senior level service schools while providing a mix of services
represented in the student bodies and faculty that enables the cross-
service acculturation that is such a key component of joint officer
education. The committee understands that current Department of Defense
policy sets the ratios of military department representation in the
student bodies and faculty at the Joint Forces Staff College and the
Colleges of the National Defense University at approximately 30 percent
for each military department. The committee believes this ratio is
appropriate at those institutions and should not change. Section 2157
would require that the length of the principal course of instruction at
each intermediate and senior level service school be not less than 10
months, and provide the Secretary of Defense with a waiver for that
requirement. The section would also require that the length of the
principal course of instruction at the Joint Force Staff College, which
is now required to be 12 weeks, can not be less than 10 weeks. Section
2158 would require that the Secretary include in his annual report to
Congress the number of officers who have received joint professional
military education phase II, but who were not selected for promotion.
This section would also require the Secretary to report the number of
officer students and faculty assigned from each service to a joint
professional military educational institution. Finally, this would make
conforming adjustments in the existing law.
Section 542--Ribbons to Recognize Completion of Joint Professional
Military Education
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
award a military decoration to persons who have successfully
completed joint professional military education phase I and to
subsequently award a device to affix to that ribbon when a
person has successfully completed joint professional military
education phase II. These awards would be retroactive for any
person who has completed either phase I or phase II since the
sequenced approach to joint professional military education was
enacted in 1989.
The committee considers joint professional military
education to be a vital contributing aspect to the excellence
the Department of Defense has historically demonstrated. This
education becomes even more important as the nature of modern
warfare becomes more complex. The committee believes that an
officer becomes fully competent in joint matters when joint
professional military education is appropriately combined with
practical joint operational experience. Officers who complete
certain routine operational assignments are awarded service
ribbons to signify successful completion of that assignment.
With the establishment of this decoration, the status of
completion of joint professional military education would be
elevated to a level on par with those operational assignments.
Section 543--Increase in Number of Private-Sector Civilians Who May Be
Enrolled for Instruction at National Defense University
This section would increase the maximum number of eligible
private sector employees who work in organizations relevant to
national security to receive instruction at the National
Defense University from 10 to 20.
Section 544--Requirement for Completion of Phase I Joint Professional
Military Education before Promotion to Colonel or Navy Captain
This section would require, with certain exceptions, that
after September 30, 2007, officers on the active duty list
complete joint professional military education phase I or phase
II prior to being appointed to the grade of colonel or Navy
captain.
Subtitle F--Other Education and Training Matters
Section 551--College First Delayed Enlistment Program
This section would permanently authorize the College First
demonstration project originally authorized for the Army in
section 573 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) and would extend the
authority to implement the program to all the secretaries of
the military departments. Under the College First program,
entry on active duty for new recruits would be delayed for up
to 30 months to allow the recruits the opportunity to pursue
higher education, vocational, or technical training courses.
During the delayed entry period, the recruits would be paid a
subsistence allowance and the secretaries would have the option
to pay an additional stipend that may not exceed $225.
Section 552--Standardization of Authority to Confer Degrees on
Graduates of Community College of the Air Force with Authority for
Other Schools of Air University
This section would shift the authority for conferring
associate degrees on graduates of the Community College of the
Air Force from the commander of the Air Education and
TrainingCommand to the commander of Air University. Such a shift would
ensure that only the commander of Air University is responsible for
conferring all degrees, thus addressing a concern that arose during the
accreditation of Air University programs.
Section 553--Change in Titles of Heads of the Naval Postgraduate School
This section would change the title of the head of the
Naval Postgraduate School from Superintendent of the Naval
Postgraduate School to President of the Naval Postgraduate
School. The section would also establish a new civilian
position of Provost and Academic Dean, and revise the
procedures to fill the position.
Section 554--Increase from Two Years to Three Years in Period for which
Educational Leave of Absence May Be Authorized
This section would expand the authority for service members
to take educational leave from two years to three years.
Section 555--Correction to Disparate Treatment of Disabilities
Sustained During Accession Training
This section would provide the capability to effectively
respond to injury and illness sustained during accession
training by authorizing military academy cadets and midshipmen
to be disability retired and Senior Reserve Officer Training
Corps cadets and midshipmen to receive medical and dental care
appropriate for the treatment of the injury, illness, or
disease incurred until the disability cannot be materially
improved.
Section 556--Prayer at Military Service Academy Activities
This section would authorize the superintendent of a
service academy to establish a policy with respect to the
offering of a voluntary, nondenominational prayer at an
authorized activity of the academy.
Section 557--Revision to Conditions on Service of Officers as Service
Academy Superintendents
This section would repeal the requirement that the
superintendents of the military service academies retire upon
completion of their assignments. The committee makes this
recommendation to permit the secretaries of the military
departments flexibility with regard to future utilization of
talented senior officers. However, the committee is concerned
that tenure of officers assigned as superintendents be of
sufficient length to permit those officers to make significant
contributions in the oversight and management of these premier
educational institutions. Therefore, this section would require
that an officer serve at least a three-year tour as
superintendent, and that if the officer is reassigned before
that period, then the secretary of the military department
concerned would be required to notify the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services of the
reasons for the curtailed assignment.
Section 558--Codification of Prohibition on Imposition of Certain
Charges and Fees at Service Academies
This section would add to title 10 of the United States
Code, a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337). That provision
prohibited the imposition of charges for tuition, room or board
at the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval
Academy, the United States Air Force Academy, the United States
Coast Guard Academy, and the United States Merchant Marine
Academy.
Section 559--Qualifications of the Dean of the Faculty of United States
Air Force Academy
This section would require that a person selected to be the
dean of faculty at the Air Force Academy, who is not an officer
on active duty, must be either a retired or former officer of
the armed forces. Furthermore, the section would prohibit the
appointment or assignment of a person to be the dean of faculty
unless that person held the highest academic degree in that
person's academic field.
Subtitle G--Medals and Decorations and Special Promotions and
Appointments
Section 561--Separate Military Campaign Medals to Recognize Service in
Operation Enduring Freedom and Service in Operation Iraqi Freedom
This section would require the President to establish
separate campaign medals to recognize the service of members
during Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Section 562--Eligibility of All Uniformed Services Personnel for
National Defense Service Medal
This section would require the President to authorize the
award of the National Defense Service Medal to members of the
uniformed services.
Section 563--Authority to Appoint Brigadier General Charles E. Yeager,
United States Air Force (retired), to the Grade of Major General on the
Retired List
This section would authorize the President to appoint, by
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, Brigadier
General Charles E. Yeager to the grade of major general on the
retired list of the Air Force.
Section 564--Posthumous Commission of William Mitchell in the Grade of
Major General in the Army
This section would authorize the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate, to issue a posthumous
commission as major general, United States Army, in the name of
the late William Mitchell, formerly a colonel, United States
Army, who resigned his commission on February 1, 1925.
Subtitle H--Military Justice Matters
Section 571--Review on How Sexual Offenses Are Covered by Uniformed
Code of Military Justice
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a proposal for changes regarding sexual offenses in the
Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the rationale for
the changes to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2005. Recent
congressional and Department of Defense focus on the problem of
sexual assault in the military services suggest that it is
necessary to examine how sexual offenses are treated in the
UCMJ, primarily Article 120. Congress strongly encourages the
Department to closely align the statutory language of sexual
assault law under the UCMJ with federal law under sections 2241
through 2247 of title 18, United States Code.
Section 572--Service Time Not Lost When Confined in Connection with
Trial if Confinement Excused as Unavoidable
This section would require the military departments to
waive lost time when a service member is acquitted or released
without trial, or has his conviction set-aside on legal grounds
(as distinguished from clemency) or reversed based upon appeal.
Existing law does not give the military departments any
discretion to consider a service member's confinement if the
member is acquitted or if there is another resolution of the
case favorable to the member qualifying for service credit.
Existing law requires service members to make up time lost for
any period of confinement by civilian or military authorities.
Section 573--Clarification of Authority of Military Legal Assistance
Counsel to Provide Military Legal Assistance without Regard to
Licensing Requirements
This section would clarify section 1044 of title 10, United
States Code, so that licensed Department of Defense military
legal assistance officers would have the authority to practice
law in connection with their official duties independent of
state regulations for those states where they are unlicensed.
Subtitle I--Administrative and Management Matters
Section 581--Three-Year Extension of Limitation on Reductions of
Personnel of Agencies Responsible for Review and Correction of Military
Records
This section would extend through September 30, 2008, the
prohibition precluding the secretaries of the military
departments from reducing the number of military and civilian
personnel assigned to duty within the boards until 90 days
after the secretary of the military department concerned
submits a report that describes the proposed reduction,
provides the rationale for the reduction, and specifies the
number of personnel that will be assigned to the board after
the reduction is complete.
Section 582--Staffing and Funding for Defense Prisoner of War/Missing
Personnel Office
This section would establish specific permanent minimum
levels of military and civil personnel assigned to the Defense
Prisoner of War Missing Personnel Office (DPMO). It would also
require, should the actual assigned strength drop below the
minimum levels, that the Secretary of Defense report publicly
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services his plan to restore the manning
levels to at least the required minimums. The committee
believes such action is necessary because the DPMO, which
performs a critical range of missions for the nation and the
missing personnel of past and future wars, has not had the full
support of the Department of Defense with regard to the
adequacy of DPMO manning or funding. For example, the September
2001 committee report on H.R. 2586 (H. Rept. 107-194), noting
that DPMO manning had been reduced by 40 percent since its
creation, directed the Secretary to increase DPMO resources in
the fiscal year 2003 budget request. When the Secretary did not
heed that direction and the committee learned that the
Department was considering a further personnel reduction of 15
percent, committee action in the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314) led
to the enactment of a prohibition any reduction of DPMO funding
and personnel below the levels requested in the 2003 budget.
Notwithstanding this statutory prohibition, the department's
fiscal year 2005 budget request for DPMO proposed a 59 percent
reduction in military spaces (from 46 to 19) and the repeal of
the minimum funding requirement. The committee urges the
Secretary to end any further efforts to reduce manning and
resources in DPMO and to commit the department to ensuring that
the DPMO is fully able to carry out the entire range of
missions assigned to it.
Section 583--Permanent ID Cards for Retiree Dependents Age 70 and Older
This section would require the service secretaries
concerned to issue permanent identification cards to dependents
of military retirees and survivors of military retirees
eligible for benefits for periods after the dependent or
survivor attains age 70.
Section 584--Authority to Provide Civilian Clothing to Members
Traveling in Connection with Medical Evacuation
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to furnish members who have been medically
evacuated civilian clothing at a cost not exceed $250 or to
reimburse the member for the purchase of civilian clothing in
an amount not to exceed $250.
Section 585--Authority to Accept Donation of Frequent Flyer Miles,
Credits, and Tickets to Facilitate Rest and Recuperation Travel of
Deployed Members of the Armed Forces and Their Families
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
accept the donation of frequent flyer miles, credits, and
tickets for the purpose of facilitating the travel of members
of the armed forces who are deployed away from their permanent
duty station and are granted, during such deployment, rest and
recuperation leave and certain other forms of leave and the
travel of family members to be reunited with such a member.
Section 586--Limitation on Amendment or Cancellation of Department of
Defense Directive Relating to Reasonable Access to Military
Installations for Certain Personal Commercial Solicitation
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
canceling or amending Department of Defense (DOD) directive
1344.7, Personal Commercial Solicitation on DOD Installations,
for a period of one year after the United States General
Accounting Office reports to Congress on the findings of an
ongoing review of the financial allotment system and the
treatment of insurance agents by military finance offices and
local managers and commanders on DOD installations.
Section 587--Annual Identification of Reasons for Discharges from the
Armed Services During Preceding Fiscal Years
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
report annually to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services detailed information
regarding of the numbers of persons discharged from each of the
military services in the preceding fiscal year. Information
required to be included in the report would include the numbers
and types of discharges, as well as the identification of the
occupational specialties and reenlistment eligibility of
discharged service members.
Section 588--Authority for Federal Recognition of National Guard
Commissioned Officers Appointed from Former Coast Guard Personnel
This section would make current and former officers and
enlisted members of the Coast Guard, as well graduates of the
United States Coast Guard Academy, eligible for federal
recognition after becoming commissioned officers of the
national guard.
Section 589--Study of Blended Wing Concept for the Air Force
This section would required the Secretary of the Air Force
to submit a report on matters related to that service's current
implementation of and future plans for blended wings to the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by March 1, 2005. Blended wings are operational
units whose membership is comprised of personnel from more than
one component--active, national guard, or reserve. The report
would also require the Secretary to provide the criteria used
to determine what units become blended units.
Section 590--Continuation of Impact Aid Assistance on Behalf of
Dependents of Certain Members Despite Change in Status of Member
This section would temporarily adjust the process for
computing the amount of funding provided by Department of
Education to certain local educational agencies heavily
impacted by dependents of military personnel. The adjustment,
limited to school year 2004-2005, would require that certain
children continue be counted as a child enrolled in school when
computing the average daily attendance, which is a key
component of the amount of aid the school might receive. Such
children include those who attend the school but who no longer
live on a military base because both parents are deployed, or
are children who temporarily reside in military base housing
following the death on active duty of a military parent.
Subtitle J--Other Matters
Section 591--Employment Preferences for Spouses of Certain Department
of Defense Civilian Employees Subject to Relocation Agreements
This section would expand the employment preference for
spouses of Department of Defense (DOD) civilian employees who
have been assigned under a mandatory mobility agreement or
similar mandatory mobility program. The employment preference
would include DOD appropriated and nonappropriated fund
civilian positions. This authority would place spouses of
civilian employees in an equivalent position to spouses of
military members who already receive employment preferences.
Section 592--Repeal of Requirement to Conduct Electronic Voting
Demonstration Project for the Federal Election to be Held in November
2004
This section would repeal the requirement in section 1604
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
(Public Law 107-107) for the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
demonstration project to permit absentee uniformed service
voters to cast their ballots through an electronic voting
system. The committee regrets that the Deputy Secretary of
Defense believed he had no option but to terminate the
electronic voting demonstration project, but the committee
understands that the decision was necessary to avoid any risk
that the demonstration project would threaten the integrity of
the election process.
Section 593--Examination of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces by the
Defense Task Force Established to Examine Sexual Harassment and
Violence at the Military Service Academies
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
expand the mission of the Task Force on Sexual Harassment and
Violence at the Military Service Academies that was established
in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004
(Public Law 108-136). Under the name of the Defense Task Force
on Sexual Assault in the Military Services, the task force
would examine matters related to sexual assault in the
military. This section would require that the task force report
findings and recommendations to the Secretary of Defense, and
the secretaries of the military departments within 12 months of
the initial meeting of the task force. Within 90 days of
receiving the task force report, the Secretary of Defense would
be required to provide the report, together with his evaluation
of the report, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services. At the same time, the
Secretary of Defense would also be required to provide to those
committees an assessment of the effectiveness of the corrective
actions being taken by the Department of Defense and military
services as a result of various investigations and reviews into
matters involving sexual assault.
Section 594--Renewal of Pilot Program for Treating GED and Home School
Diploma Recipients as High School Graduates for Determinations of
Eligibility for Enlistment
This section would reestablish the pilot program originally
authorized by section 571 of the Strom Thurmond National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
261). The program would permit participants in a National Guard
Youth Challenge Program who receive a general education
development certificate and those who complete their highschool
requirements through a home schooling program to enlist in the armed
forces as if they had received a high school diploma.
Section 595--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that Benefit
Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense
Civilian Employees
This section would provide $50.0 million for assistance to
local educational agencies. The committee makes this
recommendation in connection with it continuing strong support
of the need to help local school districts with significant
concentrations of military students.
Section 596--Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps and Recruiter Access
at Institutions of Higher Education
This section would require that military recruiters be
given access to campuses and students at institutions of higher
education that is at least equal in quality and scope to the
access provided to any other employer. The section would also
require the Secretary of Defense to obtain an annual
verification from colleges and universities who already support
the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program that they
will continue to do so in the upcoming academic year. The
section would also add two additional defense-related funding
sources, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National
Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of Energy,
and would restore the funds of the Department of Transportation
to the list of covered funds that potentially could be
terminated if an institution is determined to prevent recruiter
access or maintains anti-ROTC policies.
Section 597--Reports on Transformation Milestones
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide a number of reports to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on different
aspects of transformational efforts underway in the Department.
One report would provide information on the efforts to convert
military to civilian positions, and a series of annual reports
in fiscal years 2005 through 2007 would provide information on
the conversion of military positions to other higher priority
military positions. The section would also require the
Secretary of Defense to examine the feasibility of
implementing: (1) a system to embed within the military on a
temporary basis persons with civilian skills that are of high
value to the military, and (2) a personnel system that expands
the capability of the armed forces to rapidly access, from
other than the reserve components, civilian volunteers with
skills needed by the armed forces. Finally, the section would
also require the Secretary of the Army to report annually on
the status of efforts to transform the Army from a division-
oriented system to a brigade oriented one.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATIONS AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
OVERVIEW
The committee continues to support the strong and flexible
compensation and benefit programs needed to recruit and retain
a quality force in a wartime environment. Accordingly, the
committee recommends authorization of an enhanced across-the-
board pay raise of 3.5 percent, restructured compensation
programs for reserve forces to ensure equity with active duty
members, and continued emphasis on pay and allowances for the
warfighters.
The committee remains committed to protecting military
exchange and commissary benefits. Accordingly, the committee
would include a series of provisions to define and expand the
commissary benefit and protect military communities from
unnecessary store closures.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Combat-Related Special Compensation
The committee continues to receive complaints from combat-
disabled retirees and the organizations representing them that
the processing time for Combat-Related Special Compensation
applications is excessive. The committee is aware that the
expanded criteria enacted in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) are now
generating thousands of additional applicants that will
increase demands on the processing systems.
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
examine the processing systems used by the military departments
and consider methods for expediting the time required to review
applications. The committee suggests that the Secretary
consider consolidating the organizations currently evaluating
applications into a more efficient central processing
organization with increased personnel and fiscal resources.
Commissary Funding After Closure of a Store
The committee remains committed to preserving the
commissary benefit for military members and their families and
improving services whenever possible. Accordingly, the
committee urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure that funding
made available as a result of the closure of a commissary,
whether closed as a result of a base realignment or closure
action or other cause, be reallocated to the Defense Commissary
Agency to support improved commissary operations at other
locations.
Consolidation of the Military Exchanges
The committee remains concerned that the ongoing effort to
evaluate the utility of consolidating the military exchanges is
ill-advised and, if not managed carefully, will cause an
erosion of the exchange benefit. The committee considers the
military exchanges an important quality of life benefit that is
pivotal to the welfare of military communities around the
world. The committee understands that the cost of consolidation
will likely exceed $300.0 million and that prior consolidation
studies have concluded that such costs present too great a risk
to the dividend paid by the exchanges to morale, welfare and
recreation programs.
Accordingly, the committee insists that any proposal to
consolidate military exchanges include a strong business case
that resolves all concerns about the fiscal implications of
consolidation. The committee intends to reject any proposal
that does not include a strong business case.
The committee is also concerned about reports that the
perspectives of all the stakeholders are not being fully
considered during the evaluation process. The committee
wouldview the failure of the Unified Exchange Task Force to consider
the views and concerns of all participants as a major flaw that will
taint any proposal.
Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida, Combined Commissary and Exchange
Store
The committee is concerned that the Secretary of Defense
continues to consider the closure of the combined commissary
and exchange store at Homestead Air Reserve Base (ARB),
Florida. The committee believes that closing the store would be
a significant loss to the service members, retirees, and their
families that reside in the Homestead ARB military community
and throughout southern Florida. The committee is aware that
there are force structure changes being considered for
Homestead ARB that would significantly change the patron
population that would use the store. The committee strongly
encourages the Secretary to delay the decision to close the
store until such time as any potential increase in the military
population at Homestead ARB can be confirmed and measured.
Assuming that current force projections are fulfilled, the
committee also recommends that the Secretary consider opening a
full service commissary at Homestead ARB as soon as the active
duty population at the base increases beyond the minimum
standard required under Department of Defense policy.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2005
This section would increase basic pay for members of the
armed forces by 3.5 percent.
This raise would continue to fulfill Congress' commitment
to enhanced pay raises for the armed forces and would reduce
the pay gap between military and private sector pay increases
from 5.5 percent to 5.1 percent.
Section 602--Authority to Provide Family Separation Basic Allowance for
Housing
The section would authorize the service secretary concerned
the discretion to decline to pay family separation housing
allowances when the member's circumstances do not justify such
payments.
Section 603--Geographic Basis for Basic Allowance for Housing during
Short Changes of Station for Professional Military Education or
Training
This section would authorize service members who attend
professional military education or training lasting 12 months
or less to elect to leave their families at their previous duty
station and receive basic allowance for housing based on the
area where their dependents reside.
Section 604---Immediate Lump-Sum Reimbursement for Unusual Nonrecurring
Expenses Incurred by Members Serving Outside Continental United States
This section would authorize the service secretary
concerned to pay service members serving outside the
continental United States for certain unusual nonrecurring
expenses.
Section 605--Income Replacement Payments for Reserves Experiencing
Extended and Frequent Mobilization for Active Duty Service
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to pay
involuntarily mobilized reserve members on a monthly basis the
amount necessary to replace the income differential between
their regular military compensation (RMC) plus any special or
incentive pays and allowances paid to the member on a monthly
basis and the average monthly income received by the member
during the twelve months preceding the month during which the
member was mobilized. This section would define the income
differential as the amount by which the member's average
monthly income prior to mobilization exceeds the member's RMC
plus any special or incentive pays and allowances paid to the
member on a monthly basis. Reserve members with private sector
income that exceeds their active duty income would be eligible
for the income replacement payment for any full month following
the date that the member completes 12 continuous months of
service on active duty or 18 months on active duty during the
previous 60 months, or for any month during a mobilization that
occurs within 6 months of the member's last active duty tour.
Payments would be limited to a minimum of $50 each month and a
maximum of $3,000 each month.
Section 606--Authority for Certain Members Deployed in Combat Zones to
Receive Limited Advances on Their Future Base Pay
This section would authorize the secretary concerned to pay
service members assigned to locations where they would receive
imminent danger pay for 12 or more months up to 3 months of
basic pay in advance upon the request of the member.
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays
Section 611--One-Year Extension of Bonus and Special Pay Authorities
This section would extend the authority for the following
bonus and special pay authorities to December 31, 2005:
(1) Nurse officer candidate accession program;
(2) Aviation officer retention bonus;
(3) Accession bonus for registered nurses;
(4) Incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists;
(5) Accession bonus for dental officers;
(6) Accession bonus for pharmacy officers;
(7) Reenlistment bonus for active and reserve
members;
(8) Enlistment bonus for active and reserve members;
(9) Special pay for nuclear-qualified officers
extending the period of active service;
(10) Nuclear career accession bonus;
(11) Nuclear career annual incentive bonus;
(12) Retention bonus for members with critical skills
or other criteria; and
(13) Accession or affiliation bonus for new officers
in critical skills.
The provision would also extend the authority for repayment
of educational loans for certain health professionals who serve
in the selected reserve until January 1, 2006.
Section 612--Reduction in Required Service Commitment to Receive
Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses
This section would reduce the service commitment required
for the nurse accession bonus from four to three years of
service.
Section 613--Increase in Maximum Monthly Rate Authorized for Hardship
Duty Pay
This section would increase the maximum amount of hardship
duty pay payable from $300 to $750 per month. The committee
believes this increase provides the Secretary of Defense needed
flexibility to ensure that service members receive appropriate
compensation regardless of where they are required to serve
during the global war on terrorism.
Section 614--Termination of Assignment Incentive Pay for Members Placed
on Terminal Leave
This section would require termination of assignment
incentive pay when the member is placed on terminal leave and
will not be returning to the assignment location.
Section 615--Consolidation of Reenlistment and Enlistment Bonus
Authorities for Regular and Reserve Components
This section would allow reserve component members to be
paid enlistment and reenlistment bonuses using the same
authority used to pay active duty members. The provision would
also extend eligibility for the reenlistment bonus through 17
years of service and grant the flexibility to use the
reenlistment bonus during war and national emergency to address
unit specific retention problems without regard to critical
skill eligibility requirements. The committee intends that this
authority be used to pay a bonus to former members of the armed
forces to reenlist for service in a reserve component.
Section 616--Revision of Authority to Provide Foreign Language
Proficiency Pay
This section would authorize the service secretary
concerned to pay an annual bonus of up to $12,000 to members of
the uniformed services who maintain proficiency in a foreign
language.
Section 617--Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for Critical
Skills Retention Bonus and Expansion of Authority to Provide Bonus
This section would allow reserve component members to be
paid retention bonuses using the same authority used to pay
active duty members. The provision would also clarify that
enlisted personnel on indefinite enlistments are eligible to
receive bonuses and that bonuses may be paid based on criteria
other than service in a critical skill as determined by the
Secretary of Defense. The committee intends that this authority
be used to pay bonuses, if required, to service members who
agree to serve in an active status in any category of the ready
reserve, affiliate with reserve component units, accept
assignments to high priority reserve units, and continue to
serve in critically short wartime health specialties.
Section 618--Eligibility of New Reserve Component Officers for
Accession or Affiliation Bonus for Officers in Critical Skills
This section would allow reserve component officers to be
paid an accession or affiliation bonus using the same authority
used to pay active duty officers.
Section 619-Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for Incentive
Bonus for Conversion to Military Occupational Specialty to Ease
Personnel Shortage
This section would allow reserve component members to be
paid bonuses for converting to critical occupational
specialties using the same authority used to pay active duty
members.
Section 620--Availability of Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay for Military
Firefighters
This section would establish a new hazardous duty incentive
pay of $150 per month for members of the uniformed services who
regularly perform duty as a member of a firefighting crew.
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances
Section 631--Expansion of Travel and Transportation Allowances to
Assist Survivors of a Deceased Member to Attend Burial Ceremony of the
Member
This section would clarify that family members are
authorized to travel at government expense to the burial site
of a member who dies while on active duty or inactive duty and
that the member's parents are always eligible to travel at
government expense to attend the burial ceremony.
