[House Report 109-119]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




109th Congress                                                   Report
                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     109-119
_______________________________________________________________________



                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                       APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [to accompany h.r. 2863]





 June 10, 2005.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Bill Totals......................................................     1
Committee Budget Review Process..................................     4
Introduction.....................................................     4
Committee Recommendations by Major Category......................     5
    Active and Reserve Military Personnel........................     5
    Operation and Maintenance....................................     5
    Procurement..................................................     6
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation...................     7
Forces to be Supported...........................................     7
    Department of the Army.......................................     7
    Department of the Navy.......................................     9
    Department of the Air Force..................................    10
TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL......................................    13
    Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel 
      Appropriations.............................................    13
    Summary of Military Personnel Recommendations for Fiscal Year 
      2006.......................................................    13
    Adjustments to Military Personnel Account....................    15
        End Strength Adjustments.................................    15
        Accuracy of Obligations..................................    16
        Guard and Reserve Cost Avoidance.........................    16
        Expedited Servicemember Naturalization...................    16
        Full-Time Support Strengths..............................    16
    Military Personnel, Army.....................................    17
    Military Personnel, Navy.....................................    20
    Military Personnel, Marine Corps.............................    23
    Military Personnel, Air Force................................    26
    Reserve Personnel, Army......................................    29
    Reserve Personnel, Navy......................................    31
    Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps..............................    33
    Reserve Personnel, Air Force.................................    35
    National Guard Personnel, Army...............................    37
    National Guard Personnel, Air Force..........................    39
TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..............................    43
    Operation and Maintenance Overview...........................    45
        Recommendations to Address Shortfalls....................    46
        Operation and Maintenance Budget Execution Data..........    47
        Operation and Maintenance Reprogrammings.................    47
        Civilian Pay.............................................    48
        Military Tents...........................................    48
    Operation and Maintenance, Army..............................    49
        Second Destination Transportation (SDT) Support for Army 
          and Air Force Exchange System (AAFES)..................    54
        Controlled Humidity Program..............................    54
        Sense and Respond Logistics..............................    54
        Humanitarian Relief Transfer of DoD Aircraft.............    54
        Tacom Life Cycle Management Command Integrated Digital 
          Environment (IDE) Pilot Program........................    55
        Autonomic Logistics Prototype............................    55
        Multi-Jurisdictional Counter-Drug Task Force Training 
          (MCTFT)................................................    55
        Fort Irwin Road..........................................    55
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy..............................    56
        Diagnosis and Prognostication of Gas Turbine Problems....    60
        Naval Station Mayport Environmental Impact Study.........    61
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps......................    61
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force.........................    64
    Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide......................    68
        Joint ROTC Military Leadership Project...................    73
        National Guard Youth Challenge Program...................    73
        Wind Demonstration Project...............................    73
        Advanced First Responder Network.........................    73
        Minority Contract Enhancement Program....................    74
        Service-Wide Safety: Alcohol Breath Detectors............    74
        Public Interest Declassification Board...................    74
        Special Operations Technology Transfer...................    74
    Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve......................    74
        U.S. Army Reserve Command IT Consolidation...............    77
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve......................    77
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve..............    80
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.................    82
    Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard...............    84
    Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard................    87
        Training Capability Upgrade..............................    89
        Moffett Federal Airfield.................................    89
    Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Account.............    89
    United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces..........    89
    Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid...............    89
    Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction Account.................    90
TITLE III. PROCUREMENT...........................................    91
    Estimates and Appropriations Summary.........................    91
        Special Interest Items...................................    93
        Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts..........    93
        Reporting Requirement for Below Threshold Reprogrammings.    93
        Equipment Reset and Reconstitution.......................    93
        Classified Annex.........................................    94
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    94
        Multiyear Procurement Programs...........................    96
        UH-1 Aircraft Replacement................................    96
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................    99
        High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)...........   101
        Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS)............   101
    Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....   103
        Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW)................   105
    Procurement of Ammunition, Army..............................   108
        Ammunition Production Facilities.........................   110
        Life Cycle Management Commands...........................   110
    Other Procurement, Army......................................   113
        Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Modernization Strategy..........   117
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................   124
        KC-130J Aircraft.........................................   127
        C-130 Series.............................................   127
        Common Avionics..........................................   127
        Common Ground Equipment..................................   127
        EA-6B Series.............................................   127
            Improved Capabilities (ICAP III) Program.............   127
    Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................   132
        MK 48 ADCAP Torpedo Mods.................................   134
        Gun Mount Modifications..................................   134
        Tomahawk.................................................   134
    Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps.............   137
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................   142
        Stability of Navy Shipbuilding Plan......................   144
        Affordability of Navy's Shipbuilding Plan................   144
        Cost Growth and Cost Control in Ongoing Programs.........   145
        DDG-51 Modernization Program.............................   146
        Littoral Combat Ship.....................................   146
        LHA(R)...................................................   146
        DD(X) Destroyer..........................................   146
        DDG-51 Guided Missile Destroyer..........................   147