Section 632--Transportation of Family Members Incident to the Serious
Illness or Injury of Members of the Uniformed Services
This section would expand the number and categories of
family members and other people that would be entitled to
transportation at government expense and would authorize such
persons to receive a per diem or be reimbursed for travel
expenses.
Section 633--Reimbursement of Members for Certain Lodging Costs
Incurred in Connection with Student Dependent Travel
This section would authorize the service secretary
concerned to reimburse a service member for lodging costs
incurred by a dependent child traveling between the child's
school and the member's overseas duty station when the lodging
expenses are incurred for reasons beyond the control of the
dependent child.
Subtitle D--Survivors Benefits
Section 641--Computation of Benefits Under Survivor Benefit Plan for
Surviving Spouses Over Age 62
This section would eliminate the social security offset
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and increase the
annuities paid to survivors of military retirees who are 62 or
older from 35 percent of retired pay to the percentages
indicated for the following fiscal years:
(1) For months after September 2005 and before April
2006, 40 percent;
(2) For months after March 2006 and before April
2007, 45 percent;
(3) For months after March 2007 and before April
2008, 50 percent; and
(4) For months after March 2008, 55 percent.
This section would also make corresponding adjustments to
the SBP supplemental annuity program and would require SBP
annuities to be recalculated during October 2005, April 2006,
April 2007, and April 2008 to ensure that beneficiaries receive
the appropriate amount of annuity.
Section 642--Open Enrollment Period for Survivor Benefit Plan
Commencing October 1, 2005
This section would authorize an open season for retired
members to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) or
increase the level of their participation if they were
previously participating below the maximum allowed level. The
open season would begin October 1, 2005 and continue for two
years.
Section 643--Source of Funds for Survivor Benefit Plan Annuities for
Department of Defense Beneficiaries Over Age 62
This section would clarify that the payments into the
Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund in support of
the changes made in section 642 would be calculated by the
Secretary of Defense and paid by the Secretary of the Treasury.
Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
Benefits
Section 651--Consolidation and Reorganization of Legislative Provisions
Regarding Defense Commissary System and Exchanges and other Morale,
Welfare, and Recreational Activities
This section would consolidate a wide range of sections
from title 10, United States Code and other laws concerning
commissaries, exchanges, and other morale, welfare, and
recreation activities. The provision would also:
(1) Define the commissary benefit and require the
Secretary of Defense to operate a commissary system;
(2) Specify the criteria for establishment of
commissaries, determination of the size of
commissaries, and the closure of commissaries, to
include direction to consider the welfare of reserve
patrons in the same manner as active duty patrons are
considered when assessing the need to close a
commissary;
(3) Require the Secretary to submit to Congress
written notice of the reasons supporting the closure of
a commissary, to include the impact of the proposed
closure on the quality of life of the patrons and the
welfare of the military community, and wait 90 days
before taking action to close the store;
(4) Clarify the categories of the merchandize that
shall be sold in commissaries, to include the addition
of telephone cards, greeting cards, and film and one-
time use cameras and a list of general merchandise
items that shall continue to be sold in commissaries on
a limited basis unless space or other considerations
prevent the sale of the items;
(5) Establish a moratorium on studies to compare the
cost effectiveness of commissary operations employing
federal civilian employees and such operations
employing private sector employees through December 31,
2009; and
(6) Specify that the priority in selecting Commissary
Operating Board members should be given to people with
skills and experience useful to the operating of
commissaries and that the board chairman shall be a
career military officer or career member of the Senior
Executive Service.
Section 652--Consistent State Treatment of Department of Defense
Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program
This section would clarify that the Department of Defense
Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefit Program is a federal health
benefit program not subject to state, local, and territorial or
other laws taxes, and health plan mandates. The provision would
provide the same status to this single, uniform program that
had existed previously for the separate programs that had been
operated by the military departments prior to consolidation.
Section 653--Cooperation and Assistance for Qualified Scouting
Organizations Serving Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Civilian Employees Overseas
This section would require that professional staff
supporting both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts
of the United States of America in overseas areas be made
nonappropriated fund employees of the United States and would
clarify that appropriated funds may be used to pay the costs of
the employees. The committee believes that this action is
required to confirm the status of scouting professionals in
overseas areas and resolve any uncertainty regarding their
treatment and access to support services in foreign countries.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Section 661--Repeal of Requirement that Members Entitled to Basic
Allowance for Subsistence Pay Subsistence Charges while Hospitalized
This section would repeal the requirement for officers and
certain enlisted members to pay subsistence charges when they
are hospitalized.
Section 662--Clarification of Education Loans Qualifying for Education
Loan Repayment Program for Reserve Component Health Professions
Officers
This section would clarify that college loans involving
both a basic professional qualifying degree and graduate
education would qualify for repayment under section 16302 of
title 10, United States Code.
Section 663--Survey and Analysis of Effect of Extended and Frequent
Mobilization of Reservists for Active Duty Service on Reservist Income
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a detailed study of the loss of income by mobilized
reservists who have served on active duty in support of a
contingency operation following September 11, 2001. The
provision would require the Secretary to survey a minimum of 50
percent of such reservists, collect demographic data on the
surveyed members, identify members in critical skills, identify
members who believe that replacing lost income would affect
their retention decision, identify members who experience
reduced income levels while on active duty, determine the
amount of lost income in each case, and analyze the data. The
provision would require the Secretary to report his findings
and recommendations to address the problem of reduced income
for mobilized reservists to Congress and the Comptroller
General by January 31, 2006. The provision would require the
Comptroller General to review the report of the Secretary and
report his findings to Congress by March 31, 2006.
The committee believes that accurate information regarding
the loss of income by mobilized reservists is an important
prerequisite to establishing a lasting solution to the problem.
The committee is particularly interested in the data as it
relates to military occupational specialty because that
analysis is expected to reveal important insight regarding high
demand skills that would benefit from specific financial
incentives and force balancing initiatives.
TITLE VII--HEALTHCARE MATTERS
OVERVIEW
The committee continues to be concerned about growing
stress on the Defense Health Program which partly results from
the strain faced by the civilian health care systems in the
nation. In the face of the growing cost of health care in
general, the military health system must provide for medical
readiness and force health protection for our men and women in
uniform and ensure health care services to all other
beneficiaries. As the nation fights the global war on
terrorism, the Department of Defense will transition from
complex existing TRICARE contracts to challenging new and very
different TRICARE contracts. No other healthcare system has
ever faced a similar experience. In light of the many
challenges faced by the military health system, the committee
continues to believe that the Defense Health Program must be
fully funded.
The committee remains strongly committed to ensuring that
the force health protection and the medical readiness of our
service members have the highest priority. Accordingly, the
committee recommends legislation to ensure the deployability of
active and reserve component service members and their
protection from health threats during military operations. In
addition, several provisions would assist family members of
activated reservists to transition in and out of the military
health system.
Finally, the committee is steadfast in its view that the
transition to the new TRICARE contracts must not disrupt
beneficiary health care, and that it optimizes military
treatment facilities while preserving access to high quality
health care. The committee is pleased by the TRICARE
transformation efforts and spirit of cooperation by the various
military and private sector health care entities. However, the
committee remains concerned that some of the contracts carved
out from the major managed care support contracts, such as
those for patient appointment services, nurse triage and health
information line, and resource sharing, may leave the
transition process at risk for disruption of health care
delivery and increased beneficiary dissatisfaction. The
committee expects to be kept informed by the Department of
Defense and the military services on the ongoing efforts to
develop and implement the carved out contracts.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Collection of Perinatal Information
The committee strongly supports the goal of the TRICARE
Family-Centered Care program, which the Department of Defense
established in August 2003, to improve and enhance family-
friendly care in the military health system. One aspect of the
Family-Centered Care program was the importance of providing
high quality perinatal care to pregnant service members and
dependents. In order to ensure high quality care the committee
supports the use of the National Perinatal Information Center
that specializes in the collection of obstetric and neonatal
data necessary to determine quality measures. The committee
urges the Department to continue its efforts to measure quality
perinatal care so that pregnant service members and dependents
continue to receive high quality perinatal care in the military
health care system.
Coordination of TRICARE and Medicare Benefits and Provider Payments
Recent changes to the Medicare program enacted by Congress
may have created administrative and benefit disparities between
Medicare and TRICARE for Medicare-eligible military
beneficiaries. Such disparities cause complex problems for
beneficiaries and may result in complications and
inconsistencies that may deter health care providers from
participation and acceptance of military beneficiaries. They
also pose added costs to TRICARE contractors as a result of
having to administer multiple sets of adjudication rules and
respond to increased complaints and appeals from providers and
beneficiaries. The committee believes that elimination of such
disparities wherever possible is important to promoting
provider participation and improving access to a consistent
benefit for TRICARE beneficiaries.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
study to identify disparities between benefits and
administration methodologies within the Medicare and TRICARE
programs. The study should also include an assessment of the
impact of such disparities on program effectiveness, provider
participation, and beneficiary understanding; a summary of
actions taken to reduce those disparities; identification of
the rationale for any differences that the Secretary deems
necessary; and recommendations for legislative or other action
needed to reduce such disparities. The committee directs the
Secretary to submit a report by March 31, 2005, to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services.
Department of Defense Chemical and Biological Test Review
The Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314) required the Comptroller General
to evaluate the efforts of the Secretary of Defense to disclose
to the Department of Veterans Affairs all Department of Defense
(DOD) records and information on Project 112. Such disclosure
was to facilitate the provision of benefits by the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs to members of the armed forces who
participated in that project. The Comptroller General's review
of DOD efforts recommends that the Department:
(1) Determine the feasibility of addressing
unresolved issues associated with Project 112, and the
appropriateness of and responsibility for reporting new
information;
(2) Finalize and implement a plan for identifying DOD
projects and tests conducted outside Project 112;
(3) Designate a single point of contact for providing
information related to tests and potential exposures in
and outside Project 112.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to implement
these recommendations and submit a report on the status of the
implementation by March 1, 2005, to the Senate Committee on
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.
Landstuhl Regional Medical Center Alteration
The committee notes that Landstuhl Regional Medical Center
(LRMC) serves as the primary medical treatment center for
casualties of United States operations within Europe, Southwest
Asia and the Middle East. With the increased need to
accommodate casualties from the global war on terrorism, LRMC
requires climate control in certain patient facilities. The
committee recommends $10.0 million for the purpose of providing
an air conditioning system in patient care areas at LRMC.
Military-Civilian Education Programs Related to Sexual Health Decision-
Making
The committee is aware of collaborative military-civilian
education programs related to sexual health decision-making
that demonstrates benefits through the reduction of unintended
pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections among military
personnel. The committee's support for such collaborative
programs was demonstrated in the statement of managers
accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-
772), which directed the Secretary of Defense to examine such
programs and consider their use by the services. A military-
civilian demonstration project was set up in Colorado Springs,
Colorado, as a collaborative effort to encourage sexual
integrity and reduce sexually transmitted infections and
unplanned pregnancies in the military. As a continued measure
of support for those efforts and to further encourage the
Secretary to examine the progress of the military-civilian
demonstration project, the committee recommends $0.2 million
for the purposes of continuing the demonstration project and to
encourage program expansion of sexual integrity training to
other military installations.
Nurse Triage and Health Information Line Services
The committee is deeply committed to ensuring a smooth
transition from the current TRICARE contracts to the new
TRICARE contracts. In particular, the committee is concerned
that there are no transition plans for nurse triage and health
care information line services that were eliminated from the
new TRICARE contracts. The committee believes that the
elimination of this service from the regional contracts may
have a significant impact on beneficiary access to quality
health care services. While the elimination of the nurse triage
and health information line from the managed care support
contracts may be prudent, the committee questions whether a
return to an ad hoc, localized approach to providing triage and
delivering health information will degrade uniformity and
beneficiary satisfaction, and reduce the economies of scale and
efficiencies across the military health system. The committee
therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to provide the
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services with a comprehensive plan for ensuring a smooth
transition for nurse triage and health information line
services by December 31, 2004. The plan shall include a
detailed explanation of the Department of Defense proposal to
fulfill nurse triage and health information line services,
specifically addressing: (1) the elements of the plan; (2) the
timeline and current status for implementation; (3) an
assessment of the military services' abilities to perform the
services; (4) any gaps in fulfilling these services; (5) how
the Department will ensure uniformity within and across
regions; and (6) the estimated cost of providing these
services, taking into consideration not only the direct cost of
providing the service, but also the cost in terms of health
outcomes, provision of needed care, avoidance of unnecessary
care, and redirection of care to a more appropriate level.
Reserve Component Requirement for Medical and Dental Readiness
Accountability
The committee continues to be concerned about the medical
and dental readiness of the reserve component. The number of
reserve component soldiers activated for deployment with
disqualifying medical and dental conditions highlights the
greater need for medical personnel and operational commanders
to strictly monitor the individual medical readiness of these
personnel. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
ensure the military departments have systematic processes for
providing appropriate health examinations and assessments and a
means for capturing health information. The Department of
Defense and the military services should consider the
recommendations of the Armed Forces Epidemiological Board in
its report of September 17, 2003, and consider modeling their
programs after the Air Force Preventive Health Assessment and
Individual Medical Readiness Program. Equally important, the
Department should incentivize commanders and hold them
accountable for enforcing and monitoring medical and dental
requirements to ensure the medical readiness.
Resource Sharing Agreements
The committee is highly concerned about potential
disruptions to providing quality patient care during the
transition from the current TRICARE contracts to the new
TRICARE contracts, especially as the carved out resource
sharing programs evolve to new contractual agreements. The
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to take into
account the use of all existing authorities to guarantee a
smooth transition and to ensure that the new contracts: (1) are
as cost effective as the current agreements, (2) provide for
similar flexibility in staffing, and (3) provide uninterrupted
care for beneficiaries during the transition from existing to
new contracts.
State-of-the-Art Mobility Equipment
The committee is strongly committed to ensuring that those
who are injured or become ill serving the nation receive the
finest rehabilitation efforts to maximize independence and
accessibility. To that end, the committee supports efforts to
provide service members, especially those individuals with
orthopedic and neurologic disorders, with the finest mobility
equipment. This equipment would allow users to walk on all
surfaces and would be all-terrain in nature, providing maximum
mobility. Equipment should (1) minimize any additional damage
to the body as found in many instances with standard equipment,
(2) be lightweight, and (3) require minimal energy expenditure.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Enhanced Health Care Benefits for Reserves
Section 701--Demonstration Project for TRICARE Coverage for Ready
Reserve Members
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a three-year demonstration project to provide TRICARE
coverage for Ready Reserve members not on active duty who are
ineligible for employer-sponsored health benefits. The purpose
of the demonstration would be to determine whether such
coverage enhances medical readiness, recruiting, and retention
of reserve component members. The Secretary would be required
to report by April 1, 2007 on the results of the demonstration
project to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services. The section would require the
Comptroller General to provide both periodic and final
independent evaluations and reports of the demonstration
project to the same committees.
Section 702--Comptroller General Report on the Cost and Feasibility of
Providing Private Health Insurance Stipends for Members of the Ready
Reserve
This section would require the Comptroller General to
conduct a study of the cost and feasibility of providing a
stipend to offset the cost of private health insurance to
members of the reserves and their dependents, and to maintain
continuity of health care for dependents when members are
mobilized. The purpose of the study would be to examine
recommendations for benefit amount; cost to the Department;
potential effects on medical readiness, recruitment, and
retention; participation rates; continuity of care;
administrative and management considerations; and implications
for employers.
Section 703--Improvement of Medical Services for Activated Members of
the Ready Reserve and Their Families
This section would make permanent the now temporary
eligibility of dependents of reserve component members to
obtain TRICARE health care benefits up to 90 days before the
date on which the member's period of active duty is to begin.
The section would allow the Secretary of Defense to provide
health care benefits to service members up to 90 days before
the date on which the period of active duty is to begin. The
current temporary authority for this health care benefit
expires on December 31, 2004.
Section 704--Modification of Waiver of Certain Deductibles Under
TRICARE Program
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
waive deductible payments required by certain TRICARE programs
for dependents of certain reserve component members who are
called or ordered to active duty for a period of more than 30
days. This section would mitigate the financial hardship on
activated reservists by allowing the TRICARE deductibles to be
waived in cases where mobilized reservists had already paid
deductibles for their civilian health care coverage.
Section 705--Authority for Payment by United States of Additional
Amounts Billed by Health Care Providers to Activated Reserve Members
This section would protect a dependent of a member of a
reserve component who is ordered to active duty for a period of
more than 30 days in support of a contingency operation from
paying a health care provider any amount above the TRICARE
maximum allowable cost, known as balance billing. In such
cases, the Secretary of Defense would have authority to pay the
balance billing amount.
Section 706--Extension of Transitional Health Care Benefits After
Separation from Active Duty
This section would make permanent the authority to provide
Transition Assistance Medical Program (TAMP) benefits to
service members and their dependents for up to 180 days
following separation from active duty. Under current law, the
authority to provide the 180-day TAMP benefits expires on
December 31, 2004. The section also would require that the TAMP
eligibility would cease prior to the 180-day limit if the
beneficiaries acquire employer-provided health insurance. The
section would limit the outlays associated with the TAMP
benefits provided after January 1, 2005 to not more than $170.0
million.
Subtitle B--Other Benefits Improvements
Section 711--Coverage of Certain Young Children Under TRICARE Dental
Program
This section would permit certain dependents of service
members who die while serving on active duty or who die as a
member of the Ready Reserve to enroll in the TRICARE Dental
Program regardless of the dependent's dental plan enrollment
status on the date of the service member's death. Many
dependents, due to their young age, are not enrolled in the
TRICARE Dental Plan. In cases where the service member dies,
the child's nonparticipation due to their young age
disadvantages them from future eligibility. This section would
authorize these dependents to participate in the dental plan in
the same manner as other dependents of service members who die
while on active duty.
Section 712--Comptroller General Report on Provision of Health and
Support Services for Exceptional Family Member Program Enrollees
This section would require the Comptroller General to
evaluate the effect of the Exceptional Family Member Program
(EFMP) on health and support services in select civilian
communities near military communities with a high concentration
of EFMP enrollees that use federal, state and local health and
support services. The study mandated under this section would
pay special attention to:
(1) Identifying communities that have high
concentrations of EFMP enrollees that use local health
and support services;
(2) Evaluating the needs, if any, that are not met by
federal, state and local health and support service for
EFMP enrollees;
(3) Determining the burden, if any, placed on
federal, state and local health and support services
that provide care to EFMP enrollees;
(4) Evaluating TRICARE's ability to meet the needs of
EFMP enrollees;
(5) Examining the reason for any limitations of
TRICARE, the EFMP, and state and local health and
support services in providing assistance to military
families with EFMP members; and
(6) Providing recommendations for more effectively
meeting the needs of EFMP enrollees.
The study would examine no less than four major communities
where EFMP enrollees live and in which several major military
installations exist, including installations from multiple
military services. The Comptroller General shall submit his
report of findings and recommendations to the Senate Committee
on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
March 31, 2005.
Section 713--Exceptional Eligibility for TRICARE Prime Remote
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive
all restrictions with regard to TRICARE Prime Remote medical
care coverage for active duty family members that reside at a
remote location without regard to their sponsor's current or
past assignment. Such a waiver would occur if the Secretary
determines that there are extenuating circumstances such that
waiving the restrictions is consistent with the intent of the
law.
Section 714--Transition to Home Health Care Benefit Under Sub-acute
Care Program
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to extend
previous benefits for part-time or intermittent home health
care after the transition to new managed care support contracts
that result in a change in benefits.
Section 715--Requirement Relating to Prescription Drug Benefits for
Medicare-Eligible Enrollees Under Defense Health Care Plans
This section would prohibit the prescription drug cost-
sharing requirements for Medicare-eligible beneficiaries from
being in excess of the cost-sharing requirements applicable to
non-Medicare-eligible beneficiaries.
Section 716--Professional Accreditation of Military Dentists
This section would allow the secretaries of the military
departments to authorize the treatment of no more than 2,000
children, under the age of 13 per year at certain military
facilities offering residency programs in oral and
maxillofacial surgery and orthodontics. This authority would
maintain the viability of military dental training programs by
allowing treatment of a pediatric population, as required by
the American Dental Association for the accreditation of such
programs.
Section 717--Addition of Certain Unremarried Former Spouses to Persons
Eligible for Dental Insurance Plan of Retirees of the Uniformed
Services
This section would permit certain unremarried former
spouses of a member or former member to participate in the
TRICARE Retiree Dental Program if they do not have dental
coverage under an employer-sponsored health plan.
Section 718--Waiver of Collection of Payments Due from Certain Persons
Unaware of Loss of CHAMPUS Eligibility
This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive
the collection of certain payments for health care services
provided during a period of ineligibility between July 1, 1999
and December 31, 2004 for beneficiaries under age 65 entitled
to Medicare on the basis of disability or end stage renal
disease. The waiver would apply to those beneficiaries who were
unaware of their loss of eligibility to receive health benefits
at the time they were received. The amendment would also
require the Department of Defense to report quarterly to
Congress regarding DOD efforts to identify the eligibility
status of individuals for such benefits and the actions taken
when individuals are determined to be ineligible.
Subtitle C--Planning, Programming, and Management
Section 721--Pilot Program for Transformation of Health Care Delivery
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a three-year pilot program to test a model for future
health care delivery systems at one or more military
installations where the military population is expected to
expand. The model to be tested would focus on coordinating and
leveraging the use of existing health care resources, to
include federal, state, local, and contractor assets to meet
increased health care requirements. Historically, the approach
to providing military health care to military beneficiaries has
centered on building a military treatment facility on the
installation. With increasing requirements to repair or replace
aging military treatment facilities it may be more feasible and
cost effective to leverage non- military health care resources.
The Secretary would be required to submit an interim report by
July 1, 2005 on the implementation plan for the pilot program
and a final report by July 1, 2007 on the results of the pilot
program to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services.
Section 722--Study of Provision of Travel Reimbursement to Hospitals
for Certain Military Disability Retirees
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study of the feasibility and desirability of
providing disability retirees travel and transportation
benefits to receive medical treatment at military hospitals for
two years after their retirement. The provision would direct
the Secretary to report the results of the study to the
congressional defense subcommittees by March 1, 2005.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations
Section 801--Rapid Acquisition Authority to Respond to Combat
Emergencies
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
establish a streamlined acquisition process for use when combat
fatalities have occurred, the combatant commander has an urgent
need of equipment, and delay would cause a continuation of
combat fatalities. This process is to be used as a ``quick
start'' bridge to the normal acquisition process.
The committee finds that the current Department of Defense
acquisition system cannot respond in a timely manner to the
combatant commander's urgent need of combat equipment. A rapid
response to emergency combat situations would minimize combat
fatalities when reacting to changes in the opponent's
battlefield tactics.
Section 802--Defense Acquisition Workforce Changes
This section would amend various sections in chapter 87 of
title 10, United States Code. First, it would align the
provisions in chapter 87 of title 10, United States Code,
relating to defense acquisition workforce with similar
provisions contained in chapter 99 of title 5, United States
Code. Second, it would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
designate critical acquisition positions. Third, it would
require the Secretary and scholarship participants to enter
written agreements that identify obligations and consequences
for breach of contract.
Section 803--Limitation on Task and Delivery Order Contracts
This section would amend section 2304a of title 10, United
States Code, to clarify that the Secretary of Defense has
authority to enter into task and delivery contracts for a base
period of up to five years, and that the contract may include
additional options for a period of time as is deemed
appropriate.
Section 804--Funding for Contract Cancellation Ceilings for Certain
Multiyear Procurement Contracts
This section would amend section 2306b(g) and section
2306c(d) of title 10, United States Code, to require the head
of the agency concerned to provide written notification, to the
congressional defense committees, in those instances when
cancellation costs that are above $100 million are not fully
funded. The written notification would include a financial risk
assessment for not fully funding the cancellation ceiling.
Section 805--Increased Threshold for Requiring Contractors to Provide
Specified Employee Information to Cooperative Agreement Holders
This section would amend section 2416(d) of title 10,
United States Code, by raising the $0.5 million reporting
requirement to $1.0 million. Currently, the Secretary of
Defense is required to provide some basic contractor
information to certain organizations on contracts that have a
value of $0.5 million or more.
Section 806--Extension of Authority for Use of Simplified Acquisition
Procedures
This section would amend section 4202(e) of the Clinger-
Cohen Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-106) by extending until
October 1, 2009, the time frame in which the secretary of an
executive agency may use simplified procedures to purchase
commercial items that have a value of $5.0 million or less.
Section 807--Authority to Adjust Acquisition-Related Dollar Thresholds
for Inflation
This section would authorize the Federal Acquisition
Regulatory Council to amend the dollar threshold of procurement
statutes in accordance with inflationary rates in order to
maintain the constant dollar value of the threshold. In those
instances where a procurement statute applies to a single
agency, the secretary of that agency has authority to amend the
dollar threshold. This section would require any proposed
change to be coordinated with the Director of Office of
Management and Budget and to be published in the Federal
Register for public comment. This section would not authorize
adjustments to the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276(a)), the
Service Contract Act of 1965 (41 U.S.C. 351 et. seq), or title
III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2511 et
seq).
Subtitle B--United States Defense Industrial Base Provisions
Section 811--Defense Trade Reciprocity
This section would establish a defense trade policy based
upon the principle of fair trade and reciprocity. Further, this
section would require the Secretary of Defense to ensure that
the offset regulations or policies of a foreign country are
reduced to the same level as the domestic content requirements
of the United States before the Secretary acquires defense
products from a foreign firm operating in that country.
Offsets are defined as compensation required as a condition
of purchase in government-to-government or commercial sales of
defense products or services. Therefore, in order to sell
defense products to many of our foreign security partners, the
majority of the manufacturing jobs and technology must be
transferred to the purchasing country. In many cases, the value
of the offset compensation of U.S. manufacturing jobs or
technology exceeds the value of the product sold. The U.S. has
no offset requirements for its foreign trading partners.
The committee is concerned that the cost of offsets in
foreign export defense sales is the loss of U.S. subcontractor
jobs and the loss of U.S. technology paid for by the U.S.
taxpayer.
Section 812--Amendments to Domestic Source Requirements
This section would amend section 2533a of title 10, United
States Code, also known as the Berry Amendment, to require the
Secretary of Defense to notify Congress and the public when the
Secretary exercises a waiver.
This section would also amend section 2533a to clarify the
covered item described as clothing.
Section 813--Three-Year Extension of Restriction on Acquisition of
Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) Carbon Fiber from Foreign Sources
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
delay for three years, phasing out of the restriction of
acquisition of Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fiber from
foreign sources.
The committee is aware of the January 2001 report that
recommended phasing out of restriction on the acquisition of
PAN carbon fiber form foreign sources.
The committee finds that the aerospace market conditions
have significantly declined since September 11, 2001, and the
rationale for phasing out of the restriction is no longer
valid.
Section 814--Grant Program for Defense Contractors to Implement
Strategies to Avoid Outsourcing of Jobs
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
award grants to qualified defense contractors in order to
assist the contractor in avoiding the outsourcing of jobs.
Grant funds would be used to implement strategies that would
enable defense contractors to retain domestic employees.
Examples of such strategies include retraining employees or
plant upgrades. This provision would limit the grant to fifty
percent of the cost of the strategy and require that the
proposed strategy would retain at least ten domestic jobs
dedicated to the performance of a defense contract.
Section 815--Preference for Domestic Freight Forwarding Services
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
grant preferences to freight forwarder companies owned and
controlled by U.S. citizens that offer fair and reasonable
rates in the award of transportation service contracts for
transportation services to, from, or within Iraq or
Afghanistan.
Subtitle C--Other Acquisition Matters
Section 821--Sustainment and Modernization Plans for Existing Systems
while Replacement Systems are Under Development
This section would require the Department of Defense to
plan and budget for the sustainment and modernization of
current military systems until such time that the replacement
system under development is fielded and assumes responsibility
for the mission.
The committee is aware of the fiscal realities that make it
difficult to fund simultaneously the development of
transformational future military systems and the maintenance
and sustainment of current military systems. In general, the
military services map out program strategies for sustainment
and modernization. However, significant gaps exist. In 2003,
the General Accounting Office reported that 15 of the 25
systems reviewed had insufficient funding requested by the
Department of Defense or projected in the Future Years Defense
Program to execute the military services' program strategies to
sustain or replace their equipment.
It is the responsibility of the Department of Defense to
develop military systems that provide the armed forces with
superiority over potential adversaries. However, funding for
transformational future systems that are decades from field
operational capability must not preclude the funding required
to sustain and modernize the current force.
The committee is concerned that escalating cost growth in
development programs and accelerating transformation is funded
by underinvestment in the current force which may undermine the
readiness and capabilities of the forces that we must rely upon
for the foreseeable future.
Section 822--Review and Demonstration Project Relating to Contractor
Employees
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a review of Department of Defense policies, procedures,
and practices relating to employees of defense contractors and
their subcontractors. Specifically, it would require the
Secretary to review DOD policies, procedures, and practices of
ensuring compliance with Executive Order 12989, as amended by
Executive Order 13286, which prohibits the secretaries of
executive agencies from contracting with employers who hire or
recruit unauthorized aliens. The committee is aware of numerous
instances in which the Department contracted with vendors who
employed unauthorized aliens for work on military
installations. The review should identify problems with
existing security policies, procedures, and practices, as well
as develop and implement reforms to strengthen, upgrade, and
improve the overall DOD contracting process. This section would
require the Secretary to conduct the review within 180 days of
enactment of this Act.
This section would also require the Secretary to conduct a
demonstration program for the procurement of military
construction, renovation, maintenance or repair service on
military installations, under which significant weight would be
given to bidding contractors offering effective, reliable
staffing plans that ensure all employees are properly
authorized to be employed in the United States and properly
qualified to perform the services required under the contract.
The Secretary shall report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by October
1, 2005, the benefits of the demonstration program and the
extent to which lessons learned from the program should be
incorporated throughout DOD procurements.
Section 823--Defense Acquisition Workforce Limitation and Reports
This section would require the Department of Defense to
reduce the defense acquisition workforce personnel by five
percent on or before October 1, 2005. This provision would also
require the General Accounting Office and Defense Acquisition
University to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the
current status of the Defense Acquisition Workforce by March 1,
2005.
Section 824--Provision of Information to Congress to Enhance
Transparency in Contracting
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide information on contract or task or delivery orders to
the chairman or ranking member of the Senate Armed Services
Committee or the House Armed Services Committee, within 14 days
of the request.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST
National Defense University
The committee commends the National Defense University
(NDU) for its work in scenario modeling and simulation
methodologies. The committee encourages the NDU to continue its
work by employing advanced technologies that will increase the
effectiveness, realism and creativity of these scenarios. The
committee notes that the immersive technologies being developed
by the Department of Defense are similar to some advanced
technologies that the entertainment industry employs and
encourages contact between the Department and entertainment
industry technologists as a means of fully exploiting such
technologies to the benefit of the armed forces.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 901--Change in Title of Secretary of the Navy to Secretary of
the Navy and Marine Corps
This section would redesignate the title of the Secretary
of the Navy to the Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps. This
provision would formally recognize the responsibility of the
Office of the Secretary of the Navy over both the Navy and
Marine Corps.
Section 902--Transfer of Center for the Study of Chinese Military
Affairs from National Defense University to United States-China
Economic and Security Review Commission
This section would transfer the Center for the Study of
Chinese Military Affairs at the National Defense University,
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), to the United States-
China Economic and Security Review Commission, established in
the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398).
Section 903--Transfer to the Secretary of the Army of Responsibility
for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program
This section would transfer oversight of the Assembled
Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program (formerly the
Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment program) from the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
to the Secretary of the Army not later than January 1, 2005.
Additionally, this section would provide for management of the
program as a part of the Department of the Army organization
for management of the chemical weapons demilitarization program
as specified in section 1521(e) of title 50, United States
Code. Finally, this section would require the Army to fully
implement the alternative technologies previously selected for
the destruction of lethal chemical munitions at Pueblo Chemical
Depot, Colorado, and Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky.
Section 142 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261)
provides that the Program Manager, ACWA shall manage the
development and testing (including demonstration and pilot-
scale testing) of technologies for the destruction of lethal
chemical munitions that are potential or demonstrated
alternatives to the baseline program, which uses incineration
for destruction of the stockpile of lethal chemical agents and
munitions. This provision would further require that the
program manager shall act independently of the Program Manager
for Chemical Demilitarization (PMCD) and shall report to the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology.
Numerous General Accounting Office (GAO) reports and
testimony to Congress state that effective management of the
chemical demilitarization program has been hindered by its
complex management structure. GAO specifically cites the
division of program responsibility between the PMCD, who
reports to the Secretary of the Army as executive agent for the
program and is responsible for destruction of all elements of
the chemical weapons stockpile except that stored at the Blue
Grass Army Depot and the Pueblo Chemical Army Depot; and the
Project Manager(PM), ACWA, who reports directly to the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
and has responsibility only for destruction of those parts of
the stockpile stored at Blue Grass and Pueblo. In 2003 the
Secretary of the Army, with the concurrence of the Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics)
(USD (AT&L)), established the Chemical Material Agency, which
is responsible for management of the chemical weapons
destruction program and operation of the chemical weapons
destruction plant facilities and stockpile storage sites. With
the concurrence of the USD (AT&L), the Secretary of the Army
assigned the PM, ACWA, as the Director of the Chemical Materiel
Agency. The committee believes that the establishment of the
new management structure, which brings together all elements of
the chemical weapons demilitarization program under a single
activity, will eliminate many of the management complexities
cited by the GAO, contribute to the elimination of duplicative
management overhead and support, and ensure more efficient
management of the total program, while at the same time
addressing the equities and concerns of those sites using
assembled chemical weapons alternatives for destruction of the
stockpile
Section 904--Modification of Obligated Service Requirements under
National Security Education Program
This section would modify the service requirements to
ensure that recipients of scholarships and fellowships obtain
employment in a federal national security position that
utilizes the unique language and region expertise acquired by
the recipient. This section would also set 12 months as the
minimum length of federal service for all recipients. This
section would also require the recipient to gain employment in
an approved position within three years of completion of the
scholarship, or within two years in the case of a recipient of
a fellowship.
Section 905--Change of Membership of Certain Councils
This section would make the Undersecretary of Defense for
Policy a statutory member of the Nuclear Weapons Council and
implement the corresponding technical changes in law. Current
law (10 U.S.C. 179) establishes the Nuclear Weapons Council to,
among other things, coordinate programming and budget matters
pertaining to nuclear weapons programs between the Department
of Defense and Department of Energy and to provide broad
guidance on nuclear research and development priorities. By
statute, the council comprises the Undersecretary ofDefense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics; the Vice Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff; and the Undersecretary of Energy for Nuclear Security.
As a result of the congressionally-mandated Nuclear Posture Review,
which set out a new course in strategic policy, the Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy has come to play an increasing role in coordinating
nuclear weapons policy and making recommendations to the President.
Section 906--Actions to Prevent the Abuse of Detainees
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
prescribe policies regarding procedures for the Armed Forces,
other elements of the Department of Defense, and Department of
Defense contractor personnel in order to prevent the abuse of
prisoners held by the United States as part of the Global War
on Terrorism. The Secretary would be required to issue such
policies within 120 days of the enactment of this Act, provide
those policies to Congress immediately, and report to Congress
on their implementation one year after their issuance.
Section 907--Responses to Congressional Inquiries
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, or any
other official of the Department of Defense, to respond to
written requests for information made by the respective
Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
House Committee on Armed Services in writing within 21 days of
the transmission of such a request.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Counter-Drug Activities
Overview
The budget request contained $852.7 million for drug
interdiction and counter-drug activities, in addition to $160.2
million, for operational tempo which is included within the
operating budgets of the military services. The budget is
organized in fiscal year 2005 to address three broad national
priorities: (1) demand reduction; (2) domestic support; and (3)
international support, intelligence and technology.
The committee recommends an authorization for fiscal year
2005 Department of Defense counter-drug activities as follows:
FY05 Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Request................$852,697
Demand Reduction............................................122.209
Domestic Support............................................207,998
International Support, Intelligence and Technology..........522,590
Recommended Decreases:..............................................
Intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and tanker support.2,000
Tethered Aerostat Radar System................................5,000
Recommended Increases:..............................................
Southwest Border Fence........................................5,000
Northern Command Counter-Narcotics Support....................2,000
Recommendation..................................................852,697
Items of Special Interest
Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and tanker support
The budget request contained $2.7 million for intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance and tanker support. The budget
request for this activity in fiscal year 2004 was 0.4 million.
Reductions in support activities are planned in light of other
worldwide commitments and performance of depot-level
maintenance on related assets.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.0
million for this activity.
Northern Command counter-narcotics support
The budget request contained $9.1 million to support the
United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) counter-narcotics
missions, including those which are performed through Joint
Task Force-6 located at Fort Bliss, Texas.
The committee is concerned that the current funding levels
will diminish the ability to provide additional mobile training
teams. The mobile training teams help train federal, state, and
local law enforcement agencies across the country on a wide
variety of subjects related to narcotics interdiction. Without
the proper funding, the committee is concerned that law
enforcement agencies will not be able to develop the critical
skills necessary for effective counter-narcotics law
enforcement, and in assisting in war against terrorism in the
homeland.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2
million for additional mobile training teams along with the
attendant headquarters' support for this enhanced mission.
The committee recognizes that, in order to utilize these
funds, Joint Task Force-6 will need to be able to utilize
authority provided by Congress in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136).
Section 1022 of that bill provided authority to joint task
forces of the Department of Defense that provide support to law
enforcement agencies conducting counter-drug activities to also
provide support to those agencies conducting counter-terrorism
activities. The committee understands that the Department of
Defense has not yet issued policy guidance that would allow
combatant commands and military services to use this authority.
The committee urges the Department to issue such guidance
immediately to permit intended missions to go forward.
Southwest Border Fence
As part of the San Diego 14-Mile Border Infrastructure
System, the Southwest Border Fence has served as an invaluable
counter-narcotics resource for United States Border Patrol
agents since the project's inception in 1997. However, the
border fence construction project is still under construction,
and the area remains one of the nation's most heavily utilized
drug smuggling corridors. Since 1998, the California National
Guard and other military personnel have been responsible for
fence construction and general support of the border
infrastructure system. Completion of the border fence would
constitute a cohesive barrier against vehicle and pedestrian
narcotics trafficking and allow counter-drug assets to be
redeployed in other areas.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million for this purpose.
Tethered Aerostat Radar System
The budget request contained $32.3 million for the
operation of the Tethered Aerostat Radar System at multiple
locations in the United States. Of the $32.3 million requested,
$6.7 million was included for the procurement of additional
spare parts.
The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million dollars
in the procurement component of this request. The committee
notes that the Congress has not received the detailed analysis
it has requested to justify the continued increases in this
program.
Other Activities
Airlift Support for Homeland Defense Missions
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has not adequately considered the need for airlift
support to speed uniquely capable DOD assets to wherever needed
to perform urgent homeland defense missions. The Department has
developed considerable expertise across a range of disparate
skills that may be needed in a homeland defense mission, but
this expertise is scattered in various locations across the
country. The committee is aware of a proposal to provide such
support through the use of C-130 equipped Air National Guard
units and believes that the proposal has merit. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to report by March 31, 2005,
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
Committee on Armed Services, his views on whether the
Commander, Northern Command should have dedicated Air National
Guard C-130 units at his disposal for the purpose of responding
to attacks or incidents involving weapons of mass destruction.
Civil Reserve Air Fleet
The committee understands that the Secretary of Defense
requires that commercial air lines participating in the civil
reserve air fleet receive at least 60 percent of its air
transportation revenues from sources other than the Department
of Defense. The committee is concerned that the Secretary is
not enforcing this requirement. The committee, therefore,
directs the Secretary to enforce this requirement, and directs
the Secretary to report to the Senate Armed Services Committee
and the House Armed Services Committee when this business
practice is not followed, with an explanation as to why it was
not followed.
Defense Transformation
The committee supports the efforts of the Department of
Defense to transform the armed forces into capabilities based,
networked joint forces that are rapidly deployable and more
lethal than today's highly capable military. Despite the
Department's success in recent combat operations, the committee
recognizes that the Department's transformation goals are long
term, evolving objectives that will be very difficult to
achieve without a joint strategy to guide it.
The committee is encouraged that the Army has embarked on
an aggressive transformation program that encompasses all
aspects of the Army, including personnel policies, unit
structure, doctrine, and equipment. While the committee has
concerns about the development strategy for the Future Combat
System, addressed elsewhere in this report, the committee
believes the Army's plan to create more combat power by
fielding at least 45 active maneuver brigades is the correct
approach.
Similarly, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Air Force
have embraced transformation as an objective, and have proposed
several specific concepts as transformational. The committee is
concerned that each military service has embarked on its own
transformational campaign, without an enforceable, integrated
joint forces roadmap to ensure the services' plans are mutually
supportive and overlap only when necessary. For that reason,
the committee questions the services' plans to sustain
excessive headquarters structure despite the services'
increasing requests for information technology funding
purportedly designed to flatten combat organizations.
Accordingly, the committee believes that the Joint Forces
Command should continue to evolve as the principal coordinator
of service transformation efforts.
Global War on Terrorism
The committee applauds and supports the valiant efforts of
the men and women of America's armed forces who are prosecuting
the global war on terrorism in increasingly hostile areas
overseas. The committee believes that the war should be fought
on the enemy's home ground, and does not believe that a more
passive strategy of disengagement would be a prudent policy for
the safety of the United States and its citizens. In that
regard, the committee supports a number of initiatives intended
to enhance the ability of the armed forces to respond to the
demands of the global war on terror. These initiatives range
from measures intended to speed the development and fielding of
force protection measures urgently needed by our forces in
Iraq, to measures that will enhance the Special Operations
Command's ability to work in a variety of settings. The
committee understands the prominent roles played by other
agencies in this fight, particularly the Departments of State
and Homeland Security, but the committee continues to believe
that the Department of Defense has performed and will continue
to perform the most critical missions in the global war on
terror.
Homeland Defense Forces
In hearings over the past two years, the committee has
reviewed the Department of Defense's plans for use of the
National Guard in homeland defense missions and encouraged the
Department to include the Department of Homeland Security in
this review. Since the National Guard is a strategic national
force that is frequently deployed, the committee is concerned
that homeland defense and homeland security plans, which are
dependent on National Guard units, must consider the need for
contingency assets.
The committee is pleased to note the testimony of the
Director, National Guard Bureau, describing his efforts to
ensure that National Guard assets are continuously available
for homeland defense missions. The committee is also heartened
by the concept of the National Guard chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear (CBRNE) enhanced response force packages,
which would augment existing civil support teams in each of the
12 Federal Emergency Management Agency regions.
The committee is interested to learn whether the ongoing
force rebalancing measures will yield sufficient available
assets, given recent overseas deployments, and whether the
Department should consider augmenting the capabilities of state
defense forces authorized by title 32, United States Code, with
available training opportunities and surplus equipment.
In that regard, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland
Security and the Director, National Guard Bureau, to report any
measures necessary to enhance the capabilities of the National
Guard to perform homeland defense and homeland security
missions. This report should address any unmet requirements
related to CBRNE enhanced response teams and any necessary
measures to augment the capabilities of state defense forces,
and be provided to the Senate Armed Services Committee and the
House Armed Services Committee by December 31, 2004.
Wisconsin Project's International Export Control Center
The committee notes that Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms
Control began a public-private initiative to improve export
controls in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This
initiative was supported by the Department of Defense, the
Department of State, and the Customs Service. The committee
further notes that the Wisconsin Project is the leading source
of unclassified information on world entities suspected of
building weapons of mass destruction or have links to
terrorism. The Wisconsin Project's database lists the
activities of more than 3,700 suspected individuals and
organizations.
Recognizing the importance of tracking and updating
information related to entities which are attempting to build
weapons of mass destruction, the committee believes the
Wisconsin Project should expand its efforts to help foreign
governments improve their export control mechanisms.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $1.3
million to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency for the
expansion of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control's
International Export Control Center.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
Section 1001--Transfer Authority
This section would provide fiscal year 2005 transfer
authority to the Department of Defense for amounts up to $3.0
billion. This would include $500 million of specific transfer
authority between the services' active component and reserve
component accounts.
Section 1002--Budget Justification Documents for Operation and
Maintenance
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
include in congressional justification materials for the
operation and maintenance budget request the baseline costs for
programs in which there is an identified program increase or
decrease. The Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) failed to
identify these baseline costs, despite the direction to do so
in the committee report on the H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106).
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
include in the operation and maintenance justification
documents the amount of funds requested for personal service
contracts and the number of personal service contractors
expected to be compensated at an annual rate in excess of the
annual rate of pay for the Vice President.
This section would also require the Secretary of the Navy
to distinguish the cost of ship depot-level maintenance and
repair and ship intermediate maintenance when presenting
justification material to support the budget request for
operation and maintenance funds. Specifically, the Secretary
would be required to present to Congress separate sub-activity
groups for ship depot operations and ship intermediate
operations. The Secretary failed to maintain separate sub-
activity groups when presenting the justification of estimates
for fiscal year 2005 despite the direction to do so in the
committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106).
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
include, in the justification materials for the operations and
maintenance budget request, the average civilian salary cost by
sub-activity group as a component of the personnel summary. The
Secretary of Defense Comptroller) failed to identify such
costs, despite the direction to do so in the committee report
on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106).
This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by January 1, 2006, that
catalogues the elements of ``other costs'' and ``other
contracts'', which are currently used in justification
materials for the budget request. Although the committee
directed in the committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-
106) to provide this report by October 21, 2003, the Secretary
of Defense (Comptroller) failed to do so.
Section 1003--Retention of Fees from Intellectual Property Licenses
The section would allow the Department of Defense to
establish programs to license trademarks and insignias, and to
retain associated fees. Fees received from the trademark
licenses would be used to cover the costs incurred in securing
trademark registrations. Any funds in excess of such costs
would be available for military personnel recruiting and
retention activities, as well as morale, welfare, and
recreation activities.
Section 1004--Authority to Waive Claims of the United States when
Amounts Recoverable are Less than Costs of Collection
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense or
his designee to waive indebtedness when the cost of processing
the transaction exceeds the amounts recoverable. The maximum
amount that may be waived under this statue would be the micro-
purchase threshold, currently $2,500.
Section 1005--Repeal of Funding Restrictions Concerning Development of
Medical Countermeasures against Biological Warfare Threats
This section would repeal section 2370a of title 10, United
States Code, which requires that, of the funds allocated for
the medical component of the biological defense research
program within the Department of Defense, no more than 80
percent may be obligated or expended for product development or
research, development, test, and evaluation of medical
countermeasures against near-term validated biowarfare threat
agents. Additionally, no more than 20 percent may be obligated
or expended for product development or research, development,
test, and evaluation, of medical countermeasures against mid-
term or far-term validated biowarfare agents.
The current law defines biological warfare threats
primarily in intelligence terms. The committee believes that
this is overly restrictive because intelligence on biological
warfare threats is inherently limited due to the ease with
which biological warfare programs can be concealed and
dangerous pathogens and toxins can be acquired. The situation
is further exacerbated by the rapid advancements in bio-
technology that are widely available throughoutthe world.
Additionally, the current law categorizes biological warfare agents by
the time period in which they may become threats: near-, mid-, and far-
term. For the same reasons that make it difficult to define biological
warfare agents in terms of available intelligence, the committee
believes that it is difficult to project the time periods during which
such agents might become threats.
In responding to such threats, the committee believes that
more flexibility is needed in the medical components of the
biological defense research program.
Section 1006--Report on Budgeting for Exchange Rates for Foreign
Currency Fluctuations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2004, on
the foreign currency exchange rate projection used in the
annual Department of Defense budget.
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards
Section 1011--Authority for Award of Contracts for Ship Dismantling on
Net-Cost Basis
This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to
accept bids for domestic warship dismantling contracts based on
the estimated cost of performance as well as the estimated
value of scrap and reusable equipment. This section would also
allow contractors to retain proceeds from the sale of such
scrap and reusable equipment. With the price of steel at very
high levels, this provision is intended to allow for greater
efficiencies in the disposal of obsolete former naval vessels.
Nothing in the provision alters any environmental requirements
pertaining to disposals.
Section 1012--Independent Study to Assess Cost Effectiveness of the
Navy Ship Construction Program
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish an entity independent of the Department of Defense to
conduct a study of the cost-effectiveness of the ship
construction program of the Navy. The study would look at near-
term improvements to make shipbuilding more efficient, and
long-term improvement to make the United States shipbuilding
industry commercially competitive in the global market. This
provision would require the Secretary to submit the report to
the congressional defense committees by June 1, 2005.
Section 1013--Authority to Transfer Specified Former Naval Vessels to
Certain Foreign Countries
This section would authorize the transfer of three obsolete
former naval vessels to Chile, Portugal, and to the Taipei
Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United
States.
Section 1014--Limitation on Leasing of Foreign-Built Vessels
This section would prohibit the secretary of a military
department from entering into a contract for a lease or charter
of a vessel for a term of more than 12 months (including all
options to renew or extend the contract) if the hull, or
superstructure of the vessel is constructed in a foreign
shipyard. The President may waive this prohibition if he
determines it is in the national security interests of the
United States.
Subtitle C--Sunken Military Craft
Sections 1021-28--Protection of Sunken Military Craft
This section would protect sunken United States military
vessels, aircraft, and spacecraft, as well as the remains and
personal effects of their crews, from salvage, recovery, or
other disturbance without proper authorization from the
secretary of the military department concerned.
Thousands of U.S. and foreign sunken military craft now lie
within and beyond U.S. internal waters, the U.S. territorial
sea, and the U.S. contiguous zone. Because of recent advances
in science and technology, many of these sunken state craft
have become accessible to scientists, researchers, salvors,
treasure-hunters, and others. The unauthorized disturbance or
recovery of these sunken state craft and any remains of their
crews and passengers is a growing concern both within the
United States and internationally. In addition to deserving
respect as gravesites, theses sunken craft may contain objects
of a sensitive, archaeological, or historical nature. They
often also contain unexploded ordnance or other substances,
including fuel oil and other hazardous liquids, which could
pose a danger to human health and the marine environment if
disturbed. This section would clarify the circumstances under
which sunken military craft, entitled to sovereign immunity
when they sank, remain the property of the flag state until
officially abandoned. This section would also encourage and
authorize the negotiation of international agreements with
other nations to protect sunken military state craft and,
through reciprocal treatment, to protect sunken U.S. warships.
Finally, this section would allow the secretary of the
military department concerned to issue and enforce permits for
activities directed at sunken U.S. military craft, including
contract salvage. It would not invalidate any permitting system
currently in place nor would it affect any prior lawful
transfer or express abandonment of title to any sunken military
craft.
Subtitle D--Counter-Drug Activities
Section 1031--Continuation of Authority to Use Department of Defense
Funds for Unified Counter-Drug and Counter-Terrorism Campaign in
Colombia
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
use funds available for drug interdiction and counter-drug
activities to provide assistance to the government of Colombia
to support not only a unified campaign against narcotics
trafficking, but to also support a unified campaign against
activities by organizations designated as terrorist
organizations.
Section 1032--Limitation on Number of United States Military Personnel
in Colombia
This section would limit the number of United States
military personnel in the Republic of Colombia to 500 at any
given time. The Secretary of Defense is authorized to exclude
certain military personnel from the limitation, including those
personnel engaged in rescue efforts, members of the armed
forces assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Colombia, members of the
armed forces participating in relief efforts, non-operational
transient military personnel, and members of the armed forces
making a port call from a military vessel in Colombia.