    Other Procurement, Navy......................................   149
        LM-2500 Gas Turbine......................................   154
        Submarine Periscopes and Imaging Equipment...............   154
        Virginia Class Support Equipment.........................   154
        Ship Communications Automation...........................   154
        Coast Guard Equipment....................................   154
        SSN Combat Control Systems...............................   154
        Physical Security Equipment..............................   155
    Procurement, Marine Corps....................................   162
        MAGTFTC Range Transformation Initiative..................   164
        High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)...........   164
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................   169
        Joint Strike Fighter Advance Procurement.................   172
        Future Years Procurement Strategy for the F/A-22 Raptor..   172
        F-15 Active Electronically Scanned Array Procurement.....   172
        C-130J Multiyear Procurement Program.....................   173
        C-17 Procurement.........................................   173
        Global Hawk..............................................   174
        A-10 Mids Joint Tactical Radio System....................   174
        Airborne Fire-Fighting System............................   174
        Euro-Afghan Air Safety...................................   175
    Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................   179
        Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile....................   181
        Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV).................   181
    Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.........................   185
        Laser Guided Bomb........................................   187
    Other Procurement, Air Force.................................   189
    Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................   196
        USSOCOM--Emergent Critical Combat Mission Needs..........   198
        SOCOM--Modernization of the HC-130 Legacy Fleet..........   198
        Buy America..............................................   198
    National Guard and Reserve Equipment.........................   202
    Defense Production Act Purchases.............................   202
TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION.............   203
    Estimates and Appropriation Summary..........................   203
        Special Termination Cost Clause..........................   205
        Visual Information Display System........................   205
        Problems in DoD Space Programs...........................   205
        Joint Tactical Radio System..............................   206
        Joint Common Missile.....................................   208
        Special Interest Items...................................   208
        Reprogramming Guidance for Acquisition Accounts..........   208
        Reporting Requirement for Below Threshold Reprogrammings.   209
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army.............   209
        Future Combat System (FCS)...............................   231
        Non Line of Sight Cannon (NLOS-C)........................   232
        Excalibur, XM982 155MM Extended Range Artillery 
          Projectile.............................................   232
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy.............   240
        DD(X)....................................................   251
        CG(X)....................................................   251
        Littoral Combat Ship.....................................   251
        Mast-Mounted In-Port Video Force Protection Surveillance 
          System.................................................   251
        Maritime Battle Center...................................   251
        EA-18(G).................................................   251
        Bone Marrow Registry.....................................   251
        Multinational Information Sharing........................   252
        Target Systems Development...............................   252
        Mobile User Objective System.............................   252
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force........   261
        Optical Maximum Entropy Verification.....................   270
        Transformational Satellite Communications................   270
        Space Radar..............................................   270
        Small Diameter Bomb......................................   270
        Personnel Recovery Vehicle...............................   271
        Next Generation Bomber Tier I Supplier Sustainment.......   271
        Laser Spark Countermeasure Program.......................   271
        Advanced Satellite Thermal Control Program...............   271
        National Aerospace Leadership Initiative.................   271
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.....   281
        Missile Defense Agency--Program Element Restructure......   293
        Missile Defense Agency--Termination Liability............   293
        Dual Booster Strategy....................................   293
        Space Surveillance and Tracking System (STSS)............   294
        Boost and Ascent Phase Engagement Study..................   294
        Asymmetric Missile Threat................................   294
        Venture and Initiative Funds.............................   295
        Chemical and Biological Defense Program..................   295
        Anti-Terrorism Protection Standards......................   295
        Roll-On Roll-Off Infection Control Facility..............   296
        Demanufacturing of Electronic Equipment for Reuse and 
          Recycling..............................................   296
        Operationally Responsive Space...........................   296
    Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense.....................   304
TITLE V. REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS..........................   307
    Defense Working Capital Funds................................   307
    National Defense Sealift Fund................................   307
        T-AKE Dry Cargo/Ammunition Ship..........................   309
        MPS Lease Buyout.........................................   309
        Maritime Prepositioning Force (FUTURE)...................   309
        TAOE(X)..................................................   309
TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS...................   311
    Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army..............   311
    Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense.......   313
    Office of the Inspector General..............................   313
TITLE VII. RELATED AGENCIES......................................   315
    National Intelligence Program................................   315
        Classified Annex.........................................   315
    Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System 
      Fund.......................................................   315
    Intelligence Community Management Account....................   316
    National Security Education Trust Fund.......................   316
TITLE VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................   319
    Definition of Program, Project and Activity..................   319
TITLE IX. ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS..............................   321
    Introduction.................................................   321
    Committee Recommendation.....................................   321
    Classified Programs..........................................   323
    Reporting Requirements.......................................   323
    Military Personnel...........................................   323
    Operation and Maintenance....................................   324
        Iraqi Freedom Fund.......................................   326
    Procurement..................................................   326
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation...................   328
    Defense Working Capital Funds................................   329
    General Provisions--This Title...............................   329
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS..................   331
    Changes in the Application of Existing Law...................   331
        Appropriations Language..................................   331
        General Provisions.......................................   333
    Appropriations Not Authorized by Law.........................   335
    Transfer of Funds............................................   338
    Rescissions..................................................   338
    Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives........   338
    Constitutional Authority.....................................   339
    Comparison with the Budget Resolution........................   339
    Five-Year Outlay Projections.................................   339
    Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments..........   339
    Committee Votes..............................................   340