Subtitle E--Reports
Section 1041--Study of Continued Requirement for Two-Crew Manning for
Ballistic Missile Submarines
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the
current status of the requirement for two-man crewing of fleet
ballistic missile submarines.
Section 1042--Study of Effect on Defense Industrial Base of Elimination
of United States Domestic Firearms Manufacturing Base
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees, within 60 days
of enactment, a report detailing the impact on military
readiness and the defense industrial infrastructure of the
elimination of the United States domestic firearms
manufacturing base as a result of ongoing civil litigation.
Section 1043--Study of Extent and Quality of Training Provided to
Members of the Armed Services to Prepare for Post-Conflict Operations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
identify and assess the training that members of the armed
forces assigned to support contingency operations receive in
post-conflict operations. The Secretary would further be
required to submit a report on his findings to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services no later than March 15, 2005.
Subtitle F--Security Matters
Section 1051--Use of National Driver Register for Personnel Security
Investigations and Determinations
This section would authorize federal agencies to access the
National Driver Register for use in personnel security
investigations with regard to federal employment. The Secretary
of Transportation and the chief driver licensing official in
each state, who provides driver licensing records to the
National Driver Register, cooperatively manage the system.
Access to the information is currently provided to multiple
federal agencies.
Section 1052--Standards for Disqualification from Eligibility for
Department of Defense Security Clearances
This section would amend section 986 of title 10, United
States Code, to allow decisions on granting meritorious waivers
related to the granting of a security clearance to be delegated
by the Secretary of Defense or the secretary of a military
department to appropriate subordinates. This change is intended
to improve the operation of the current program and decrease
the time required to adjudicate security clearance eligibility
without creating any additional risk to national security.
Subtitle G--Transportation Matters
Section 1061--Use of Military Aircraft to Transport Mail to and from
Overseas Locations
This section would provide the Secretary of Defense
authority to use military aircraft to transport mail and
parcels to, from, and between overseas locations. This
authority, however, would be limited to the following
circumstances:
(1) There is excess space on a scheduled military
flight;
(2) There is no overall cost increase to the
Department of Defense or the United States Postal
Service;
(3) The United States Transportation Command would
pay the cost of transporting mail from United States
Postal Service, to customs clearance facilities, and
military debarkation locations at rates not to exceed
Department of Transportation rates for commercial
airlines;
(4) There is no degradation of mail service; and
(5) There is no diversion of such military aircraft
during contingencies or other events.
Section 1062--Reorganization and Clarification of Certain Provisions
Relating to Control and Supervision of Transportation within the
Department of Defense
This section would amend sections 4744 through 4747 of
title 10, United States Code, by moving these sections from
chapter 47 to chapter 26. This section would also repeal
sections 9741, 9743, and 9746 of title 10, United States Code.
These changes reflect the Secretary of Defense's role in
transportation versus the individual role of the service
secretaries.
Section 1063--Determination of Whether Private Air Carriers are
Controlled by United States Citizens for Purposes of Eligibility for
Government Contract for Transportation of Passengers or Supplies
This section would amend section 2710 of the Emergency
Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 (Public Law 108-
11), to clarify that the Secretary of Transportation is
responsible for certifying whether an air carrier is
effectively controlled by citizens of the United States.
Section 1064--Evaluation of Whether to Prohibit Certain Offers for
Transportation of Security-Sensitive Cargo
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
evaluate whether, and under what circumstances, it would be
appropriate to limit competition for domestic freight
transportation of security-sensitive cargo to motor carriers
that are not part of a group of motor carriers under common
financial or administrative control. The Secretary would be
required to submit the evaluation to the Senate Armed Services
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee by January 1,
2005.
Subtitle H--Other Matters Defense to Engage in Commercial Activities as
Security for Intelligence Collection Activities Abroad
This section would provide for a two year extension of the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to engage in commercial
activities as security for intelligence collection activities.
Section 1072--Assistance for Study of Feasibility of Biennial
International Air Trade Show in the United States and for Initial
Implementation
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
select and provide assistance to a community in conducting a
joint study to determine the feasibility of establishing an
international air trade show in that community. The committee
believes that international air trade shows are an important
component of efforts to demonstrate the effectiveness of United
States military equipment to other nations and seeks to
increase the importance of U.S. based air trade shows in the
conduct of international aerospace trade. This provision would
also require that the Secretary make his selection through
competitive procedures, while giving preference to communities
that already host an air show and have demonstrated a history
of supporting air shows with local resources.
Section 1073--Technical and Clerical Amendments
This section would make a number of technical and clerical
amendments to existing law of a non-substantive basis.
Section 1074--Commission on the Long-Term Implementation of the New
Strategic Posture of the United States
This section would establish a new commission to review the
long-term implementation of the Nuclear Posture Review.
Section 1075--Liability Protection for Certain Department of Defense
Volunteers Working in the Maritime Environment
This section would remedy an inadvertent oversight in
existing law by extending to volunteers working in the maritime
training environment the same status and legal protections
presently available to volunteers working on land-based
assignments.
Section 1076--Transfer of Historic F3A-1 Brewster Corsair Aircraft
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
transfer ownership of a historic F3A-1 Brewster Corsair
aircraft to a private citizen. The aircraft would be
transferred in its current unflyable, ``as is'' condition, and
at no cost to the United States.
TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL
OVERVIEW
In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2004 (Public Law 108-136), Congress enacted the Department of
Defense National Security Personnel System (NSPS), as chapter
99 of title 5, United States Code. In doing so, Congress
created a more flexible and rewarding personnel system for the
Department. The Secretary of Defense tasked the Secretary of
the Navy with responsibility for designing and implementing a
human resources management system in accordance with NSPS. The
committee strongly supports the Secretary of the Navy's
outreach to unions, executive agencies, and Congress, as he
fulfills this task. The Secretary of the Navy has, thus far,
promoted a thorough and thoughtful plan, with continued
communication and collaboration with the employees and their
representatives to ensure a responsible human resources
management system.
In light of the Department's current effort to implement
NSPS, the committee recommends only minor changes to civilian
personnel policy. These changes, however, exemplify the
committee's continued respect for the civilian workforce and
the need to reward properly individual accomplishments.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1101--Payment of Federal Employee Health Benefit Premiums for
Mobilized Federal Employees
This section would provide a federal government employee,
who is a member of a reserve component ordered to active duty
in support of a contingency and placed on leave without pay, to
continue to receive coverage under the Federal Employee Health
Benefit Program for 24 months. This section would also
authorize the executive agency authority to pay both the
employee's share and the agency's share of the premiums for
continued coverage up to 24 months.
Section 1102--Foreign Language Proficiency Pay
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
offer special pay to a Department of Defense employee who is
certified to be proficient in a language deemed necessary for
national security interests and whose duties require such
language proficiency. This section would repeal the requirement
that the individual be assigned duties during a contingency
operation in section 1596a of title 10, United States Code.
Section 1103--Pay Parity for Civilian Intelligence Personnel
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
use a performance appraisal system for personnel in the defense
intelligence senior executive service to ensure pay parity for
all personnel in the defense senior executive service.
Section 1104--Pay Parity for Senior Executives in Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
adjust the pay cap for Department of Defense nonappropriated
fund executives to ensure that the compensation paid to such
employees remains consistent with the Senior Executive Service
employees.
Section 1105---Prohibition of Unauthorized Wearing or Use of Civilian
Medals or Decorations
This section would prohibit any person from merchandising
or wearing a Department of Defense civilian medal or decoration
without the written permission of the Secretary of Defense.This
section would also authorize the Attorney General to initiate a civil
proceeding in a United States district court to enjoin the prohibited
practice.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Global War on
Terrorism
Section 1201--Documentation of Conditions in Iraq under Former
Dictatorial Government as Part of Transition to Post-Dictatorial
Government
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
expedite, where practical, the review of documents seized from
the Iraqi government and Ba'ath Socialist Party of Iraq
relating to the functioning, crimes, and atrocities of those
entities against the Iraqi people during the regime of Saddam
Hussein. The Secretary would be further directed to transfer
those documents, as appropriate, to Iraqi entities in Iraq
dedicated to documenting the crimes and nature of the Hussein
regime, to serve as a reminder of the dangers of tolerating
dictatorship in Iraq. Analysts have found that such efforts in
other post-dictatorial countries can contribute to the
reconstruction and reconciliation process. The committee
believes Iraqi democracy would benefit from a similar effort.
Section 1202--Support of Military Operations to Combat Terrorism
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense,
during fiscal year 2005, to expend up to $25.0 million in
operation and maintenance funds authorized by Title XV of this
Act to provide support to foreign forces, irregular forces, or
individuals who actively support United States special
operations forces engaged in military operations against
terrorists. The section would not authorize U.S. special
operations forces to engage in covert actions, as defined by
the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413b(e)). Thus,
the intent is to provide additional resources to special
operations forces engaged in clandestine operations, during
which they often operate without the support of larger military
units, but not to allow U.S. special operations forces to
engage in activities traditionally performed by the
intelligence community under title 50, United States Code. This
section would require quarterly reports on how this authority
is used.
Section 1203--Commander's Emergency Response Program
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
use up to $300.0 million in operations and maintenance funding
available to the Secretary from funds made available by Title
XV of the Act for the Commander's Emergency Response Program,
under which commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan receive funds
for use in small humanitarian and reconstruction projects in
the areas in which they are deployed. The section requires
quarterly reports on the source and use of funds under this
section.
Section 1204--Status of Iraqi Security Forces
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not
later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act, to submit
to Congress a strategic plan setting forth the manner and
timeline under which the United States will achieve the goal of
establishing viable and professional Iraqi security forces. The
Secretary would further be required to submit updates on
progress implementing the strategic plan every 90 days
thereafter.
Section 1205--Guidance and Report Required on Contractors Supporting
Deployed Forces in Iraq
This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within
90 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, to issue
guidance on the management of contractors that support deployed
military forces and to direct the secretaries of the military
departments to develop procedures to implement that guidance.
The Secretary of Defense would further be required to report to
Congress within 30 days of issuing the aforementioned guidance
on how it addressed certain issues and to establish and
implement a process for collecting information on contractors
providing certain security services in Iraq.
Section 1206--Findings and Sense of Congress Concerning Army Specialist
Joseph Darby
This section would make a series of findings regarding the
importance of Specialist Joseph Darby's actions in reporting
abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and expresses the sense
of Congress that Specialist Darby should be commended for his
actions.
Subtitle B--Other Matters
Section 1211--Assignment of Allied Naval Personnel to Submarine Safety
Programs
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
assign military personnel from NATO countries and other
countries, including Australia, Sweden, South Korea, and Japan,
to United States commands for the purpose of working on the
standardization, development, and interoperability of submarine
safety and rescue systems and procedures. The Department of
Defense requested authority to assign foreign naval personnel
to the International Submarine Escape and Rescue Liaison Office
within Allied Submarine Command.
Section 1212--Expansion of Entities of the People's Republic of China
Subject to Certain Presidential Authorities when Operating in the
United States
This section would expand the definition of a ``Communist
Chinese military company'' as defined in the Strom Thurmond
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public
Law 105-261), to include Chinese firms owned or operated by a
ministry of the People's Republic of China or an entity
affiliated with the defense industrial base of the People's
Republic of China, such as the China State Shipbuilding
Corporation or the China Overseas Shipping Corporation.
Existing law only applies the definition to entities owned or
operated by the People's Liberation Army, thereby excluding a
class of firms engaged in Chinese military modernization.
Section 1213--Report by President on Global Peace Operations Initiative
This section would require the President to report to
Congress on the Global Peace Operations Initiative, a new
program announced by the administration after the submission of
the budget request.
On April 29, 2004, administration officials briefed
committee staff on the Global Peace Operations Initiative. In
general, the initiative is a joint venture between the
Department of Defense and the Department of State to train and
equip roughly 75,000 foreign military personnel in peacekeeping
and peace enforcement operations over five years. The
administration further proposed legislative authority for the
Department of Defense to spend up to $100 million in operations
and maintenance funding on training foreign military forces,
either by transferring those funds to the Department of State
or conducting the training itself. Over the next five years,
the administration estimated that the total cost of the
initiative would be $606 million and that the Department of
Defense would be responsible for roughly eighty percent of the
total. However, the administration did not request those funds
for the Department of Defense in the fiscal year 2005 budget
request and that they are not currently programmed in the five-
year defense plan.
In general, the committee supports the goals of the Global
Peace Operations Initiative. However, it is concerned about the
process by which the administration seeks to fund the program
and move it forward. Historically, the Department of State has
trained and equipped foreign military forces for the United
States under title 22 of the U.S. Code, which restricts the
kinds of training that can be provided and the countries to
which it can be provided in order to ensure that such
activities are consistent with U.S. human rights practices and
foreign policy. In this case, however, the administration
proposed exempting the Global Peace Operations Initiative from
those legal constraints and requested authority to use
Department of Defense funding intended to pay for the
operations and maintenance of U.S. forces. As a result, any use
of the authority could mean depriving U.S. forces of the
resources that the administration had requested, and which
Congress had authorized and appropriated, for their operations
and maintenance. Therefore, the committee recommends against
granting the authority requested. Instead, it recommends a
provision that would seek additional information on the Global
Peace Operations Initiative.
Section 1214--Procurement Sanctions against Foreign Persons that
Transfer Certain Defense Articles and Services to the People's Republic
of China
This section would make it the policy of the United States
to prevent destabilizing arms transfers to the People's
Republic of China by denying Department of Defense procurement
contracts to foreign companies that sell China items similar to
those found on the U.S. Munitions List. The section would also
require the Secretary of Defense to publish a list of such
companies in the Federal Register.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION
OVERVIEW
The budget request included $409.2 million for Cooperative
Threat Reduction (CTR) programs with the states of the former
Soviet Union for fiscal year 2005. This is $41.6 million less
than requested for fiscal year 2004 and $39.4 million less than
was appropriated for fiscal year 2004. The funding request
breaks out as follows: $58.5 million for strategic offensive
arms elimination in Russia; $48.7 million for nuclear weapons
storage security in Russia; $26.2 million for nuclear weapons
transportation security in Russia; $158.4 million for chemical
weapons destruction in Russia; $55.0 million for biological
weapons proliferation prevention in the states of the former
Soviet Union; $40.0 million for weapons of mass destruction
proliferation prevention in the states of the former Soviet
Union; $8.0 million for defense and military contacts; and,
$14.3 million for activities designated as Other Assessments/
Administrative Support. Programmatic funding levels are
generally consistent with those requested in fiscal year 2004
with one notable exception. The request for chemical weapons
destruction in Russia is $41.9 million less than requested and
appropriated for fiscal year 2004. According to the Department
of Defense, the decrease in funding reflects the state of
construction at the Russian chemical weapons dismantlement
facility in Shchuch'ye.
The committee continues to support the goals of the
Cooperative Threat Reduction program and recommends funding at
the levels requested. In particular, it notes the positive
steps being taken to improve oversight of the program within
the Department, such as beginning the process of identifying
and deploying on-site managers to improve project oversight
within states of the former Soviet Union and increased
reporting as required in the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136). The Department took
the additional step of making officials within the Office of
the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics (OUSD/AT&L) responsible for oversight of Cooperative
Threat Reduction programs. As a result, OUSD/AT&L established
cost, schedule, and performance baselines, a milestone decision
authority process, and a phased approach to project
implementation that have long been lacking in CTR programs, and
to which most acquisition programs are routinely subjected.
Together, these efforts address many of the shortcomings that
the committee identified and worked to address during the
1990s.
The committee further applauds the steps that Cooperative
Threat Reduction partners have taken to increase their
commitment of resources to the goals of the program. In
particular, the committee notes increases in Russian funding
for chemical weapons destruction from 2001 to 2002 and the
President's December 6, 2003, certification that Russia would
spend at least $33.0 million on the Shchuch'ye project in 2003.
Additionally, during 2003, Russia took proactive steps to
improve chemical weapons destruction by concluding in March
2003 a legally binding agreement to destroy all nerve agents at
a single site, which it reaffirmed in a September 2003
amendment to the agreement. Together, these steps mark
significant progress in meeting the conditions upon which
Congress made continued assistance for the Shchuch'ye facility
dependent. They also validate the committee's approach to
funding CTR programs, in which the United States commitment is
carefully matched to significant, concrete, and concurrent
demonstrations of commitment by the respective CTR partner.
Despite the improvements discussed above, some Russian
behavior continues to suggest that the Russian government does
not place as high a priority on the goals of the Cooperative
Threat Reduction program as the United States. First, Russia
continues to modernize its strategic nuclear forces, suggesting
it views modernizing its strategic arsenal as more important
than securing and dismantling excess weapons of mass
destruction inherited from the Soviet Union. At the end of
2003, for example, it deployed several new Topol-M
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In contrast, the
United States has not deployed a new ICBM in almost two
decades. Second, questions remain about the completeness and
accuracy of Russia's declarations regarding the size of the
chemical weapons stockpile in Russia. While U.S. andRussian
negotiators continue to discuss the problem, Russian officials have
consistently rejected U.S. proposals intended to increase visibility
into Russian chemical weapons stockpiles. Third, Russia has not
developed a comprehensive and credible plan for destroying its
stockpile of nerve agents. Such a plan is necessary to ensure that the
value of U.S. expenditures on the Shchuch'ye chemical weapons
dismantlement facility is fully realized.
As a result of these last two factors, the President cannot
certify that Russia is in compliance with the preconditions for
continuing U.S. CTR assistance in section 1305 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) as amended. Consequently, the President has again requested
authority to waive those conditions.
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Visa Requirements
The committee is aware of concerns that efforts to tighten
visa requirements after September 11, 2001 may have had the
unintended consequence of hampering the effectiveness of the
Department of Defense and the Department of Energy
nonproliferation programs by imposing delays in collaborative
programs and complicating the international cooperation and
coordination required. Therefore, the committee directs that
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy submit a
report no later than six months after the enactment of this
Act, identifying the causes of any new delays and assessing the
costs and benefits of various means by which those delays might
be remedied.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs
and Funds
This section would specify the kinds of programs to be
funded under this title and authorize them at the level of the
budget request. It would also make fiscal year 2005 Cooperative
Threat Reduction funds available for three years.
Section 1302--Funding Allocations
This section would allocate fiscal year 2004 funding for
various Cooperative Threat Reduction purposes and activities at
the levels requested by the President.
Section 1303--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on Funding for
Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in Russia
This section would extend for one year the President's
authority to waive preconditions established in section 1305 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(Public Law 106-65) for continuing certain Cooperative Threat
Reduction programs. The President's current authority expires
at the end of fiscal year 2004. The committee notes that Russia
has made progress in meeting several of the aforementioned
conditions and believes that the existence of those conditions
serves as an incentive for further progress.
TITLE XIV--EXPORT CONTROLS AND COUNTERPROLIFERATION MATTERS
OVERVIEW
The committee agrees with the President that the nexus of
weapons of mass destruction and terrorism is a critical threat
facing the United States in the 21st century. The committee
also agrees with the President's call on February 11, 2004 to
strengthen export controls, both domestic and international, as
a means of ensuring that terrorist groups and their state
supporters are not able to acquire capabilities to design,
develop, or employ weapons of mass destruction. In particular,
it notes that proliferation networks have grown increasingly
sophisticated at exploiting legitimate international trade to
spread such capabilities. The network of Pakistani weapons
scientist A.Q. Khan, for example, has been widely implicated in
spreading nuclear technology to a number of countries of
concern. At the same time, the committee notes the growing role
of international consortia in producing advanced military
capabilities. In general, certain exceptions in existing export
control regimes were designed to govern state-to-state
transactions, but are now being employed to facilitate
international transactions among non-state actors. The
committee is concerned that these two trends are beginning to
intersect and that proliferation networks will begin to exploit
loopholes in existing export control regimes to acquire
dangerous capabilities. Therefore, the committee, in close
cooperation with the Committee on International Relations,
developed a series of provisions intended to rationalize and
harmonize export controls with the new international security
environment.
Recognizing the importance of a multilateral approach, the
committee also recommends provisions intended to assist other
countries in improving their capacity to prevent proliferation
networks from acquiring sensitive technology through illicit
activities disguised as legitimate defense trade. These include
domestic counterproliferation fellowships for foreign military
and defense ministry personnel in order to improve their
understanding and application of counterproliferation tools and
an expansion of the Secretary of Defense's authority to provide
assistance to existing programs by the U.S. Customs Bureau and
Federal Bureau of Investigations to train foreign customs and
law enforcement officials in the skills needed to stem the
spread of weapons of mass destruction.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Defense Technology Security Administration
The budget request included $20.5 million for the Defense
Technology Security Administration (DTSA), which seeks to
safeguard the United States and its allies by controlling and
monitoring international technology transfers and preventing
inappropriate technology transfers. The committee recommends
$21.5 million in order to bolster the Administration's ability
to prevent U.S. high technology from falling into the hands of
potential adversaries.
Defense Threat Reduction Agency
The budget request included $325.5 million for the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) which seeks to reduce the threat
of future weapons of mass destruction being employed against
the United States and its allies. The committee supports the
work of DTRA andrecommends an increase of an additional $1.4
million to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency in order to strengthen
and expand the existing federal effort to help foreign governments
improve their export control performance through an export control data
base currently used by some 18 countries in Eastern Europe and the
former Soviet Union. The committee recommends the funds be used to
continue existing subscriptions of the export control database for
foreign countries, supply the database to additional countries around
the globe, provide education and training for its use worldwide,
enhance the quality and utility of the database by expanding its
coverage of weapons of mass destruction information, and perform
related research and public education initiatives on export control
policy.
Nonproliferation Education
The committee notes that the next Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty (NPT) review conference will be held in 2005, and will
come at a time of heightened concern over the threat of
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The
committee welcomes the important steps taken by the
Administration to enhance current U.S. counter and non-
proliferation efforts, including the four proposals offered by
the President on February 11, 2004:
(1) Expansion of the Proliferation Security
Initiative (PSI) to go beyond shipments and transfers,
to increase collaboration between intelligence, law
enforcement, and military agencies to target and shut
down weapons traffickers, WMD suppliers, their labs,
and buyers;
(2) Strengthened laws and international controls
governing proliferation, including a new Security
Council resolution requiring all states to criminalize
proliferation, enact strict export controls, and secure
all sensitive materials within their borders;
(3) Expansion of U.S. Nunn-Lugar efforts, where the
President noted great success since 1991 but also
added, ``We have more work to do there;'' and
(4) Elimination of a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
loophole that has been exploited by nations such as
North Korea and Iran, which have been allowed to
produce nuclear material that can be used to build
bombs under the cover of civilian nuclear programs.
The committee believes that increased attention to
proliferation concerns provides an opportunity to stimulate and
encourage new entrants into nonproliferation and international
security careers, and a chance to increase public understanding
of the national and international security ramifications of the
NPT and other efforts to stem WMD proliferation. The committee
commends efforts by universities and other non-government
organizations to broaden awareness of these critical issues,
and believes that efforts to encourage the study of
nonproliferation and international security issues are a
welcome addition to postsecondary educational curricula.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Export Controls
Section 1401--Definitions under Arms Export Control Act
This section would clarify the definitions of ``license,''
``agent,'' and ``exporting agent'' as they are applied under
the Arms Export Control Act (Public Law 90-629). Currently,
such terms are not defined. The definition of ``license'' would
require it to be in written form. While current regulations
require licenses to be in writing, the Department of State
recently unilaterally issued a ``verbal'' license to approve
the export of military guidance and sensor chips to the
People's Republic of China (PRC), at a time when such items are
normally prohibited for sale to the PRC. The chips were
embedded in a commercial aircraft sale, but can be used in
missile guidance systems. The Department of State's explanation
for this significant departure from normal practice--that
weather conditions in Washington, DC precluded the timely
issuance of a written license--is not acceptable given the
sensitivity of the technology involved.
The definition of ``agent'' would ensure that persons
covered by the definition are in fact empowered by their
governments to act as emissaries of those governments in some
capacity. Restrictions on the transfer of exported goods
generally limit such transfers among those governments or their
agents. However, several European states have begun to re-
interpret ``agents'' to mean representatives of a commercial
firm within their borders. This looser definition effectively
creates a loophole in which exports to certain countries could
be approved with the expectation that the only individuals who
have access to those exports are government officials, but in
which access is considerably broader. The committee believes
this change is necessary to ensure that advanced technology
entrusted to foreign governments continues to be controlled
with the care that has historically been afforded to it.
The definition of ``exporting agent'' means the freight
forwarder or consignee as designated on a license application
and authorized to act on behalf of the license applicant.
Section 1402--Exemption from Licensing Requirements for Export of
Significant Military Equipment
This section would prohibit the President from creating
regulatory exemptions for significant military equipment that
would otherwise require an export license. Section 47 of the
Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2794) defines ``significant
military equipment'' as articles for which special export
controls are warranted and are identified on the United States
Munitions List. As a practical matter, this limitation would
result in little change from current practice. However, the
Department of State recently proposed exempting a class of
significant military equipment from the requirement to obtain a
license, raising concerns about setting precedents for the
license-free export of major combat systems. This section would
inoculate the U.S. Government from pressures to export those
systems without first giving such exports the added scrutiny
and safeguards inherent in the licensing process.
Section 1403--Cooperative Projects with Friendly Foreign Countries
This section would create a process by which Congress has
an opportunity to reject a cooperative project proposal it
currently receives under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
2767). Similar procedures already exist for commercial and
military exports undertaken under the Arms Export Control Act
(22 U.S.C. 2776). This section would also ensure that
commercial exports embedded in an international cooperative
project will require a license under Section 38 of the Arms
Export Control Act governing commercial arms exports.
Historically, cooperative projects with friendly foreign
countries were conducted as government-to-government
activities. However, in recent years, such projects have
increasingly included corporate entities and accorded them
growing authority in making project decisions, outside of the
normal licensing process. As the United States makes increasing
use of such projects in the research, development, and
acquisition process, the committee is concerned that controls
on the exports of sensitive military technologies are being
inadvertently loosened in order streamline the
project'sexecution. It is concerned that this process may take place
without regard to the need to ensure sensitive military capabilities do
not fall into the hands of potential adversaries or terrorist groups.
By aligning the Congressional review process on cooperative projects
with the review process on commercial arms exports and requiring a
license for commercial entities embedded in a cooperative project, this
section would ensure that security interests continue to predominate in
such projects.
Section 1404--Licensing Requirement for Export of Militarily Critical
Technologies
This section would require the President to require
exporters of militarily critical technologies to obtain an
export license for the export or re-export of any item on the
Militarily Critical Technologies List published by the
Department of Defense (DOD). The Export Administration Act of
1979 established process for licensing import or export of
dual-use technologies. It also required the Department of
Defense to prepare a Militarily Critical Technologies List
(MCTL). The Departments of Defense and Commerce are expected to
integrate the MCTL into the list of dual-use goods and
technologies that require a license to export under the Export
Administration Act.
However, in recent years, concerns have been raised that
MCTL goods were not being appropriately controlled. Section
1211 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2004 (Public Law 108-136) requires DOD to prepare a report on
technologies needed to ensure U.S. military superiority and
identify whether those items were controlled under any export
control regime. That report was delivered on March 5, 2004 and
identified several technologies that are not controlled under
the Export Administration Regulations or the Arms Export
Control Act, including, among others,: (1) Amorphous Silicon
Focal Plane Arrays used in Night Vision Devices; (2) UAV kits
to convert civil aircraft; (3) Precision Approach Radars
containing electronically scanned arrays (useful in EW); (4)
Surveillance Direction Finders; (5) GPS receivers with
interference protection; and, (6) High-Precision, Multi-Axis
Job Grinders, a machine tool used to make missile guidance
components. These systems fall into categories identified on
the MCTL, confirming that such technologies are not adequately
controlled. This section would continue to allow exports of
such militarily critical technologies, but would ensure that
the exports remain consistent with national security.
Section 1405--Control of Exports of United States Weapons Technology to
the People's Republic of China
This section would prohibit the export of certain
technologies to individuals or countries engaged in the sale of
such items to the security services of the People's Republic of
China unless certain conditions are met. Such conditions would
require that a license was approved for that export, the
Secretary of Defense concurs in the export, and the foreign
person or country agrees in writing not to transfer title,
possession of, or otherwise provide access to that item without
prior, written, consent by the President.
The committee is concerned by reports that military trade
embargos imposed on the People's Republic of China after the
Tiananmen Square massacre might be weakened or discontinued.
The committee is also concerned that the weakening of such
restrictions would send the wrong message about the importance
of respecting human rights, undermine international controls
intended to prevent the proliferation of sensitive dual-use and
military technology, and exacerbate a serious military
imbalance in Asia.
Section 1406--Strengthening International Export Controls
This section would make it the policy of the United States
to seek continued negotiations to strengthen the international
export control system for arms and militarily-sensitive goods
and technologies to countries of concern. It requires a
Presidential report on progress made in strengthening
international controls 180 days after enactment and every six
months thereafter.
Subtitle B--Counterproliferation Matters
Section 1411--Defense International Counterproliferation Programs
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
expand existing programs to train foreign border and law
enforcement officials in preventing the illicit transfer of
weapons of mass destruction in the states of the former Soviet
Union, Eastern Europe, and the Baltic states, by granting the
Secretary authority to conduct those programs in any other
country in which the Secretary determines a significant threat
exists. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1995 (Public Law 103-337) established a joint program between
the Department of Defense and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation to conduct training of law enforcement officials
in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to deter,
interdict, and counter any organized crime involvement in the
illegal acquisition of weapons of mass destruction. The
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public
Law 104-201) established a joint program between the Department
of Defense and the United States Customs Service to assist
customs and border guard entities in the former Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe to prevent the unauthorized transfer and
transportation of weapons of mass destruction and related
material.
Section 1412--Defense Counterproliferation Fellowship Program
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
establish a fellowship program to train and educate foreign
defense policymakers and military officers in identifying and
using counterproliferation tools to combat the spread of
weapons of mass destruction. It would further direct the
Secretary to establish a domestic fellowship program for the
purposes of improving the Department of Defense's ability to
exploit non-government expertise in combating the spread of
weapons of mass destruction. The President has identified the
nexus among terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, and rogue
states as a critical threat to United States national security.
Nonproliferation and counterproliferation tools, such as export
controls and the Proliferation Security Initiative, can play a
vital role in containing that threat worldwide.
Subtitle C--Initiatives Relating to Countries of the Former Soviet
Union
Section 1421--Silk Road Initiative
This section would make it the policy of the United States
to establish and promote programs to prevent the proliferation
from former Soviet scientists, engineers, and technicians of
the expertise useful to the development of weapons of mass
destruction. It further authorizes the Secretary of Energy to
carry out a program known as the Silk Road Initiative to
promote employment in the former Soviet republics in the
Caucasus and Central Asia. It encourages the Secretary to begin
a pilot program in the Republic of Georgia and authorizes the
Secretary tospend up to $10.0 million on the program from
within funds available for nonproliferation and international security
in fiscal year 2005.
Section 1422--Teller-Kurchatov Nonproliferation Fellowships
This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to
conduct a fellowship program in which an American scientist
serves as a fellow at the Kurchatov Institute in Russia and a
Russian scientist to serve as a fellow in the Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory. It authorizes the Secretary to
spend up to $10.0 million on the program from within funds
available for nonproliferation and international security in
fiscal year 2005.
Section 1423--Collaboration to Reduce the Risks of a Launch of Russian
Nuclear Weapons
This section finds that certain limitations of the Russian
nuclear command and control system raise concerns about the
prospects for an accidental or unauthorized launch of Russian
strategic ballistic missiles. It directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to Congress no later than November
1, 2005 on steps that might be taken to reduce that danger,
including an assessment of the risks and opportunities
associated with taking those steps.
TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION IRAQI
FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM
OVERVIEW
The committee recommends authorization of $25 billion in
funds to be appropriated for fiscal year 2005 to support the
defense activities principally associated with Operation Iraqi
Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom and the global war on
terrorism. These funds are designated for emergency contingency
operations related to the global war on terrorism pursuant to
H. Con. Res. 393, establishing the congressional budget for the
United States Government for fiscal year 2005 and setting forth
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2004 and 2006
though 2009, as passed by the House of Representatives on March
25, 2004.
The increase in insurgent and terrorist action during the
period preceding the return of sovereignty to the Iraqi
government has increased the cost of operations. The committee
believes that it is essential to recognize the change in
operational level and ensure full funding is available to
support U.S. troops and their needs.
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATION
The following table provides a summary of the committee's
authorization of funds for this purpose by appropriations
account.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Procurement
It is the highest priority of the committee that our troops
be supported with the equipment necessary to successfully
accomplish their missions in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation
Enduring Freedom and the global war on terrorism. The committee
recommends authorization for procurement to support force
protection, the rapid fielding initiative for basic infantry
combat equipment, combat losses of essential equipment, the
Army's modularity initiative, and essential combat related
unfunded requirements of our armed forces.
The committee's recommendations for procurement in this
title include full support of the force protection needs of our
units. Included in the force protection recommendation is full
funding for the Up Armor High Mobilility Multipurpose Wheeled
Vehicle (HMMWV); bolt-on ballistic armor for HMMWVs and trucks;
and Interceptor Body Armor (IBA), including funding for add-on
protection for the shoulder and side body areas. Intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) are important elements of
force protection and are critical to interdict, disrupt, and
defeat the insurgent and terrorist threat. Therefore, this
title also includes authorization to procure unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAV) that are currently in production to provide
these UAV assets to the units in theater in sufficient quantity
to meet both their operational and ISR requirements.
The committee fully supports the Army's efforts to
transform the structure of its divisions into smaller
organizations to create additional combat relevant units. This
reorganization known as ``modularity'' will contribute to the
reduction of stress on our troops due to the high operational
tempo of operations in southwest Asia. This title authorizes an
aggressive down payment for the equipment costs of both
modularity and the rapid fielding initiative as displayed in
the Army unfunded requirements list so that every infantry
soldier has the equipment necessary to perform their mission.
This title also provides authorization for the combat
related, unfunded equipment requirements of the Marine Corp and
Army as submitted by the service chiefs in February and March
2004 and to replace combat losses in aviation and other
equipment.
Operations and Maintenance
The military departments and defense agencies need
operations and maintenance (O&M) funds to pay for food, fuel,
spare parts, maintenance, transportation, camp, post, and base
expenses that have risen dramatically as a result of Operation
Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). Much
of these expenses are captured in the O&M funding for operating
tempo. This cost is significant. Without additional funding at
the start of fiscal year 2005, the military departments will be
forced to use third and fourth quarter O&M funds in the initial
months of fiscal year 2005 to pay for OIF and OEF costs. This
presents significant accounting and budgetary hurdles and
alters the ability to plan properly for the entire year. The
committee, therefore, believes that O&M war-related costs
should be funded prior to the start of the fiscal year. In
addition, the committee is funding critical equipment for the
Iraq and Afghanistan theater that will improve our troops'
welfare and combat effectiveness. The committee believes that
these items should be funded immediately.
Military Personnel
The committee long has advocated for increases in active
component manpower to sustain the full range of capabilities
required of and missions assigned to the Armed Forces. Thus the
committee recommended in the National Defense Authorization
Acts for Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004 increases of 10,350 and
6,240 respectively in active component manpower above the
budget requests.
More recently, the Army Chief of Staff announced a plan for
a temporary increase of 30,000 in the Army's active component
end strength, not only to improve its ability to meet the full
range of its worldwide missions, but also to increase its
current active combat capability from 33 brigades to 43-48
brigades. To support the Army's need, the committee recommends
in this title a cumulative active component increase of 30,000
(to an end strength of 512,400), in increments of 10,000 each
in fiscal years 2005 through 2007. The committee would also
temporarily adjust the minimum end strength floors to reflect
the increases in authorized end strength.
To ensure the Marine Corps can continue to provide and
sustain the force levels required of it by the national
security strategy, the committee recommends in this title a
cumulative active component Marine Corps increase of 9,000 (to
and end strength of 184,000), in increments of 3,000 each in
fiscal years 2005 through 2007. The committee would also adjust
the minimum end strength floors to reflect the increases in
authorized end strength.
The committee recommends an additional $1,179 million for
military personnel, operations and maintenance to fund the
additional Army and Marine Corps active component manpower in
fiscal year 2005. To fund increased Army and Marine Corps
manpower in fiscal years 2006 and beyond, the committee
recommends that starting in fiscal year 2006 the Secretary of
the Treasury would assume the requirement for the annual
payment to the Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree
Health Care Fund that is now made by the Secretary of Defense.
The committee expects that the Secretary of Defense will use
the resulting funding flexibility to fully fund the costs of
the Army transformation efforts and Marine Corps end strength
growth in fiscal year 2006 and beyond.
To address the concerns of the Secretary of Defense and the
Chief of Staff of the Army that end strength increases should
not be made permanent, the committee's recommendation provides
for only temporary end strength growth through the end of
fiscal year 2007--the point at which Army leadership has
indicated it will be in a better position to assess future
manning levels. Furthermore, this committee recommendation
would require that if the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of the Army, or the Secretary of the Navy,
believes changes should be made to the strength levels
authorized by this title, then those changes must be provided
to the committee prior to the submission of the budget request
for any fiscal year.
Finally, to provide for the active component and reserve
component military manpower deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan
for the first quarter of fiscal year 2005, the committee would
authorize $4.4 billion. In addition, the committee would also
authorize $141 million to extend the authority of the
Department of Defense to continue paying higher levels of
family separation allowance and imminent danger pay.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1501--Purpose
This section would establish this title as an authorization
of appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year
2005, in addition to amounts otherwise authorized in this Act,
to provide funds for additional costs due to Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 1511--Army Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $2,439.2 million
for fiscal year 2005 Army procurement.
Section 1512--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $136.6 million
for fiscal year 2005 Navy and Marine Corps procurement.
Section 1513--Air Force Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $99.0 million
for fiscal year 2005 Air Force procurement.
Section 1514--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement
This section would authorize an additional $720.0 million
for fiscal year 2005 Defense-Wide Activities procurement.
Section 1515--Operation and Maintenance
This section would authorize an additional $16,225.2
million for fiscal year 2005 operation and maintenance
programs.
Section 1516--Defense Health Program
This section would authorize $75.0 million to be
appropriated to the Defense Health Program (DHP) for operations
and maintenance for fiscal year 2005.
Section 1517--Military Personnel
This section would authorize $5,305.0 million to be
appropriated to the Department of Defense for military
personnel for fiscal year 2005.
Section 1518--Treatment as Additional Authorization
This section would authorize an additional $25 billion for
emergency contingency operations related to the global war on
terrorism to the amounts otherwise authorized in this Act.
Section 1519--Transfer Authority
This section would provide fiscal year 2005 transfer
authority of $2.5 billion to the Department of Defense for the
authorizations contained in this title.
Section 1520--Designation of Emergency Authorization
This section would authorize $25 billion for fiscal year
2005 to support emergency contingency operations related to the
global war on terrorism.
Subtitle B--Personnel Provisions
Section 1531--Three Year Increase in Active Army Strength Levels
This section would increase the active Army end strength
authorized for fiscal year 2005 by 10,000 above the
authorization contained in section 401. This section would also
authorize active Army end strengths for fiscal years 2006 and
2007 of 502,400 and 512,400 respectively. This section would
establish temporary new minimum active duty end strengths for
the Army as of September 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively.
These changes in minimum strengths reflect the committee's
recommendations for Army end strength provided by this section.
The section would also direct that if the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Secretary of the Army, determines that
adjustments are necessary to the minimum end strength levels,
then the Secretary of Defense shall submit a report of his
recommendations and rationale for change to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services prior to the submission of the budget request for the
fiscal year in which the change would be effective.
Section 1532--Three Year Increase in Active Marine Corps Strength
Levels
This section would increase the United States Marine Corps
active end strength authorized for fiscal year 2005 by 3,000
above the authorization contained in section 401. This section
would also authorize U.S. Marine Corps active end strengths for
fiscal years 2006 and 2007 of 181,000 and 184,000 respectively.
This section would establish temporary new minimum active duty
end strengths for the Marine Corps as of September 30, 2005,
2006 and 2007 respectively. These changes in minimum strengths
reflect the committee's recommendations for Marine Corps active
end strength provided by this section. The section would also
direct that if the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with
the Secretary of the Navy, determines that adjustments are
necessary to the minimum end strength levels, then the
Secretary of Defense shall submit a report of his
recommendations and rationale for change to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services prior to the submission of the budget request for the
fiscal year in which the change would be effective.
Section 1533--Extension of Increased Rates for Imminent Danger Pay and
Family Separation Allowance
This section would make permanent the increase in the rate
of imminent danger pay from $150 per month to $225 per month
and the increase in the rate of family separation allowance
from $100 per month to $250 per month.
Subtitle C--Financial Management Matters
Section 1541--Revised Funding Methodology for Military Retiree Health
Care Benefits
This section would revise the process for funding the
annual payments that are required to be paid into the
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care
Fund. Beginning in fiscal year 2006, the Secretary of the
Treasury would make the annual payments from the general fund
of the Treasury. Under current law the Secretary of Defense, as
well as the secretaries of the other departments whose
beneficiaries participate in the TRICARE for Life program, make
these annual payments.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
PURPOSE
Division B provides military construction and related
authorities in support of the military departments during
fiscal year 2005. As recommended by the committee, Division B
would authorize appropriations in the amount of $9,930,475,000
for construction in support of the active forces, reserve
components, defense agencies, and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization security infrastructure fund for fiscal year 2005.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW
The Department of Defense (DOD) requested $5,308,879,000
for military construction and $4,171,596,000 for family housing
for fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of
$5,778,709,000 for military construction and $4,151,766,000 for
family housing in fiscal year 2005. The committee's
recommendations are consistent with a total budget authority
level of $9,930,475,000 for military construction and family
housing in fiscal year 2005.
The committee's recommendation to increase the budget
request for military construction and family housing reflects
continued concern about the state of DOD infrastructure. Every
Congress for the past decade has acted on similar concerns by
adding funds to military construction and family housing
budgets. This historic trend is a clear indication that the
annual budget requests for DOD infrastructure and facilities
are routinely inadequate.
Of additional concern is the fact that the fiscal year 2005
budget request for military construction and family housing
includes less funding than the fiscal year 2004 program, as
enacted. Furthermore, the fiscal year 2005 request for these
programs is nearly $1,400,000,000 smaller than was forecast in
the fiscal year 2004 budget. Finally, the forecasted total for
military construction over the fiscal year 2005 Future Years
Defense Program (FYDP) is $6,000,000,000 less than the amounts
forecasted in the fiscal year 2004 FYDP.
Unless these forecasted increases become reality, the
Department will not be able to meet its current facilities
needs, nor will it be able to meet the substantial facilities
requirements associated with Army transformation, increased
Army force structure, and the Global Posture Review.
Considering the importance of facilities and infrastructure to
military readiness, quality of life, retention, and operational
capabilities, the committee urges the Department to ensure that
future military construction and family housing budget requests
are properly resourced.
With regard to maintenance, repair, and sustainment of
facilities, the committee applauds the Department for
implementing a legitimate model for determining sustainment
budgets. However, the Department does not have an effective
model for base operations, repair, and modernization budgets.
As a result, these accounts continue to be funded at levels
that do not support ``must pay'' bills for utilities and
critical base services. While operations, maintenance, and
repair budgets are primarily funded in title III of this Act,
funding shortfalls in these areas directly affect the
condition, usability, and lifespan of military facilities and
family housing projects funded in Division B. Therefore, the
committee urges the Department to fully fund facilities-related
budgets, including military construction, family housing, base
operations, sustainment, restoration, and maintenance programs.
Finally, the Department continues to develop the Global
Posture Review, a comprehensive review and restructuring of the
Department's overseas basing strategy. While the Department has
provided Congress glimpses of parts of the review, it has not
yet finalized its overseas basing decisions, nor has it
provided Congress with a complete picture of its plans.
While this would be troubling in any year, the committee is
particularly concerned that the review, which is expected to
return significant numbers of overseas-based military personnel
to the United States, will not be finalized until the base
closure process is well under way. As a result, Congress will
not have the opportunity to review and validate the
Department's overseas basing decisions before they are
implemented through the base closure process. Furthermore, the
Department is in the midst of several additional evolving
efforts that are likely to have significant effects on the
infrastructure requirements of the military services, including
force transformation and changes in endstrength related to the
active and reserve personnel mix of the services. Therefore,
the committee has included provisions in Division B to ensure
that the Department presents Congress with a complete plan of
future infrastructure requirements before proceeding with the
base closure process.
A tabular summary of the authorizations provided in
Division B for fiscal year 2005 follows:
TITLE XXI--ARMY
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,771,285,000 for Army
military construction and $1,565,006,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,866,209,000 for military construction and $1,562,606,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2005.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following projects:
$750,000 for an aircraft maintenance hangar at Cairns Army Air
Field, Fort Rucker, Alabama; $561,000 for a runway extension at
Amedee Army Airfield, Sierra Army Depot, California; $2,250,000
for a receptee barracks expansion at Fort Benning, Georgia;
$310,000 for a law enforcement complex at Fort Gordon, Georgia;
$365,000 for a consolidated shipping center at Bluegrass Depot,
Kentucky; $278,000 for a child development center at Tobyhanna,
Pennsylvania; $486,000 for a military operations on unbanized
terrain collective training facility at Fort A.P. Hill,
Virginia; and $500,000 for access roads at Fort Belvoir,
Virginia.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Army
construction projects for fiscal year 2005. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2102--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
2005.
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize new improvements to existing
units of family housing for fiscal year 2005.
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year
2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount
the Army may spend on military construction projects.
Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
Year 2004 Projects
This section would amend the table in section 2101 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004
(division B of Public Law 108-136) to increase the amounts
authorized for construction at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and Fort
Drum, New York.
Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
Year 2003 Project
This section would amend the table in section 2101 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003
(division B of Public Law 107-314) to increase the amount
authorized for construction at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.
TITLE XXII--NAVY
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,060,455,000 for Navy
military construction and $843,611,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,077,862,000 for military construction and $835,411,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2005.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Navy complete
planning and design activities for the following projects:
$250,000 for an advanced sensors integration facility at Naval
Air Weapons Station China Lake, California; $268,000 for
physical gate security enhancements at Marine Corps Air Station
Miramar, California; $150,000 for phase two of an aircraft
parking apron at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida;
$150,000 for a consolidated operations support facility at
Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida; and $1,032,000 for
improvements to machine shops at Norfolk Naval Shipyard
Detachment, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Navy
construction projects for fiscal year 2005. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2202--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year
2005.
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize new improvements to existing
units of family housing for fiscal year 2005.
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Navy's budget for fiscal year
2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount
the Navy may spend on military construction projects.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $663,964,000 for Air Force
military construction and $1,710,855,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of
$792,054,000 for military construction and $1,701,625,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2005.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
complete planning and design activities for the following
projects: $880,000 for a security forces operational facility
at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida; $8,000,000 for a
consolidated Central Command facility at MacDill Air Force
Base, Florida; $1,340,000 for a logistics readiness center at
Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho; $1,332,000 for a
consolidated mobility processing center at McConnell Air Force
Base, Kansas; $890,000 for alteration of a fuel cell dock at
Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota; $497,000 for runway repair
at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska; $837,000 for a fire and
crash rescue station at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada; and
$670,000 for a mission support complex at Fairchild Air Force
Base, Washington.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Air Force
construction projects for fiscal year 2005. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2302--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2005.
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize new improvements to existing
units of family housing for fiscal year 2005.
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Air Force's budget for fiscal
year 2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the
amount the Air Force may spend on military construction
projects.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $699,437,000 for defense
agency military construction and $49,624,000 for family housing
for fiscal year 2005. The budget request also included
$81,886,000 for chemical demilitarization construction projects
in a separate title. The committee recommends including
chemical demilitarization construction in Title XXIV.
Therefore, the committee recommends authorization of
$790,823,000 for military construction and $49,624,000 for
family housing for defense agencies for fiscal year 2005.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section contains the list of authorized defense
agencies construction projects for fiscal year 2005. The
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
Section 2402--Improvements to Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2005.
Section 2403--Energy Conservation Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out energy conservation projects.
Section 2404--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies
This section would authorize specific amounts for each line
item contained in the defense agencies' budgets for fiscal year
2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount
the defense agencies may spend on military construction
projects.
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $165,800,000 for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) infrastructure fund (NATO
Security Investment Program) for fiscal year 2005. The
committee recommends authorization of $165,800,000 for fiscal
year 2005.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program in an amount equal to the sum of
the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of this bill
and the amount of recoupment due to the United States for
construction previously financed by the United States.
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO
This section would authorize $165,800,000 as the U.S.
contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $619,936,000 for military
construction of guard and reserve facilities for fiscal year
2005. The committee recommends authorization for fiscal year
2005 of $839,845,000 to be distributed as follows:
Army National Guard........................................$393,225,000
Air National Guard..........................................184,620,000
Army Reserve................................................116,955,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve...............................30,955,000
Air Force Reserve...........................................114,090,000
________________
Total.................................................839,845,000
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design, Air National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
complete planning and design activities for the following
projects: $772,000 for a composite operations and training
facility at Montgomery, Alabama; $509,000 for a space warning
system squadron support facility at Greeley Air National Guard
Station, Colorado; $300,000 for the relocation of the base
entrance at Capital Municipal Airport, Illinois; $650,000 for a
fire and crash rescue station at Rosecrans Memorial Airport,
Missouri; $990,000 for a pararescue complex at Francis S.
Gabreski Airport, New York; and $501,000 for a fire and crash
rescue station at Stewart International Airport, New York.
Planning and Design, Air Reserve
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
complete planning and design activities for the following
project: $954,000 for phase one of a joint services lodging
facility at Youngstown Air Reserve Station, Ohio.
Planning and Design, Army National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following projects:
$789,000 for a joint armed forces reserve center at Daytona
Beach, Florida; $844,000 for a armed forces reserve center at
Gary, Indiana; $614,000 for a national guard and reserve center
building at Lincoln Airbase, Nebraska; $485,000 for a readiness
center at Hermitage, Pennsylvania; $1,999,000 for phase two of
a readiness center addition and alteration at Nashville,
Tennessee; $935,000 for a joint armed forces reserve center at
Smyrna, Tennessee; $530,000 for a readiness center at
Winchester, Virginia; and $2,014,000 for a readiness center at
Fort Lewis, Washington.
Planning and Design, Army Reserve
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following project:
$843,000 for a reserve center at Garden Grove, California.
Unspecified Minor Construction, Army National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Army
execute the following project: $2,700,000 for a wastewater
treatment facility at Camp Shelby, Mississippi.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISION
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize appropriations for military
construction for the guard and reserve by service component for
fiscal year 2005. The state list contained in this report is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to be
Specified by Law
This section would provide that authorizations for military
construction projects, repair of real property, land
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities,
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
infrastructure program, and guard and reserve projects will
expire on October 1, 2007, or the date of enactment of an act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2008, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated
before October 1, 2007, or the date of enactment of an act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2008, whichever is later.
Section 2702--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2002
Projects
This section would extend fiscal year 2002 military
construction authorizations until October 1, 2005, or the date
of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2006, whichever is later. The
extended authorization applies to the following projects:
$23,000,000 for construction of a power plant cooling tower at
Fort Wainwright, Alaska; $1,500,000 for Parker Ranch land
acquisition at Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii; $11,400,000 for
construction of family housing at Buckley Air Force Base,
Colorado; and $7,300,000 to replace family housing at Barksdale
Air Force Base, Louisiana.
Section 2703--Extension and Renewal of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 2001 Projects
This section would extend certain fiscal year 2001 military
construction authorizations until October 1, 2005, or the date
of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2006, whichever is later. The
extended authorizations apply to the following projects:
$250,000 for construction of family housing at Fort Jackson,
South Carolina; $7,400,000 for Defense Finance and Accounting
Service building renovation at Kleber Kaserne, Germany; and
$843,000 for an elementary school classroom addition at Osan
Air Base, Korea.