109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    109-119

======================================================================


 
            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006

                                _______
                                

 June 10, 2005.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Young of Florida, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted 
                             the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2863]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense, and for other 
purposes, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006.

                              Bill Totals

    Appropriations for most military functions of the 
Department of Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill 
for the fiscal year 2006. This bill does not provide 
appropriations for military construction, military family 
housing, civil defense, military nuclear warheads, Basic 
Allowance for Housing, the Defense Health Program, Facilities 
Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM), or 
environmental restoration for which requirements are considered 
in connection with other appropriations acts.
    The President's fiscal year 2006 budget request for 
activities funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act totals $366,964,393,000 in new budget obligational 
authority. The amounts recommended by the Committee in the 
accompanying bill total $363,684,246,000 in new budget 
authority. This is $3,280,174,000 below the budget estimate, 
and $11,020,732,000 above the sums made available for the 
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2005, excluding 
$73,163,308,000 in emergency funds contained in Public Law 109-
13.
    The Committee recommendation also includes appropriations 
in title IX totaling $45,254,619,000 for contingency operations 
related to the global war on terrorism. These funds are made 
available consistent with authority contained in section 402 of 
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.



                    Committee Budget Review Process

    During its review of the fiscal year 2006 budget, the 
Subcommittee on Defense held a total of ten hearings during the 
period of February 2005 to April 2005. Testimony received by 
the Subcommittee totaled 724 pages of transcript. Approximately 
half of the hearings were held in open session. Executive 
(closed) sessions were held only when the security 
classification of the material to be discussed presented no 
alternative.

                              Introduction

    The Committee recommendations represent a balanced approach 
to the needs of the Defense Department, while ensuring that our 
men and women in uniform in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the 
world will not face a gap in funding as they wage the global 
war on terrorism.
    The Committee recommendations for fiscal year 2006 were 
driven by a number of factors, including the following:
    1. the need to ensure continuity of combat operations in 
Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world as part of the global 
war on terrorism;
    2. the need to ensure oversight over major procurement 
items, and to make adjustments as warranted by the status of 
such procurements;
    3. the need to ensure that the technological advantage 
enjoyed by our Armed Forces is maintained by providing a robust 
investment in research and development; and
    4. the need to restrain the President's budget request 
consistent with the budget allocation.
    The Committee responded to these needs in a variety of 
ways. In title IX, the Committee has recommended 
$45,254,619,000 in additional appropriations as a ``bridge 
fund'' until full-year appropriations become available to 
support the operating costs associated with the global war on 
terrorism and Operations Iraqi Freedom, Enduring Freedom, and 
Noble Eagle. These funds are intended to cover the costs of 
combat operations for the first 6 months of fiscal year 2006, 
thereby avoiding a potential interruption in funding which 
would have an adverse impact on our troops in the field. The 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006 
designates $50,000,000,000 for such purposes. Also, the 
authorization of appropriations for similar activities is 
contained in H.R. 1815, the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2006, which passed the House of Representatives 
on April 26, 2005, by a vote of 390-39.
    As part of its regular oversight responsibilities, the 
Committee also reviewed the status of major procurement items 
and made recommendations for adjustments in funding levels 
based on program slippage, contracting problems, and other 
changes to the status of such procurements. For instance, due 
to repeated test failures of the Joint Air to Surface Standoff 
Missile (JASSM), the Committee recommends termination of this 
program. However, in most cases the reductions in procurement 
funding are due to schedule slippages and development delays. 
In such cases, the Committee recommendation includes reductions 
to procurement funding associated with schedule slippage, but 
maintains research and development funding in order to correct 
the problems that led to these delays.
    In addition, the Committee recommends funding of certain 
procurement programs at levels above those included in the 
President's budget. Examples include restoration of the 
multiyear procurement of the C-130J aircraft for the Air Force; 
funding of an additional DDG-51 destroyer, 2 additional 
Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), and an additional T-AKE ammunition 
ship for the Navy; and funding of 4 additional UH-60 Blackhawk 
helicopters for the Army.
    Finally, to ensure that the United States military of 
tomorrow can continue to operate in an environment of 
technological superiority, the Committee recommendation 
includes funding for the Research, development, test and 
evaluation accounts of $71,656,892,000, an increase of 
$2,300,852,000 above the President's request.