Section 2704--Effective Date
This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII,
XXIV, XXV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October
1, 2004, or the date of enactment of this Act, whichever is
later.
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Base Realignment and Closure
By May 16, 2005, the Secretary of Defense must present
recommendations for base closures and realignments to Congress
and the base closure commission. With this deadline
approximately one year away, the committee is increasingly
concerned by the significant number of uncertainties and
ongoing turbulent events that will dramatically affect the
Department's infrastructure requirements both during and after
the base closure process.
For example, the demands of the global war on terrorism
continue to change, the manpower and infrastructure
requirements related to the effort to rebuild Iraq continue to
evolve, the Department has not yet completed a global review of
its overseas military installations, each of the military
services is in the midst of force transformation, end strength
requirements of the services continue to be unsettled issues,
and the infrastructure and force requirements for the
Department to meet homeland security missions have not yet been
determined.
Therefore, the committee includes a provision to require
the Department to report to Congress on a number of unresolved
infrastructure-related issues. Pending submission of these
reports, the provision would suspend the base closure process
until 2007.
The committee notes that a two-year postponement of the
base closure and realignment round would have several benefits.
First, postponement would allow the Department to stabilize
force and funding requirements related to Iraq, Afghanistan,
the war against terrorism, and homeland security before making
base closure and realignment recommendations. Second,
postponement would allow DOD to understand the impact of, and
in some cases resolve, significant infrastructure-related
issues such as global basing and transformation before making
irreversible base closure decisions. Finally, base closure
actions historically result in significant up-front costs with
net savings not occurring for several years after closure
activities. Delay of the base closure round until 2007 would
provide relief to significant budgetary pressures on the
Department during the next five years.
The committee also includes a provision to amend and codify
the criteria used by the Department to make base closure and
realignment recommendations. The committee's recommended
changes address many of the comments that the Department
received during the public comment period on the selection
criteria.
Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs Health Care Facility Sharing
The committee continues to support efforts by the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) to design, construct, maintain, and operate health care
facilities in a joint manner, and encourages the Department and
VA to take advantage of opportunities to share health care
facilities whenever possible. The committee report (H. Rept.
108-106) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004, advocated DOD participation in and
contribution to the VA's plans to build a new hospital at the
site of the closed Fitzsimons Army Hospital in Colorado. The
committee reiterates its support for a joint DOD-VA hospital at
the Fitzsimons Hospital site, and encourages the Department of
Defense to contribute funds, at a level representative of its
medical requirements, to design and construct such a facility.
Housing Requirements Analyses
The committee is aware that recent changes to methodology
used in Housing Requirements Analyses have resulted in
significant decreases to on-base housing requirements at many
military installations, including McChord Air Force Base,
Washington and Travis Air Force Base, California. Military
Housing Privatization Initiative authorities do not prohibit
privatized housing maintenance or construction in excess of the
minimum requirement. As such, the committee encourages the
services to inform housing privatization bidders of this point,
particularly for those installations that have experienced
significant decreases in on-base housing requirements as a
result of the new housing methodology. In the specific case of
McChord Air Force Base, the committee encourages the Secretary
of the Air Force to explore joint efforts with the Army and the
national guard to ensure that the privatized housing initiative
at McChord is responsive to the needs of all active-duty
military personnel in the region.
Military Housing Privatization Program
The committee continues to support the Department of
Defense's efforts to privatize military family and
unaccompanied housing. By the end of fiscal year 2004, the
Department anticipates having used the privatization program to
leverage private investments to provide quality housing to more
than 90,000 military families. The success of this program to
date validates the committee's recommendation to eliminate the
$850.0 million statutory ceiling on government investment in
privatization projects (section 2806), effective October 1,
2005.
Furthermore, the committee believes that the housing
privatization model may be a viable means of providing housing
to military personnel at enduring overseas installations. As
such, the committee urges the Department to consider the
feasibility of expanding housing privatization authorities to
permit overseas military family housing privatization.
Finally, the committee notes that some local taxation
authorities have chosen to levy real property taxes upon
privatized housing projects. By taxing these properties, local
authorities divert resources from reinvestment into military
family housing facilities and cause significant reductions in
the level of educational impact aid provided to communities
with military dependents. Of particular concern are those cases
where local taxation authorities have chosen to tax privatized
family housing even though the local government is not
providing municipal services such as trash collection and fire
and police protection. The committee reminds local and state
taxation authorities that taxation of privatized military
family housing facilities has a direct effect on the quality of
life of military personnel stationed in their communities, and
urges such authorities to repeal and refrain from real property
taxation of such projects.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing
Changes
Section 2801--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Carrying Out
Unspecified Minor Military Construction Projects
This section would amend section 2805(b) of title 10,
United States Code, to increase from $750,000 to $1,000,000 the
threshold at which service secretaries must approve the use of
operation and maintenance funds for unspecified minor
construction projects. This section would also amend section
2805(c) to establish a single limit of $1,500,000 at which
operation and maintenance funds may be used for unspecified
minor construction projects.
Section 2802--Assessment of Vulnerability of Military Installations to
Terrorist Attack and Annual Report on Military Construction
Requirements Related to Antiterrorism and Force Protection
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
establish guidance for the military services on appropriate
levels of antiterrorism and force protection requirements for
facilities construction and perimeter defenses (including gate
and fence line construction). This section would also require
the Secretary to certify that all major Department
installations have been assessed for vulnerabilities to
terrorist attack since September 11, 2001. Finally, this
section would require the Department of Defense to provide an
annual list of unfunded antiterrorism and force-protection
military construction requirements.
Section 2803--Change in Threshold for Congressional Notification
Regarding Use of Operation and Maintenance Funds for Facility Repair
This section would amend section 2811(d) of title 10,
United States Code, to lower the threshold at which
congressional notification is required for facility repairs
using operation and maintenance funds from $10,000,000 to
$7,500,000.
Section 2804--Reporting Requirements Regarding Military Family Housing
Requirements for General Officers and Flag Officers
This section would require the Department of Defense to
conduct an analysis of general and flag officer housing
requirements in the national capital region by March 30, 2005.
This analysis must be based upon available housing in the local
housing market as well as requirements for key and essential
personnel to be housed in secure locations.
The military services maintain more than 170 general and
flag officer quarters in the national capital region. Although
the committee recognizes the value of military family housing
to quality of life, it is difficult to justify the high costs
of building, operating, and maintaining a sizeable inventory of
large general and flag officer quarters in the region.
Therefore, this section would ensure that the Department
determines whether the current number of such homes is
appropriate.
This section would also require the Department to report to
Congress, by March 30, 2005, on its inventory of general and
flag officer housing, including annual expenditures of each
house for operations, utilities, and maintenance and repair
over the past five years. The committee notes with concern the
large expenditures on maintenance, repair, operations, and
utilities on general and flag officers quarters reported in the
fiscal year 2005 budget justification documents. This section
is intended to provide the Congress with an historical
perspective of the number and costs associated with general and
flag officer quarters.
Finally, this section would require the Department to
provide as part of its annual budget justification documents,
by March 30 of each year, a detailed list of each general and
flag officer quarters for which operations, utilities, and
maintenance and repair costs, in sum, are anticipated to exceed
$20,000 in the coming year. Currently, annual appropriations
laws require congressional notification prior to the
expenditure of more than $35,000 for maintenance and repair for
any single general or flag officer quarters. This section would
enhance congressional oversight of total costs associated with
general and flag officer housing.
Section 2805--Congressional Notification of Deviations from Authorized
Cost Variations for Military Construction Projects and Military Family
Housing Projects
This section would amend section 2853(c)(3) of title 10,
United States Code, to shorten the notice and wait period for
significant project cost increases or scope decreases from 21
days to 14 days, if notification is provided in an electronic
format to Congress.
Section 2806--Repeal of Limitation on Use of Alternative Authority for
Acquisition and Improvement of Military Family Housing
This section would amend section 2883 of title 10, United
States Code, to repeal the limitation on budget authority for
contracts and investments in military housing privatization
projects, effective October 1, 2005.
Section 2807--Temporary Authority to Accelerate Design Efforts for
Military Construction Projects Carried Out Using Design-Build Selection
Procedures
This section would establish a demonstration program to
allow the Department of Defense to enter into a design-build
construction contract using design funds made available under
sections 2807 and 18233 of title 10, United States Code, prior
to the authorization of the project. Contracts entered into
under this demonstration program must be selected using
existing design-build contract procedures. In addition, the
federal government's liability for termination for convenience
of any such contract may not exceed the project's design cost.
This section would permit the Department to enter into 36
contracts through September 30, 2008, and would require a
report to Congress on the value of the program by March 1,
2007.
Section 2808--Exchange or Sale of Reserve Component Facilities to
Acquire Replacement Facilities
This section would amend section 18233 of title 10, United
States Code, to provide the Secretary of Defense the authority
to receive facilities, cash, or a combination of facilities and
cash for existing reserve component facilities. Existing law
only permits the Secretary to exchange reserve facilities for
replacement facilities.
Section 2809--One-Year Extension of Temporary, Limited Authority to Use
Operation and Maintenance Funds for Construction Projects Outside the
United States
This section would extend for one year the authority
provided by section 2808 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) to permit the
Secretary of Defense to utilize operation and maintenance funds
to construct facilities necessary for temporary operational
requirements related to a declaration of war, national
emergency, or contingency.
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration
Section 2811--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Reporting Real
Property Transactions
This section would amend section 2662 of title 10, United
States Code, to increase from $750,000 to $1,500,000 the
thresholds at which the military services must report to
Congress real property transactions. This section would also
make adjustments to annual reporting requirements for minor
real property transactions.
Section 2812--Reorganization of Existing Administrative Provisions
Relating to Real Property Transactions
This section would consolidate and reorganize sections of
chapter 159 of title 10, United States Code.
Section 2813--Treatment of Money Rentals from Golf Course at Rock
Island Arsenal, Illinois
This section would amend section 2667 of title 10, United
States Code, to allow 50 percent of lease receipts from the
Rock Island Arsenal Golf Club, a community club that leases and
operates the arsenal's golf course for the general public and
local military personnel, to be placed into the Rock Island
Arsenal morale, welfare, and recreation fund.
Section 2814--Number of Contracts Authorized Department-Wide Under
Demonstration Program on Reduction in Long-Term Facility Maintenance
Costs
This section would amend section 2814 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-
107) to adjust the number of contracts permitted under the
building commissioning program. The existing program allows
each military department to enter into 12 contracts for the
construction and short-term maintenance of a facility. This
section would adjust the limit to allow a total of 36 contracts
for the Department of Defense.
Section 2815--Repeal of Commission on Review of Overseas Military
Facility Structure of the United States
This section would repeal section 128 of the Military
Construction Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-132),
which established the Commission on the Review of Overseas
Military Facility Structure of the United States.
Section 2816--Designation of Airmen Leadership School at Luke Air Force
Base, Arizona, in Honor of John J. Rhodes, a Former Minority Leader of
the House of Representatives
This section would designate the Airmen Leadership School
at Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, the John J. Rhodes Airmen
Leadership School in honor of the former minority leader of the
House of Representatives, Congressman John J. Rhodes.
Congressman Rhodes served in the United States Army Air Corps,
served in the Arizona National Guard as a staff judge advocate,
and represented the congressional district containing Luke Air
Force Base for the majority of his service in the House of
Representatives.
Section 2817--Elimination of Reversionary Interests Clouding United
States Title to Property Used as Navy Homeports
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into agreements with holders of reversionary interests at
Navy homeports to secure permanent title to the properties for
the Navy. In exchange, the Navy may provide in-kind
consideration including forfeiture of existing agreements that
require payment to the Navy for real property improvements. The
committee believes that such an exchange is in the interest of
all parties, and would ensure that disposal of property at
these homeports, should they be closed, realigned, or otherwise
declared excess to Navy needs, is conducted in a manner that
does not place local communities and developers at a
disadvantage to locations which do not have reversionary
agreements in place.
Section 2818--Report on Real Property Disposal at Marine Corps Air
Station, El Toro, California
This section would require the Secretary of the Navy,
within 180 days of enactment, to report to Congress on the
effort to dispose of real property at Marine Corps Air Station
El Toro, California, anticipated future uses of the property,
and requests received from other federal agencies for property
at the air station.
Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment
Section 2821--Two-Year Postponement of 2005 Base Closure and
Realignment Round and Submission of Reports Regarding Future
Infrastructure Requirements for the Armed Forces
This section would amend current base realignment and
closure law to postpone the 2005 base closure and realignment
round until 2007, pending receipt of several reports on
significant infrastructure issues.
First, this section would require the Department of Defense
to study and report to Congress on the following issues: the
Department's Integrated Global Basing Strategy, including
basing locations, rotational plans and policies, and overseas
and domestic infrastructure requirements associated with that
strategy; a study of the infrastructure requirements associated
with force transformation efforts; a report on infrastructure
requirements related to changes to the active and reserve
personnel mixtures of the services; a study of the
infrastructure requirements resulting from the Secretary of
Defense's ``10-30-30'' objective; a reassessment of excess
infrastructure capacity that is based upon infrastructure,
facility, and space requirements of current, future, and surged
military forces; and a definition of, and infrastructure
requirements associated with, ``surge requirements'' as
determined by the Secretary as required by section 2822 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public
Law 108-136). These reports must be submitted between January
1, 2006, and March 15, 2006, or the authority to conduct an
additional round of base closures would be terminated.
In order to permit sufficient time for congressional review
of these documents and to allow the Department to incorporate
the findings of these reports into base closure and realignment
recommendations, this section would suspend the base
realignment and closure process until 2007.
Finally, this section would require resubmission of a force
structure plan based on an assessment of probable threats to
national security during the 20 year period beginning with
fiscal year 2007, including anticipated endstrength and force
units necessary to meet those threats. It would also require
the Secretary of Defense to certify the need for an additional
round of base closures as part of the fiscal year 2007 budget
justification materials.
The committee notes that a two-year postponement of the
base closure and realignment round would have several benefits.
First, postponement would allow the Department to stabilize
force and funding requirements related to Iraq, Afghanistan,
the war against terrorism, and homeland security before making
base closure and realignment recommendations. Second,
postponement would allow DOD to understand the impact of, and
in some cases resolve, significant infrastructure-related
issues such as global basing and transformation before making
irreversible base closure decisions. Finally, base closure
actions historically result in significant up-front costs with
net savings not occurring for several years after closure
activities. Delay of the base closure round until 2007 would
provide relief to significant budgetary pressures on the
Department during the next five years.
Section 2822--Establishment of Specific Deadline for Submission of
Revisions to Force-Structure Plan and Infrastructure Inventory for Next
Base Closure Round
This section would amend section 2912(a)(4) of the Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX
of Public Law 101-510, as amended) to establish March 15 of the
base closure round year as the final deadline for revision of
the force structure plan or infrastructure inventory. The
Secretary of Defense published an initial force structure plan
and infrastructure inventory, as required by base closure law,
in March 2004. This force structure plan and infrastructure
inventory, along with selection criteria, will be used by the
Secretary to make base closure and realignment recommendations.
While section 2912(a)(4) of the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 permits the Secretary to revise the
plan and inventory by submitting such a revision to Congress as
part of the budget justification documents for fiscal year
2006, existing law does not include a specific deadline for
submission. This section would establish March 15, of the base
closure round year as the deadline, thereby ensuring that any
revision to the force structure plan and infrastructure
inventory is made with sufficient time to permit congressional
review and Department of Defense implementation.
Section 2823--Specification of Final Selection Criteria for Next Base
Closure Round
This section would amend and codify the criteria that will
be used by the Secretary of Defense in making recommendations
for the closure or realignment of military installations inside
the United States during the next base closure round.
The Secretary published draft selection criteria in the
Federal Register on December 23, 2003. Following a public
comment period, during which the Secretary received comments
relating to approximately 200 areas of concern, the final
selection criteria were published on February 12, 2004. Despite
the number of public comments and criticisms, the final
published selection criteria were identical to the initial
proposal. This section would modify the selection criteria to
incorporate many of the comments and concerns received by the
Department of Defense during the comment period and would
codify the amended criteria into base closure law.
Section 2824--Requirement for Unanimous Vote of Defense Base Closure
and Realignment Commission to Add to or Otherwise Expand Closure and
Realignment Recommendations made by Secretary of Defense
This section would amend section 2914(d) of the Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX
of Public Law 101-510, as amended) to require a unanimous vote
of the base closure commission to recommend closure,
realignment, or expanded realignment of an installation not
recommended for closure or realignment by the Secretary of
Defense.
Section 2825--Adherence to Certain Authorities on Preservation of
Military Depot Capabilities During Any Subsequent Round of Base
Closures and Realignments
This section would amend the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law
101-510, as amended) to require that base closure and
realignment actions comply with provisions of title 10, United
States Code, that address government-owned, government-operated
depot-level maintenance, repair, and logisticscapabilities
within the Department of Defense. In addition, this section would
prohibit any base closure or realignment action from including a waiver
to sections 2464 or section 2466 of title 10, United States code,
relating to the preservation of government-owned, government-operated
depot facilities and the annual percentage of military department
funding for depot level maintenance and repair activities that may be
expended on private sector depot activities.
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
Part I--Army Conveyances
Section 2831--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction, Defense Supply
Center, Columbus, Ohio
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
transfer, without consideration, administrative jurisdiction
over approximately 20 acres of real property to the Secretary
of Veterans' Affairs to be used for the location of a veterans'
outpatient clinic.
Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Fort Hood, Texas
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
convey approximately 662 acres at Fort Hood, Texas, to the
Texas A&M University system of the state of Texas for the
purpose of establishing Texas A&M University, Central Texas. In
exchange, the Army shall receive fair market value in cash or
in-kind consideration for the property. Finally, conveyance of
the property is contingent upon the Secretary of the Army's
determination that use of the land as a university will not
adversely impact operations at Fort Hood's Robert Gray Army
Airfield.
Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Army National Guard Facility, Seattle,
Washington
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
convey, without consideration, approximately 10 acres of real
property, including a portion of a national guard facility, to
the state of Washington to support relocation of a guard unit.
Part II--Navy Conveyances
Section 2841--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Nebraska Avenue Naval Complex,
District of Columbia
This section would transfer jurisdiction of the Nebraska
Avenue Naval Complex in Washington, D.C., from the Navy to the
Administrator of General Services for the purpose of
accommodating the Department of Homeland Security. The initial
costs incurred by the Navy as a result of the transfer,
including move-out costs and first-year lease costs, shall be
paid for by the Department of Homeland Security, subject to
appropriations.
The section would also express the sense of Congress that
long-term relocation costs incurred by the Navy, to include
final relocation costs and permanent construction, shall be
paid for from federal sources outside of the Department of
Defense. In addition, the provision would require the
President, after consultation with the chairmen and ranking
members of the committees on Armed Services and Appropriations,
to certify within three years of the transfer whether the
Navy's costs related to its departure from the complex have
been fully compensated. If the Navy's costs have not been fully
compensated, the property shall revert to the jurisdiction of
the Navy, which must then dispose of the property by
competitive sale.
Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Navy Property, Former Fort Sheridan,
Illinois
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
convey, without consideration, a parcel of environmentally
sensitive property to a nonprofit land conservation
organization for the purpose of ensuring permanent protection
of the lands.
Section 2843--Land Exchange, Naval Air Station, Patuxent River,
Maryland
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
convey approximately five acres of real property at Naval Air
Station, Patuxent River, Maryland, to the state of Maryland. In
exchange, the Navy shall receive approximately 1.5 acres of
property of an equal value to the conveyance.
Part III--Air Force Conveyances
Section 2851--Land Exchange, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to convey the Maxwell Heights Housing site at Maxwell Air Force
Base, Alabama, to the city of Montgomery, Alabama. In exchange,
the Air Force shall receive approximately 35 acres of land
contiguous to Maxwell Air Force Base.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $16,797.6 million for the
national security activities of the Department of Energy for
fiscal year 2005. Of this amount, $9,048.7 million is for the
programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration, and
$7,748.9 million is for environmental and other defense
activities. The committee recommends $16,700.6 million, a
decrease of $97.0 million.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
National Nuclear Security Administration
Overview
The budget request contained $9,048.7 million for the
National Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommends $9,047.7 million, a decrease of $1.0
million.
Adjustments to the Budget Request
Reductions
Directed stockpile work
The budget request contained $1,406.4 million for directed
stockpile work.
The committee notes that the nuclear weapon stockpile
requirements that guide the stockpile life extension programs
are under review by the Department of Defense as part of a
periodic assessment of the Nuclear Posture Review. The
committee also notes that it is difficult for the committee to
support increases in funding for individual warhead life
extension programs until this assessment is completed and
forwarded to the congressional defense committees.
The committee recommends $1,367.4 million, a decrease of
$39.0 million.
Campaigns
The budget request contained $301.0 million for the science
campaign.
The committee notes with concern that the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA) reported mixed results in
meeting the fiscal year 2003 science campaign performance
targets contained in the NNSA Future-Year Nuclear Security
Program.
The committee recommends $281.5 million, a decrease of
$19.5 million. This funding level represents an increase of
$18.0 million over the fiscal year 2004 appropriation.
The budget request contained $741.3 million for the
Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) campaign. The committee
notes that the ASC campaign has experienced cost growth and
schedule slippage. The committee also notes that the campaign
is apparently procuring a considerably larger set of computers
than originally envisioned.
The committee recommends $721.3 million, a decrease of
$20.0 million. This funding represents funding at the fiscal
year 2004 level.
International nuclear materials protection and cooperation
The budget request contained $43.0 million within the
International Nuclear Materials Protection and Cooperation
program for security enhancements at the MinAtom Weapons
complex.
The committee understands that the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA) has had limited success in
completing security upgrades at these sites due to MinAtom not
granting access. While the committee supports the goals of this
program, it does not support authorizing funds for projects
where NNSA does not have the access required to accomplish
program objectives.
The committee recommends $32.5 million, a decrease of $10.5
million. The recommended funding is equivalent to the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 2004. The committee directs the
Administrator of the NNSA to submit a report with the fiscal
year 2006 budget request on the status of NNSA access, as of
the end of fiscal year 2004, to those MinAtom sites where
Congress has authorized and appropriated funds for security
upgrades.
Increases
Engineering campaign
The budget request contained $48.7 million in the
engineering campaign for construction of the Microsystems and
Engineering Sciences Application (MESA) complex at Sandia
National Laboratories (project 01-D-108).
The committee notes that when complete, MESA will be a
significant facility for modernizing the electrical, optical,
and mechanical components of the nuclear stockpile using
computationally enabled micro-technologies. Accelerated
construction of the MESA complex will ensure timely
availability of critical tools for stockpile stewardship.
The committee recommends $68.7 million, an increase of
$20.0 million for further acceleration of MESA construction.
The NNSA Administrator is directed to submit a revised MESA
construction baseline with the fiscal year 2006 budget request
that reflects congressional funding increases through the end
of fiscal year 2005.
Readiness in technical base and facilities
The budget request contained $1,474.5 million for Readiness
in Technical Base and Facilities.
The committee has been encouraged by the progress made in
the reduction of deferred maintenance backlogs in the defense
nuclear complex.
The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million for
replacement of aging equipment, correction of deferred
maintenance, and disposition of legacy materials consistent
with the National Nuclear Security Administration approved 10
year comprehensive site plan as follows: $5.0 million at the
Kansas City Plant, $8.0 million at Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, $19.0 million at Pantex and $18.0 million at the Y-
12 plant.
The committee is aware that accelerated construction and
delivery of the Z Petawatt laser will add significant
radiographic diagnostic capabilities to the stockpile
stewardship campaign. The committee recommends an increase of
$13.0 million for the Z Petawatt laser.
The committee is aware that adding a second operations
shift to the Z facility will meet the increased demand for
experiments conducted on the Z machine. The committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to fund a second shift
operation at the Z facility.
Advanced Concepts and Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator
The committee supports the budget request of $9.0 million
for Advanced Concepts and $27.6 million for completion of the
6.2/2A Air Force-led study on the Robust Nuclear
EarthPenetrator (RNEP). The committee strongly reaffirms the importance
of these two initiatives and authorizes the full amount of the request.
The committee notes that the Administrator of the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has stated in testimony
before the committee that the RNEP study was being conducted at
the request of the Department of Defense. The committee also
takes note that a recent Defense Science Board Task Force study
on Future Strategic Strike Forces specifically recommended that
research be initiated on nuclear weapons that produce much
lower collateral damage than those weapons in the existing
nuclear stockpile. The committee also reminds the NNSA that any
efforts beyond a study could only be pursued if the President
approves and funds are authorized and appropriated by Congress.
Advanced Technology Research and Development
The committee notes that the budget requests funds for
advanced technology research and development in several
activities within the National Nuclear Security Administration.
The committee encourages the Administrator to review individual
advanced technology research and development programs to ensure
they are coordinated with, and do not duplicate, other similar
research and development efforts.
Los Alamos Public Schools
The committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) stated
the concern that little progress has been made in developing an
exit strategy for the Department of Energy to discontinue
funding for the Los Alamos Public Schools system. The fiscal
year 2005 budget request contained no funding for the Los
Alamos Public Schools, ending a practice whereby for many years
this school district was the only one receiving assistance from
the Department.
The Department, in its February 2004 report, ``Support for
Public Education in the Vicinity of Los Alamos National
Laboratory, New Mexico,'' concluded that the Los Alamos Public
School District must receive stable financial support if the
Los Alamos Public School District is to maintain the standard
of educational excellence that the Los Alamos National
Laboratory staff demands. According to the report, this support
to the public schools is required in order for the laboratory
to attract and retain the talented and highly educated
individuals required to execute its national security mission.
One option the report recommended for supplementing the
resources of the Los Alamos Public Schools was to allow the
management and operating contractor for Los Alamos National
Laboratory to support the Los Alamos Public Schools within the
confines of the existing operating contract.
The committee understands the need to attract and retain
highly talented personnel for the national laboratory complex.
Therefore, the committee directs the Department, from within
those funds authorized for Department activities at Los Alamos
National Laboratory, to provide $8.0 million per year out of
site contractor overhead, to support the Los Alamos Public
School District.
Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility
The committee notes the National Nuclear Security
Administration's (NNSA) recent announcement of a delay until
the summer of 2005 for starting construction of the Mixed Oxide
Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX) in the Russian Federation due
to delays in resolving a government-to-government liability
agreement. Recent discussions with the NNSA indicate that the
2005 commencement date may also be in jeopardy. The committee
notes that the projected start of construction has slipped four
years since the project began in fiscal year 2000.
While the committee fully supports the MOX program
objective of conversion of weapons grade plutonium into fuel
for commercial reactors, it is concerned with these delays and
does not want to further add to the existing uncommitted
balances in the NNSA nonproliferation accounts. The committee
directs the Administrator of the NNSA to notify the
congressional defense committees within 30 days of any decision
that construction of the MOX facility will not begin by the end
of fiscal year 2005.
Environmental and Other Defense Activities
Overview
The budget request contained $7,748.9 million for
environmental and other defense activities. The committee
recommends $7,652.9 million, a decrease of $96.0 million.
Adjustments to the Budget Request
Reductions
Waste incidental to reprocessing
The budget request contained $350.0 million for a High
Level Waste Proposal program within the Defense Site
Acceleration Completion account to address a contingency for
``Waste Incidental to Reprocessing.'' The budget materials
state that these funds will only be requested to the extent
that legal uncertainty concerning certain reprocessing wastes
is satisfactorily resolved through pending litigation or by new
legislation. This uncertainty was raised by a 2003 federal
district court ruling that the Department of Energy's
reclassification of waste streams generated by reprocessing of
spent nuclear fuel violated the Nuclear Waste Policy Act
(Natural Resources Defense Council v. Spencer Abraham, District
Court of Idaho, 2003).
The committee understands that this request concerns
matters that are both pending the outcome of litigation and the
subject of negotiations with individual states. The committee
has not received formal transmittal of a legislative proposal.
However, the committee notes that the Department is actively
working with the states to achieve consensus on a legislative
proposal that would clarify the law and allow cleanup
activities to proceed. The committee also notes it does not
appear that the federal court decision requires a cessation of
all current waste cleanup activities and that the budget
request contains $3,368.0 million for Defense Site Acceleration
Completion for sites in Idaho, South Carolina, and Washington.
The committee notes that some of the activities proposed to
be funded in the High Level Waste Proposal may either be
precluded by or imprudent to conduct under the federal district
court ruling. The committee urges the Department to proceed
with those cleanup activities that are not prevented by the
federal district court ruling or are not otherwise deemed
inappropriate due to the legal uncertainty resulting from the
court ruling. The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
January 1, 2005 stating which of those activities listed under
the High Level Waste Proposal can proceed consistent withthe
current legal determination and those that cannot, clearly stating the
rationale for each such determination. The committee also urges the
Department to submit a legislative proposal at the earliest opportunity
to clarify the law on Waste Incidental to Reprocessing in order to
facilitate long-term cleanup plans across all defense sites.
The committee recognizes the significant costs and schedule
impacts for future defense site acceleration cleanup plans in
the event the district court ruling stands and the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act is not amended. The committee includes a
legislative provision calling for a National Academy of
Sciences study of the Department's plans to manage and treat
prior to final disposal the high-level radioactive waste at the
Savannah River Site, South Carolina, the Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory, Idaho and the Hanford Reservation,
Washington.
The committee recommends $250.0 million, a decrease of
$100.0 million. Should funds in excess of the amount authorized
be required for site cleanup activities under the High Level
Waste Proposal in fiscal year 2005, the Department of Energy is
directed to submit a request for reprogramming of funds to the
congressional defense committees.
Worker and community transition
The budget request contained $2.5 million for worker and
community transition within the Office of Legacy Management.
The committee notes that the budget request states that the
need for worker transition assistance has considerably
diminished in recent years and that there is no estimated need
for community transition assistance during fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommends no funds for worker and community
transition and recommends the Department of Energy terminate
the program.
Office of future liabilities
The budget contained $5.0 million for the Office of Future
Liabilities. The committee notes that the Office of Future
Liabilities was just recently established by the Department of
Energy to fund and manage environmental liabilities not
assigned to the Office of Environmental Management or other
organizations within the Department. The committee also notes
that the Department had previously established a new Office of
Legacy Management in 2003.
While the committee is encouraged that the Office of
Environmental Management is taking a long term view of future
management issues, it appears premature to establish an Office
of Future Liabilities when the current Defense Site
Acceleration Completion activities are scheduled to continue
through fiscal year 2035.
The committee recommends no funds for the Office of Future
Liabilities and encourages the Department to perform those
functions within the Office of Environmental Management or
Office of Legacy Management.
Increases
2035 defense site accelerated completions
The budget request contains no funds for the Hazardous
Materials Management and Emergency Response Training and
Education (HAMMER) center.
The committee is aware that the HAMMER center provides
valuable training for emergency response personnel. The
committee is also aware that the Department of Energy is
reviewing whether the HAMMER center should be operated by the
Office of Environmental Management or by the Office of Energy
Security and Assurance.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for
operation of the HAMMER center. The committee also urges the
Secretary to make a determination as to what office within the
Department should have long-term responsibility for operation
of the HAMMER center.
Non-closure environmental activities
The budget request contained $187.9 million for non-closure
environmental activities.
The committee is aware of a need to fund newly generated
waste requirements and ground water cleanup activities at
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
The committee recommends $191.9 million, an increase of
$4.0 million for newly generated waste requirements and ground
water cleanup activities at Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (Project HQ-SW-0013Y).
Idaho facilities management-other defense activities
The budget request contained $20.9 million for Idaho
Facilities Management-Other Defense Activities.
The committee is aware that spent nuclear fuel, a portion
of which is the responsibility of the Department of Energy
through contracts by the Department and its predecessor federal
agencies, is in long-term storage in aluminum canisters at the
Lynchburg Technology Center operated by BWX Technologies in
Lynchburg, Virginia. The committee also notes that both the
Department and BWX Technologies have indicated that
inspections, and possibly repackaging, of the stored spent
nuclear fuel are required to ensure proper long-term storage.
The committee recommends $22.4 million, an increase of $1.5
million, for the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and
Technology to inspect and repackage, as appropriate, its spent
nuclear fuel stored in outside storage wells at the Lynchburg
Technology Center in Lynchburg, Virginia. After the spent
nuclear fuel is inspected and appropriate repackaging is
completed, it is to be replaced in refurbished storage wells.
The specific spent nuclear fuel covered by this requirement is
that spent nuclear fuel described in the storage contract (DE-
AC02-02NE23429) between the Department, as administered by the
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology, and BWX
Technologies. The committee intends for this work to start in
fiscal year 2005 and conclude no later than the end of fiscal
year 2007.
Technology Deployment and Development
The committee notes that several high-level waste
separation technologies under development could potentially
reduce costs and shorten schedules for high-level waste
remediation. The committee encourages the Department, within
funds authorized under Defense Site Acceleration Completion for
technology deployment and development, to fund technology
demonstrations that provide alternative solutions for high-
level waste separation.
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program
The committee is concerned with the lack of progress the
Department of Energy has made in processing the backlog of
defense nuclear worker claims under Subtitle D of the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act. The committee
notes that recent Department statistics reflect that 2,257
cases have been completed out of the 23,996 applications
received for health-related claims under the Act. However, the
committee also notes that only a handful of workers determined
to have valid health-related claims have actually received any
compensation. The committee also understands that a recent GAO
report notes that the lack of a ``willing payer'' of workers''
compensation benefits for some workers means that some workers
with valid defense nuclear complex health claims may receive no
compensation.
While the Department has made some progress in processing
the claims, the committee notes that further improvements to
processing are required to ensure that claims can be processed
with proper physician advice in a manner that is both speedy
and medically sound. The committee notes that the Department
has requested increased funding and has requested legislative
remedies that may improve the efficiency of the physician
review panels.
The committee remains concerned that these and possibly
other improvements are needed to achieve timely physician
review panel determinations and urges the Department to work
with the committee to identify any additional actions required
to expedite processing and payment of claims. The committee
also urges the Department to continue to work with federal
agencies and other organizations to propose solutions for the
``willing payer'' problems.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations
Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration
This section would authorize funds for the National Nuclear
Security Administration for fiscal year 2005, including funds
for weapons activities, defense nuclear nonproliferation
programs, naval reactor programs, and the Office of the
Administrator.
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Management
This section would authorize funds for defense
environmental management activities for fiscal year 2005,
including funds for defense site acceleration completion and
defense environmental services.
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities
This section would authorize funds for other defense
activities for fiscal year 2005.
Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal
This section would authorize funds for defense nuclear
waste disposal for fiscal year 2005.
Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations
Section 3111--Extension of Authority for Appointment of Certain
Scientific, Engineering and Technical Personnel
This section would amend section 4601 of the Atomic Energy
Defense Act (50 USC 2701) to extend authority for appointment
of certain scientific, engineering, and technical personnel.
Section 3112--Requirements for Baseline of Projects under Facilities
and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program
This section would amend section 3114 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136) to give the NNSA Administrator greater flexibility in
adding projects or updating priorities to projects within the
Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program.
Subtitle C--Other Matters
Section 3131--Transfers and reprogrammings of National Nuclear Security
Administration funds
Title XXXII of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (50 USC 2401), otherwise known as the ``NNSA
Act'') established the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA). In passing the Act, Congress created the NNSA as a
semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy. The
mission of the NNSA is to enhance national security through the
military application of nuclear energy, reduce global danger
from weapons of mass destruction, and promote international
nuclear safety. The cornerstone of this Act is a significant
level of autonomy for the NNSA.
Among the various functions assigned in the Act, the NNSA
Administrator has authority over, and is responsible for, all
programs and activities of the NNSA including budget
formulation, guidance and execution, and other financial
matters (50 USC 2402). The NNSA Act also provides for separate
treatment of the NNSA budget request within the President's
budget request (50 USC 2451) and for the Administrator to
establish procedures for planning, programming, budgeting, and
financial activities (50 USC 2452).
The committee is concerned that execution of the NNSA
budget process may not reflect the degree of autonomy intended
in the NNSA Act. In order to carry out the above budget
functions as intended by Congress, this provision directs the
Administrator for Nuclear Security specifically to submit
notifications and requests for reprogramming directly to the
congressional defense committees, with the only role of the
Department of Energy being for the Chief Financial Officer to
certify whether funds covered by the notice or request are
available. This provision is necessary to ensure responsive
oversight and to safeguard the autonomy of the Administration.
The committee remains concerned that there may be
additional areas of the budget process in which the autonomy
intended by Congress is not being exercised. The committee
encourages the Administrator to review the budget and
programming process to ensure NNSA is in complete compliance
with the letter and spirit of the NNSA Act.
Section 3132--National Academy of Sciences study on management by
Department of Energy of high-level radioactive waste
This section would require the Secretary of Energy to enter
into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to
complete a study of the Department's ``residual'' waste streams
management plans. These streams are from the Department's high-
level waste tanks, which are not planned for disposal into a
high-level waste repository.
This study should provide an explicit assessment of the
waste streams that are planned for disposal in place in the
tanks or that result from the processing of retrieved tank
wastes at the Hanford Reservation in Washington, the Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in Idaho, and
the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The examination
should address the full range of ``residual wastes'' including,
among others, the high-level waste tank remainders that the
Department considers incidental to reprocessing, the streams
from tank waste processing, such as saltstone at the Savannah
River Site, and tank waste the Department plans to immobilize
and ship for disposal to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
The National Academy of Sciences should deliver an interim
report on the waste planned for disposal in place in the tanks
to the committee and the Secretary six months after entering
into the agreement to undertake this study. A final report
addressing the remainder of the task objectives should be
issued twelve months after funding is received. Within funds
allocated for defense environmental management the Department
authorizes up to $1,500,000 for the study.
Section 3133--Contract to Review Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, New
Mexico
The current five-year Congressional authorization for
Independent Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Oversight expires at
the end of fiscal year 2004. This section would direct the
Secretary of Energy to enter into a new contract for
independent reviews of the design, construction and operations
of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3201--Authorization
This section would authorize $21.3 million for the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2005, an
increase of $1.0 million to fund cost-of-living pay increases
for permanent staff and to hire outside consultants as needed
for technical oversight of new Department of Energy projects.
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3301--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile Funds
This section would authorize $59.7 million from the
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund for the operation
and maintenance of the National Defense Stockpile for fiscal
year 2005. The provision would also permit the use of
additional funds for extraordinary or emergency conditions 45
days after Congress receives notification.
Section 3302--Revision of Limitations on Required Disposals of Certain
Materials in National Defense Stockpile
This section would amend section 3306 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-
107) by authorizing the Secretary of Defense to dispose of
100,000 short tons of high carbon manganese ferro of the
highest grade during fiscal year 2005, rather than 50,000 short
tons as currently authorized.
Section 3303--Authority to Dispose of Certain Materials in National
Defense Stockpile
This section would amend section 3303 of the Strom Thurmond
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public
Law 105-261) to authorize the Secretary of Defense to dispose
of materials in the National Defense Stockpile so as to result
in $785.0 million in receipts by the end of fiscal year 2005,
and $870.0 million in receipts by the end of fiscal year 2009.
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES
LEGISLATIVE PROVISION
Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would authorize $20.0 million for fiscal year
2005 for the operation and maintenance of the Naval Petroleum
and Oil Shale Reserves.
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Maritime
Administration for Fiscal Year 2005
This section would authorize a total of $149.1 million for
fiscal year 2005, an increase of $13.4 million above the budget
request for the Maritime Administration. Of the funds
authorized, $109.3 would be for operations and training
programs, $4.8 million would be for administrative expenses
related to providing loan guarantees authorized by title XI of
the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended, (46 App. United
States Code 1271 et seq.), and $35 million would be for the
disposal of obsolete ships in the National Defense Reserve
Fleet. Within the funds provided for the disposal of obsolete
vessels, the committee includes $2 million to begin the
decommissioning, removal, and disposal of the nuclear reactor
and hazardous materials aboard the Nuclear Ship Savannah, which
is located at the James River facility in Virginia.
Section 3502--Extension of Authority to Provide War Risk Insurance for
Merchant Marine Vessels
This section would extend for five years the authority of
the Secretary of Transportation to provide war risk insurance
and reinsurance relating to merchant marine vessels. This
section would also modify the existing provision to reflect the
current Department of the Treasury practice of investing in
public debt securities of the United States, with maturities
and interest rates suitable to the needs of the fund.
DEPARTMENTAL DATA
The Department of Defense requested legislation, in
accordance with the program of the President, as illustrated by
the correspondence set out below:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST
Department of Defense,
Office of General Counsel,
Washington, DC, March 11, 2004.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
the Congress enact the enclosed National Defense Authorization
Bill for Fiscal Year 2005.
The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
section-by-section analysis.
In the coming weeks, the Department will propose a few
additional legislative initiatives for inclusion in the same
Bill.
The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
Sincerely,
William J. Haynes II,
General Counsel.
------
COMMITTEE POSITION
On May 12, 2004 the Committee on Armed Services, a quorum
being present, approved H.R. 4200, as amended, by a vote of 60-
0.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES
House of Representatives,
Committee on Education and the Workforce,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Hunter: Thank you for working with me in your
development of H.R. 4200, the ``National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005,'' specifically:
(1) Section 590. Continuation of impact aid assistance on
behalf of dependents of certain members despite change in state
of member.
(2) Section 595. Assistance to local educational agencies
that benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense civilian employees.
(3) Section 596. Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps and
recruiter access at institutions of higher education.
(4) Section 904. Modification of obligated service
requirements under National Security Education Program.
As you know, these provisions are within the jurisdiction
of the Education and the Workforce Committee. While I do not
intend to seek sequential referral of H.R. 4200, the Committee
does hold an interest in preserving its future jurisdiction
with respect to issues raised in the aforementioned provisions
and its jurisdictional prerogatives should the provisions of
this bill or any Senate amendments thereto be considered in a
conference with the Senate. We would expect to be appointed as
conferees on these provisions should a conference with the
Senate arise.
Again, I thank you for working with me in developing the
amendments to H.R. 4200 and look forward to working with you on
these issues in the future.
Sincerely,
John Boehner, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. John Boehner,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Committee on Education and the Workforce
has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request such a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on
the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Hunter: On May 12, 2004, the Committee on
Armed Services ordered reported H.R. 4200, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005.As ordered reported by
the Committee on Armed Services, this legislation contains a number of
provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
These provisions include the following:
Section 596. Reserve Senior Officer Training Corps and
recruiter access at institutions of higher education.
Section 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 2005.
Section 3111. Extension of authority for appointment of
certain scientific, engineering, and technical personnel.
Section 3112. Requirements for baseline of projects under
Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program.
Section 3131. Transfers and reprogrammings of National
Nuclear Security Administration funds.
Section 3132. National Academy of Sciences study on
management by Department of Energy of high-level radioactive
waste.
Section 3133. Contract to review Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant, New Mexico.
Section 3201. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
authorization.
Recognizing your interest in bringing this legislation
before the House expeditiously, the Committee on Energy and
Commerce agrees not to seek a sequential referral of the bill.
By agreeing not to seek a sequential referral, the Committee on
Energy and Commerce does not waive its jurisdiction over these
provisions or any other provisions of the bill that may fall
within its jurisdiction. In addition, the Committee on Energy
and Commerce reserves its right to seek conferees on any
provisions within its jurisdiction which are considered in the
House-Senate conference, and asks for your support in being
accorded such conferees.
I request that you include this letter as part of the
report on H.R. 4200 and as part of the Congressional Record
during consideration of this bill by the House.
Sincerely,
Joe Barton, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Joe Barton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
request such a referral in the interest of expediting
consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a
sequential referral, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman: On May 12, 2004, the Committee on Armed
Services ordered reported H.R. 4200, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. As you know, the H.R.
4200, as reported, contains a number of provisions within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Government Reform under Rule X
of the Rules of the House of Representatives. These provisions
implicate the committee's jurisdiction on a number of subject
including: the disposition of Federal property, the Freedom of
Information Act, the Federal civil service, and procurement.
Because of your willingness to consult with this Committee,
and because of your desire to move this legislation
expeditiously, I will waive consideration of the bill by the
Committee on Government Reform. By agreeing to waive its
consideration of the bill, the Committee does not waive its
jurisdiction over H.R. 4200. In addition, the Committee
reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of
the bill that are within its jurisdiction during any House-
Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation. I
ask your commitment to support any request for conferees by the
Committee on H.R. 4200 or similar legislation.
I request that you include this letter and your response in
the Committee Report and in the Congressional Record during
consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank you
for your attention to these matters.
Sincerely,
Tom Davis, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Tom Davis,
Chairman, Committee on Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Committee on Government Reform has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
request such a referral in the interest of expediting
consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a
sequential referral, the Committee on Government Reform is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC, May 11, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I write with respect to the export
control provisions of this year's proposed National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA), H.R. 4200, which your Committee is
preparing to mark up and report in the near future. I request
that you include in H.R. 4200 those provisions in Title XIV,
Subtitle A, relating to export controls. These provisions would
strengthen military export controls in areas in which the
Department of Defense plays a major role, often alongside U.S.
private firms regulated under section 38 of the Arms Export
Control Act. Other provisions would reinforce the role and
responsibility of Congress to provide appropriate oversight in
these areas.
These provisions complement and reinforce the policy that
the Committee on International Relations has long followed in
these areas and are fully consistent with provisions in H.R.
1950 (the State Department Authorization Act), which the House
passed last year during the first session of the 108th
Congress. In particular, I am very sympathetic to purposes
which the NDAA export control provisions would advance
concerning: (1) the need to strengthen (not relax) military
export controls in the context of the global war on terror, and
(2) to set high (not reduced) standards internationally for
other governments to follow multilaterally, as well as in the
administration of their national systems, regarding the control
of weapons technology and military systems and equipment.
Similarly, at a time when our European allies are seeking
increasingly greater access to the United States defense
procurement market and to our weapons technology in order to
help meet their defense commitments to NATO, while
simultaneously pursuing a process to expand weapons technology
transfers to the People's Republic of China, it behooves our
Government to ensure that fundamental principles of U.S. law
and policy are upheld. This includes, above all, the right of
the United States to consent to the re-export or retransfer of
U.S. weapons technology by a foreign government or person to
any third party or person, including the government of another
country, before such a re-export or retransfer may take place.
For the foregoing reasons, I strongly support adoption by
your Committee of these provisions in the proposed NDAA.
With best wishes, I am
Sincerely,
Henry J. Hyde, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I understand that on Wednesday, May 12,
2004, the Committee on Armed Services ordered favorably
reported H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005. The bill includes a number of provisions that
fall within the legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on
International Relations pursuant to Rule X(k) of the House of
Representatives.
With respect to Section 1202, Assistance to Military or
Security Forces of Iraq and Afghanistan, I will request from
the Speaker a referral of H.R. 4200, should this provision not
be removed from the bill before it is filed.
Additional provisions within our Committee's jurisdiction
are: (1) Section 811, Defense Trade Reciprocity; (2) Section
1013, Authority to Transfer Specified Former Naval Vessels to
Certain Foreign Countries; (3) Section 1027, Encouragement of
Agreements with Foreign Countries; (4) Section 1031,
Continuation of Authority to Use Department of Defense Funds
for Unified Counter-Drug and Counter-Terrorism Campaign in
Colombia; (5) Section 1204, Status of Iraqi Security Forces;
(6) Section 1211, Assignment of Allied Naval Personnel to
Submarine Safety Programs; (7) Section 1212, Expansion of
Entities of the People's Republic of China Subject to Certain
Presidential Authorities When Operating in the United States;
(8) Section 1213, Report by the President on Global Peace
Operations Initiative; (9) Section 1214, Procurement Sanctions
Against Foreign Persons that Transfer Certain Defense Articles
and Services to the People's Republic of China; (10) Title
XIII, Cooperative Threat Reduction with the States of the
Former Soviet Union; and (11) Title XIV, Export Controls and
Counter-Proliferation Matters.
Pursuant to Chairman Dreier's announcement that the
Committee on Rules will move expeditiously to consider a rule
for H.R. 4200 and your desire to have the bill considered on
the House floor next week, the Committee on International
Relations will not seek a sequential referral of the bill as a
result of including these provisions, without waiving or ceding
now or in the future this Committee's jurisdiction over the
provisions in question. I will seek to have conferees appointed
for these provisions during any House-Senate conference
committee.
In that regard, I am particularly concerned about certain
provisions in Title XIV, Subtitle B and C, regarding counter-
proliferation matters and initiatives related to the former
Soviet Union. I look forward to working with you regarding my
concerns about these provisions as H.R. 4200 moves forward in
the legislative process.
I would appreciate your including this letter as a part of
the report on H.R. 4200 and as part of the record during
consideration of the bill by the House of Representatives.
With best wishes,
Sincerely,
Henry J. Hyde, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, May 13, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Hunter: In recognition of the desire to
expedite floor consideration of H.R. 4200, the Department of
Defense authorization bill, the Committee on the Judiciary
hereby waives consideration of the bill. This waiver is made
with the understanding that proposed sections that have been
reviewed by the Committee on the Judiciary relating to the
bankruptcy treatment of certain military bonuses and pay
incentives, compensating employees who were exposed to
radiation in certain government programs, and the title to
sunken military ships (to the extent such provision contained
matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the
Judiciary) will not be included in the bill. These sections
contain matters within the Committee on the Judiciary's Rule X
jurisdiction.
I further understand that proposed sections that have been
reviewed by the Committee on the Judiciary relating to the
misuse of civilian medals, Federal Tort Claims Act coverage for
volunteers performing volunteer duties at sea and for committee
members of the Employee Support for the Guard and Reserve,
waivers of DOJ prison reviews for several land conveyances,
state tax preemption for the Non-Appropriated Fund Health
Benefits Programs, trademark licensing of military slogans and
the like, military legal assistance, a public-private employee
exchange program, and allowing assignment of contract claims to
sureties will be included in the bill. If these sections are
added to the bill, I will not seek a sequential referral based
on inclusion.
The Committee on the Judiciary takes this action with the
understanding that the Committee's jurisdiction over these
provisions is in no way diminished or altered. I would
appreciate your including this letter in your Committee's
report on H.R. 4200 and the Congressional Record during
consideration of the legislation on the House floor.
Sincerely,
F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
request such a referral in the interest of expediting
consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a
sequential referral, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee in matters being considered in H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 4200 and
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore,
while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over a number of
provisions of the bill, I do not intend to request a sequential
referral. This, of course, is conditional on our mutual
understanding that nothing in this legislation or my decision
to forego a sequential referral waives, reduces or otherwise
affects the jurisdiction of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee, that every effort will be made to
include any agreements worked out by staff of our two
Committees in amendments as the bill is taken to the House
Floor, and that a copy of this letter and of your response
acknowledging our jurisdictional interest will be included in
the Committee Report and as part of the Congressional Record
during consideration of this bill by the House.
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure also
asks that you support our request to be conferees on the
provisions over which we have jurisdiction during any House-
Senate conference.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Don Young, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to request such a referral in
the interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree
that by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure is not waiving its
jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters will be
included in the Committee report on the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, DC, May 11, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I wish to inform the Committee on Armed
Services that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs hereby waives
any jurisdiction it has over the provisions of section 2831 of
H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2005, regarding ``Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction,
Defense Supply Center, Columbus, Ohio.'' Our Committee does not
desire referral of these provisions, a copy of which is
enclosed.
Sincerely,
Christopher H. Smith, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
request such a referral in the interest of expediting
consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a
sequential referral, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Select Committee on Intelligence,
Washington, DC, May XX, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to confirm our mutual
understanding with respect to consideration of H.R. 4200, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005.
Certain provisions of this important legislation are within the
jurisdiction of the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence (HPSCI). I support the legislation and shareyour
desire to have it considered expeditiously by the House; hence, I do
not intend to seek referral of this legislation to the HPSCI.
However, I do so only with the understanding that this
procedural route should not be construed to prejudice this
Committee's valid jurisdictional interests and prerogatives on
these provisions or any other similar legislation. Likewise,
this should not be considered as precedent for consideration of
matters of jurisdictional interest to the HPSCI in the future.
Furthermore, should these provisions or similar provisions be
included in any Senate amendments and considered in a
conference with the Senate, I would request that the Speaker
appoint Members of the HPSCI as conferees on those provisions.
Finally, I would ask that you include a copy of our exchange of
letters on this matter in your report to accompany the bill. I
thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Porter Goss, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Porter Goss,
Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request such a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on
the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Select Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC, May 11, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: It has come to my attention that a new
section has been added to the Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005, incorporating the text of H.R. 3966, the
``ROTC and Military Recruiter Equal Access to Campus Act of
2004.'' As noted in my previous letter dated, March 19, 2004,
provisions of H.R. 3966 directly impact the programs and
operations of the Department of Homeland Security by limiting
its ability to distribute funds to institutions of higher
education by grant or contract. Although I believe that these
provisions fall within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee
under H. Res. 5, I will not seek a sequential referral given
the importance of expediting passage of this bill, which I co-
sponsored and strongly support.
The Select Committee on Homeland Security takes this action
with the understanding that its jurisdiction over the provision
as included in the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005 is in no way diminished or altered. I would appreciate
your including this letter in the Committee Report on the bill.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Christopher Cox, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Christopher Cox,
Chairman, Select Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005.
I agree that the Select Committee on Homeland Security has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to request such a referral in the interest of
expediting consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing
a sequential referral, the Select Committee on Homeland
Security is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on
the bill.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
FISCAL DATA
Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain
annual outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 2005
and each of the following five fiscal years. The results of
such efforts are reflected in the committee cost estimate,
which is included in this report pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE
Under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House of
Representatives and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, the committee has requested but not received a cost
estimate for this bill from the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office.
COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE
Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out
this bill.
H.R. 4200 would authorize appropriations of $418.5 billion
for fiscal year 2005 for the activities of the Department of
Defense (DOD) and the national security programs of the
Department of Energy (DOE). The budget authority implication of
the authorization of appropriations in H.R. 4200 is $422.1
billion. It would also authorize an additional $25 billion
emergency appropriation for fiscal year 2005 to support
Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
The committee estimates that enacting H.R. 4200 would not
increase mandatory budget authority for fiscal year 2004 or the
following five years. In terms of discretionary and mandatory
budget authority, H.R. 4200 is within the allocation provided
by H. Con. Res. 393, as passed by the House on March 25, 2004,
which establishes the Congressional budget for the United
States Government for fiscal year 2005 and sets forth
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2004 and 2005
through 2009.
The committee has been in close and constant consultation
with the Congressional Budget Office and has provided copies of
H.R. 4200 as ordered reported on May 12, 2004, to develop an
estimate and comparison as required under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974. The committee expects to
receive this letter prior to the consideration of H.R. 4200 by
the House of Representatives.
OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, this legislation results from
hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the
committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and are
reflected in the body of this report.
With respect to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this legislation does not
include any new spending or credit authority, nor does it
provide for any increase or decrease in tax revenues or
expenditures. The bill does, however, authorize appropriations.
Other fiscal features of this legislation are addressed in the
estimate prepared by the committee under clause 3(d)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, this legislation would address
several general and outcome-related performance goals and
objectives. The general goal and objective of this legislation
is to improve the quality of life for military personnel and
their families, military readiness, the modernization and
eventual transformation of the armed forces, to enhance the
development of ballistic missile defenses, and to improve the
condition of military housing and facilities.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving the
quality of life for military personnel and their families, the
objective of this legislation is to:
(1) Add 10,000 Army personnel and 3,000 Marine Corps
personnel each year in fiscal years 2005, 2006, and
2007, enabling the military services to begin meeting
long-standing manpower shortages, as well as new
manning requirements;
(2) Provide every military service member an across-
the-board pay raise of 3.5 percent effective January 1,
2005; and
(3) Eliminate out-of-pocket housing costs for
military personnel.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving force
protection for our troops, the objective of this legislation is
to:
(1) Provide over $2.0 billion for force protection
initiatives, including armor for vehicles, new
munitions and surveillance programs; and
(2) Establish a streamlined acquisition process in
order to respond in a timely manner to urgent requests
for combat equipment by commanders in the battlefield.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of successfully
prosecuting continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the
objective of this legislation is to:
(1) Provide an additional $25.0 billion in emergency
contingency operations supplemental funding to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 to support the war on
terrorism's operational costs, personnel expenses and
the procurement of new equipment; and
(2) Support the Army's efforts to transform the
structure of its divisions into smaller organizations
and create additional combat relevant units. This
reorganization known as ``modularity'' will contribute
to the reduction of stress on our troops due to the
high operational tempo of operations in Southwest Asia.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving
military housing and facilities, the objective of this
legislation is to:
(1) Provide $9.9 billion for military construction
and military family housing programs; and
(2) Eliminate the statutory ceiling for the military
housing privatization program, allowing the Department
of Defense to leverage private sector investments and
business interests to build and revitalize family
housing at domestic military bases.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Pursuant to rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for
this legislation in Article I, Section 8 of the United States
Constitution.
STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES
Pursuant to section 423 of Public Law 104-4, this
legislation contains no federal mandates with respect to state,
local, and tribal governments, nor with respect to the private
sector. Similarly, the bill provides no federal
intergovernmental mandates.
RECORD VOTES
In accordance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, record and voice votes were taken
with respect to the committee's consideration of H.R. 4200. The
record of these votes is attached to this report.
The committee ordered H.R. 4200 reported to the House with
a favorable recommendation by a vote of 60-0, a quorum being
present.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
The committee intends to take steps to make available the
analysis of changes in existing law made by the bill, as
required by clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF IKE SKELTON
The 2005 defense authorization is a good bill that makes
advances on a variety of issues. I am pleased that the
committee worked largely in accordance with its nonpartisan
traditions, and that important initiatives from each side were
considered seriously and often adopted. A few of the bill's
provisions are worthy of special mention.
When the surviving spouse of a military retiree, usually a
widow, becomes eligible for Social Security at the age of 62,
her spousal survivor benefits drop from 55 percent of her
spouse's retired pay to 35 percent. Democrats have consistently
called for legislation to eliminate this ``Widow's Tax'' in the
Survivors Benefit Program (SBP), and urged the committee to
address this issue. I therefore applaud the inclusion of
legislation in this bill to eliminate the SBP offset over a
five-year period, beginning on October 1, 2005. I will continue
to work to ensure that this legislative victory is preserved in
conference with the Senate.
I remain concerned by events in Iraq. June 30 is quickly
approaching, and much remains unsettled about the transition of
sovereignty to the Iraqis and the role of U.S. Armed Forces
after the transition. The recent revelations of prisoner abuse
at Abu Ghraib compound these difficulties, and point to a clear
need for better congressional oversight over both the goals and
conduct of U.S.-Iraqi policies.
Several amendments to strengthen congressional oversight
were adopted, including two that I offered. One is a progress
report on Iraqi Security Forces, and the other is to require
the Department of Defense to respond more expeditiously to
congressional requests. Rep. Abercrombie successfully offered
an amendment to better account for and manage civilian
contractors in Iraq. The unsettling news of the alleged
involvement of contractors in the prison abuses and the grisly
beheading of an American businessman highlight the need for a
better awareness of the number and role of contractors in Iraq.
We need to ensure that their roles are appropriate and that
their safety can be reasonably secured.
Despite the adoption of these and other related amendments,
I am not satisfied that Congress has the access to information
to conduct proper oversight, nor am I confident that the
civilian and military leadership at the Pentagon has access to
all the information they need to make critical policy
decisions. Rep. Meek introduced and withdrew an amendment
regarding how critical information is relayed in the military
chain of command. I look forward to working with him and others
during consideration of the bill on the floor to ensure that
both the Legislative and Executive branches of our government
are fully informed of important events in Iraq and can provide
more vigorous oversight and leadership.
While Democrats also support the inclusion of a $25 billion
authorization of an emergency supplemental for ongoing military
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, I am disappointed that the
committee did not accept an amendment offered by Reps. Jim
Cooper and Tim Ryan to authorize $67 billion. The Cooper-Ryan
Amendment represents a more realistic, good-faith estimate of
the likely cost, and would better ensure that Iraq and
Afghanistan operations are not ``cash-flowed'' from regular
Department of Defense appropriations. ``Cash-flowing'' involves
using regular operations and maintenance and military personnel
appropriations for contingency operations, and this practice
invariably leads to disruptions in readiness levels, training,
base operations, equipment maintenance, and other important
peace-time military activities. The $25 billion supplemental
will serve as a useful ``bridge'' to a future supplemental, but
the Cooper-Ryan amendment was a more responsible approach both
militarily and fiscally.
A positive aspect of the $25 billion supplemental was that
it also included much needed end-strength increases for the
Army and Marine Corps. The stress on our ground forces has been
tremendous. I know of soldiers who have returned home from one
year of operations in Afghanistan, only to be told three months
later that they will be deployed to Iraq for a year. The
supplemental authorizes the end-strength increases (10,000
annually for three years) that the Secretary of Defense
indicated was needed by the Army to conduct their
transformational activities while still meeting their
operational requirements. It also provides a necessary increase
for the Marine Corps (3,000 annually for three years) to meet
their mission requirements.
Finally, this Committee in 1989 laid the foundation for
joint officer development and joint professional military
education as it exists today. Recent combat experience
demonstrates that the services have generally achieved a
remarkable integration in executing joint operations. However,
as the nature of warfare evolves, future operations will become
more complex and joint at lower levels than before, and the
framework for developing persons skilled in joint matters must
also evolve. Our committee is again improving military
education by raising joint military education requirements with
a corresponding increase in joint military education
opportunities. This is the first step in developing joint
officers ready to face the challenge of 21st century warfare.
America is a nation at war. The fiscal 2005 defense
authorization recognizes that exigency and provides those who
protect America the tools they need to do the job. I look
forward to improving the bill even further as the legislative
process proceeds.
Ike Skelton.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SOLOMON P. ORTIZ
The United States must take care to use a policy of
impartial diplomacy in our future relations with both the
Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China,
at all levels of our diplomatic relationship. The Pacific Rim
is an area of enormous economic trade with the United States.
The One-China policy is a fundamental fixture of our
international policy, and we must reinforce that at all levels
of our government.
As a Member of Congress who has traveled extensively in
that area on military and trade missions, I have come to love
the people of both China and Taiwan. They are so similar, yet
so unique. People of both nations are peace-loving, yet anxious
about their national character.
Taiwan is currently finding their way through the emotional
aftermath of a divisive 2004 presidential election, which has
only worked to further strain their relationship with the
People's Republic of China. This is a difficult moment for the
U.S. as tensions simmer between our friends on the Pacific Rim.
The United States has much at stake when it comes to a peaceful
relationship between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China.
As one of the few Americans who has traveled to North Korea
and talked to officials there, I want to note that we have
multiple, dangerous, strategic military concerns in this
region. We must focus our attention on diplomacy and the One-
China policy. We must not step off that path. China helped to
set up our meeting with North Korea, and continue to be an
important intermediary between North Korea and us.
The United States, as a country, has long recognized the
One-China policy. It is our long-term guiding principle, and we
must tread carefully along the path of diplomacy as Taiwan and
China confront and deal with their differences.
We must not implement policy that will fuel the fires of
dissention that simmer between these two nations. Our
obligation to the American people, and to peace in that region
of the world, is to aid in the process of finding diplomatic
solutions for our strategic interests through the One-China
policy.
We continue to hope China and Taiwan will be able to get
together to work out the differences between them. The U.S.
needs to give them the time and space to do that. The world has
a great stake in their coming together.
Solomon P. Ortiz.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF STEVE ISRAEL
The FY 2005 defense authorization is important because it
recognizes that the greatest investment we can make is in our
troops, by developing the sometimes intangible qualities of
leadership, education, judgment, initiative and historic
knowledge. I am pleased that the authorization bill understands
the centrality of foreign language and cultural expertise to
the success of military operations in Operation Iraqi Freedom
and Operation Enduring Freedom, as well as the Global War on
Terrorism.
I commend the Committee and the Department of Defense for
including legislative language in the bill that establishes a
Defense Language Office within the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to ensure a
strategic focus on meeting present and future requirements for
language and regional expertise. Other language directing the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a study on how the military
educates and trains our soldiers in language and culture will
prove invaluable. The technological revolution that has made
possible our recent successes must be accompanied by a similar
progression in the way we wage war.
We must continue to build on the accomplishments of
Representative Skelton and others on this committee who were
instrumental in raising the standard of joint officer
development and education that has been so critical to the
success of our military. Faced with new challenges, we must
recommit ourselves to creating the educational and training
framework that will give our military the language and cultural
expertise they need to succeed.
I also want to recognize the contribution of Major General
Robert Scales. As a leading voice for re-shaping our military
to deal with the challenges of the 21st Century, his testimony
before the full committee was helpful in focusing the
Committee's attention on this issue. With more than 30 years of
experience in the military and former commandant of the Army
War College, he would be a valuable resource for the Department
of Defense when it begins its assessment of military education
and training.
I look forward to working with my colleagues and the
defense community to ensure that our men and women in uniform
have the skill necessary to navigate the cultural and
geopolitical complexities to conflict in the 21st century.
Steve Israel.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF KENDRICK B. MEEK
There are many things about which to be proud in the 2005
defense authorization bill. I am very pleased that this bill
will provide additional funds over the original Pentagon
request to provide for the current necessities of our fighting
men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan. From equipping our
troops with signal-jamming equipment to replacement of damaged
air and ground vehicles to the over $700 million in added funds
to completely up-armor our fleet of HMMWVs, the bill intends to
outfit our troops in a manner befitting the heroes of a country
with the greatest resources in the world.
However, merely supplying our troops with the means and
methods to fight an asymmetrical war gives them only two-thirds
of what they, and we, need for ultimate success in Iraq and
Afghanistan. I am concerned that information necessary for
proper strategic planning is not being utilized in high-level,
decision-making processes. While this information appears to be
available at the operations level, the most critical elements
of it do not always rise to the policy level.
The United States finds itself in a quagmire resulting from
detainee abuses at Abu Ghraib that not only complicates the
stabilization of Iraq and the Middle East in general, but that
brings into question the moral integrity of a country that has
always fought hard, even within its own borders, for human
rights. Unfortunately, had the Pentagon acted sooner, there is
reason to believe this situation could have been at least
contained, if not avoided altogether.
In late August of 2003 and again in mid-October, Allied
Forces Commander, Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez, commissioned two
separate evaluation and assessment investigations of the
detention and interrogation situation in Iraq. Both reports
contained admonishments that policies were lacking, training
subpar, and oversight non-existent. Among the similarities in
the two reports:
That there were no authorities or procedures in place
to affect a unified strategy to detain and interrogate
internees in Iraq;
That there was a lack of active control of the
internees within the detention environment, and flawed
use-of-force procedures;
That the general prison population was inappropriately
co-mingled with EPWs;
That the soldier to detainee ratio was critically
deficient;
That there was indication the MPs were actively,
though indirectly engaged in interrogation actions
despite Army Regulations to the contrary.
Any one of these items is worthy of command level
discussion and subsequent briefing to the Pentagon. Taken
together, they constituted a warning shot over the bow. In
fact, in the Article 15-6 Investigation performed by MG Taguba,
the IO specifically states, ``Unfortunately, many of the
systemic problems that surfaced during MG Ryder's team's
assessment are the very same issues that are the subject of
this investigation.'' [Taguba Report, page 12, pg 2]. However,
current Army regulations do not require the transmittal of such
information up the chain of command beyond the commissioning
authority [AR 15-6, ss 3-18, 3-19].
Currently, only Air Force HQ is aggressive in finding
sensitive information and forwarding it up the chain of
command, having done so since 1998. An office was set up within
HQ whose sole purpose is to learn of sensitive information
items and flag them. As part of the Air Force's formal rules,
personnel who learn of explosive matters- including those
``with potential community reaction or press coverage''--must
inform the office for briefing to the Secretary of the Air
Force. The Navy also has a limited version of the Air Force's
program, though it is less ambitious.
Secretary Rumsfeld said last week that it would be
difficult for him to reach down through the myriad of legal
cases climbing through the military justice system and find
those that are potentially explosive in nature. I would counter
that with the right guidance he would not have to reach down,
but could expect that information to be pushed up, even before
it reaches the criminal investigation stage.
Military leadership has always required critical elements
of information to make sound, timely, and informed decisions on
the battlefield. Determining the information needed to make
these decisions is crucial to a commander's ability to act
decisively in the course of battle. That same depth and speed
of information is necessary for the Pentagon to direct policy
and decision-making in the course of stabilization efforts
afterwards.
The amendment that I offered during committee intends to
move mission-critical information from the commissioning
authority up to the highest-levels in short order when that
information portends events or situations detrimental to our
strategic plan. The language merely required that the Secretary
give guidance to all Department of Defense personnel with
authority to commission assessments, evaluations or
investigations on what types of information would be necessary
to pass up the chain of command. This guidance would
specifically target those items of such potentially volatile
nature as to give even the layman a reason to raise a red flag.
Were it that MG Miller's assessment had been even a topic
of discussion around the water cooler at the Pentagon, we might
have been able to avoid the events at Abu Ghraib. Had more
intense conversation happened after MG Ryder's investigation,
we would have at least had the opportunity to contain the
situation, develop a strategy for correcting the problem, and
alert the world in a far less internationally embarrassing
fashion. Instead of the issue being a part of Pentagon
discussions in the summer and fall of 2003, it was left to a
courageous specialist to try to put a stop to the vile episodes
at Abu Ghraib in 2004, some five months after official reports
highlighted conditions for a serious problem.
It is not enough to arm our soldiers with the means and
methods of war fighting. We must arm them with strategic
planning. Proper planning is the offspring of proper
information gathering and processing at the decision-making
level. It is ironic that there are suggestions that we seek
more information on seeking more information before we act. I
hope that before the defense authorization bill leaves the
House of Representatives we are able to improve an excellent
bill even more by addressing this pertinent and timely issue.
Kendrick B. Meek.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE MIKE D. ROGERS
As the Committee moves forward with H.R. 4200, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, I want to share
my concern over the Department of Defense's use of the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green
Building Rating System. The Air Force, Army, and Navy each
utilize the LEED standard in some respects in its building
projects. Although sustainable building design can be a
valuable goal, the Department's use of the LEED standard is
troubling.
First, the LEED rating system clearly discriminates against
the use of renewable wood products. Through several of its
specific credits for steel and concrete, certain wood products
are put at a significant disadvantage. It does not recognize
that wood is among the most environmentally benign of all
building materials, because, among other things, it is a
renewable resource that sequesters huge amounts of carbon.
Second, LEED discriminates against wood products
manufactured in the United States. The LEED rating system
provides a specific credit only for forest products that have
been certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), a
standard initially developed by international environmental
groups to combat tropical deforestation. It is predominately
recognized in Europe. FSC-certified products manufactured from
wood grown in the U.S. are not readily available. However,
products from other credible third party certification programs
are readily available. No credits are given for wood products
produced by companies independently third-party certified to
the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) Program standard or
the American Tree Farm System--the two largest sustainable
forest management systems in the U.S.
Third, LEED has not been developed through a consensus
process open to all interested parties. The process used by the
U.S. Green Building Council to create and operate LEED does not
meet any generally accepted definition of a voluntary consensus
standard. For example, the USGBC fails to satisfy the measures
of the voluntary consensus standards development process set
out by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
And fourth, a recent National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) study, while recognizing that the LEED
standard does have beneficial elements, concluded that it does
not properly rate products based on environmental criteria. In
the study, NIST was especially critical of LEED's arbitrary
thresholds, its emphasis on cost rather than environmental
impact measures, the lack of appropriate baselines and measures
of improvement, and the program's inability to compare
buildings in different locations on equal terms.
To address this issue, I urge the committee to accept in
conference the following report language from Title XXVIII of
the Senate version of the bill, S. 2400:
Use of sustainable design standards by the Department of Defense
Congress encourages the Department of Defense to utilize
sustainable building design and construction methods to
maximize the efficient use of renewable, recycled, and
environmentally sound materials. However, concerns have been
expressed that certain rating systems adopted by the Department
to assess the standards of sustainable design and construction
of facilities may unfairly discriminate against domestic
producers of wood construction products. Therefore, the
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
to the committee by June 1, 2005 which describes:
(1) the standards used by each military department to
assess the use of sustainable design and construction
methods, including credits provided for products made
from renewable materials, as well as recycled
materials;
(2) the extent to which such standards comply with
the requirements of Section 6002 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, section 6962 of title
42, United States Code, Executive Order 13101, Office
of Management and Budget Circular A-119, and other
applicable requirements of law and regulation; and
(3) the extent to which the standards adopted by each
military department unfairly discriminate against the
use of products and materials manufactured in the
United States.
The committee expects the Secretary to take appropriate
action to address any noncompliance with applicable
requirements of law or regulation and any unfair discrimination
against any U.S. manufactured materials identified during the
course of this review.
Mike D. Rogers.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES VIC SNYDER AND MAC THORNBERRY
We find ourselves in disagreement with the actions of the
Committee regarding the delay contained in the bill of the Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process. The Chairman of the
Readiness Subcommittee included in his mark language that
essentially delayed the BRAC process for two years by demanding
that a series of reports be submitted late in 2005 and that the
process then hold for 18 months until the committee had a
chance to consider the amendments.
During the full committee markup process, an amendment was
offered to cancel the entire BRAC process, to which a second
degree amendment was offered reinstating the two year delay.
This amendment was passed, although a number of members spoke
against both amendments.
Arguments were made that the process should be delayed, and
several reports be submitted, because there is a war currently
going on. During debate on the amendments, the argument was
advanced that the process should be cancelled because the
Department of Defense has not yet been able to nominate
directly to Congress any individual base that should be closed,
and that, should the Department do this, Congress is perfectly
capable of voting to close or realign individual bases. In my
opinion, both of these arguments represent seriously wrong
approaches.
We were pleased to see the committee reject the second
argument. The BRAC process was created to ensure that politics
and the self-interest of an individual district or member are
removed from the process of base closure. To have the
Department of Defense begin nominating bases and Congress
voting to close individual bases would immediately cause even
more tension in Congress and accusations of partisan bias in
the system. This would result in gridlock and an utter failure
to take needed action.
The former argument, that the process should be delayed due
to the current issues in Iraq, is similarly flawed. There will
never be a time during which sufficient peace and stability
reign for us to carry out the BRAC process. Many people regard
the 1990s as a time of relative peace, forgetting that during
this window of stability the U.S. military carried out actions
in Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Somalia, to say nothing of
scores of other minor military engagements. Simply put, we
almost always have been, and probably always will be, bemoaning
the disorder that seems to constantly reign supreme. In
addition, the BRAC process is as much about realignment as it
is closure, and the realignment is needed to assist the
Department of Defense in carrying out the very changes in the
military that are designed to allow us to better address the
current chaos.
There is a valid argument that the reports requested by the
Committee in the provision contained in the bill should be
submitted. We agree that the Committee should be better
informed about the Global Posture Review, under which DoD is
adjusting our overseas basing, and its diplomatic and military
effects. Similarly, it would be beneficial to know more about
the effects of homeland security missions and military
transformation on basing. Nothing stops the Committee from
demanding these reports now, and we believe that it would be
entirely appropriate to do so. If we did so, presumably DoD
could be ordered to produce the information by the spring of
2005 at the latest, which would give the Committee, and
Congress as a whole, 6 months to consider the reports, digest
the information, and hold hearings. Nothing is stopping us from
carrying out this needed oversight but our own timidity, but
the reports do not require delaying a much needed process by
two years.
In conclusion, while the Committee has asked for much
needed information, it has also delayed a needed process. It is
my hope that the whole House, or at least the whole Congress
acting through the conference committee, will reject the delay
contained in the House bill and proceed with the process
currently in law. Hoping for a respite in the current global
environment is not only unrealistic, but does the military
itself no favors.
Vic Snyder.
Mac Thornberry.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES JIM COOPER AND TIM RYAN
We commend Chairman Hunter for including a detailed
authorization for $25 billion in this year's National Defense
Authorization Act, but we are gravely concerned that this down
payment on the cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2005
fails to tell the whole truth to the American people.
During committee consideration of the authorization bill,
we offered an amendment authorizing a full-year supplemental
appropriation of $67 billion. This larger figure reflects a
realistic, detailed analysis of the likely total cost of the
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2005. This amendment included
funding for all of the commendable items in the Chairman's
bill, including funding for critical force protection
equipment, deferred vehicle maintenance, new counter-terrorism
technology, replacement vehicles for those destroyed in combat
operations, and additional combat troops for the Army and
Marine Corps. However, it also provided sufficient funds for
combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for all of fiscal
year 2005, not just the few months of funding that the
Chairman's bill authorized.
We offered this amendment because we believe the House bill
should reflect the true costs of these wars. Piecemeal funding
of these critical military efforts sends the wrong signal to
our adversaries, the American people, and U.S. troops in the
field. Our adversaries are watching our actions closely, and a
robust full-year authorization would have sent the signal that
despite the significant challenges we face in Iraq and
Afghanistan, the United States is committed to victory. To
Americans here at home, a full-year authorization would
demonstrate that Congress takes seriously its duty to be honest
with the American people, and that when it comes to providing
funding for our troops in the field, politics should truly take
a backseat. Finally, our troops in the field look to Congress
to provide them what they need to accomplish the missions they
are assigned. Authorization of a full-year supplemental would
leave no doubt that Congress supports them and is willing to
provide whatever is needed to win.
We were disappointed that no Republican members of our
committee chose to support our amendment. We believe the
American people will continue to support the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan where critical U.S. interests are at stake, but
only if we are honest about the cost.
Jim Cooper.
Tim Ryan.