              Committee Recommendations by Major Category


                 ACTIVE AND RESERVE MILITARY PERSONNEL

    In title I of the bill, the Committee recommends a total of 
$84,132,276,000 for active, Reserve and Guard military 
personnel, a decrease of $829,700,000 below the budget request. 
The Committee supports the budget proposal to provide an 
increase in basic pay for all personnel of 3.1 percent, 
effective January 1, 2006, and agrees with the authorized end 
strength levels as requested for active duty and Selected 
Reserve personnel. Funds in title IX provide sustainment for 
the increased end strength resulting from ongoing contingency 
operations.
    In addition, a $20,000,000 increase is provided for the 
Family Advocacy Program. Funding of $30,000,000 is also 
provided for Impact Aid, which was proposed for termination in 
the budget.

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

    In title II of the bill, the Committee recommends a total 
of $116,092,791,000 for operation and maintenance support to 
the military services and other Department of Defense entities, 
a reduction of $2,890,150,000 from the fiscal year 2006 budget 
request, and an increase of $3,250,359,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005.
    The Committee's recommendation fully funds the President's 
request for readiness training in flying hours, ship steaming 
and ground forces operational tempo training. Requests for unit 
and depot level maintenance program funding have been fully 
supported. Funds not needed for home station activities due to 
units being deployed for military operations in Afghanistan and 
Iraq have been realigned for support of continuing combat and 
peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
    In addition, the Committee has provided over $500,000,000 
in additional operating account funding to assist in addressing 
many of the Department's shortfalls. Funds have been added for 
individual soldier and Marine field equipment, small all 
terrain vehicles, general purpose tents and mobility shelters, 
improvements in control of logistics systems, enhanced training 
capabilities, foreign language training, training on urbanized 
terrain, military and civilian safety, education programs, and 
distance learning.

                              PROCUREMENT

    In title III of the bill, the Committee recommends a total 
of $76,806,886,000 for procurement, an increase of $171,476,000 
over the fiscal year 2006 budget request and a decrease of 
$872,917,000 from the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2005. 
However, the latter figure does not include $17,378,594,000 
provided in fiscal year 2005 for procurement in the Emergency 
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on 
Terror, and Tsunami Relief Act, 2005. In addition, title IX of 
this bill includes a total of $2,857,314,000 in various 
procurement accounts.
    Major initiatives and modifications include:
    $580,650,000, an increase of $75,000,000 above the budget 
request, to procure a total of 45 Blackhawk Helicopters, an 
increase of 4 above the fiscal year 2006 budget request;
    $882,449,000, the President's request, for the procurement 
of 240 Stryker vehicles;
    $590,392,000 to fully support the AH64 Apache program; 
including authority for multi-year procurement for Block II 
upgrades;
    $489,700,000 for 108 Patriot surface-to-air missile 
systems;
    $2,736,230,000 to fully support the request for 38 F/A-18 
Hornet aircraft, as well as $86,105,000 in advance procurement;
    $1,060,576,000 to fully support procurement of V-22 Osprey 
aircraft for the Marine Corps;
    $9,613,358,000 in Navy shipbuilding and conversion, 
including $1,637,698,000 for an additional Virginia class 
submarine, $1,300,000,000 for nuclear refueling of an aircraft 
carrier, $1,400,000,000 for an additional DDG-51 destroyer, 
$1,334,741,000 for 1 LPD-17 amphibious assault ship, and 
$440,000,000 for 2 additional Littoral Combat Ships;
    $384,000,000 for an additional T-AKE ship within the 
National Defense Sealift Fund;
    $3,186,622,000 to fully fund procurement of 24 F/A-22 
Raptors in fiscal year 2006, and $576,877,000 for advance 
procurement of 29 aircraft in fiscal year 2007;
    $2,790,859,000 for procurement of 15 C-17 aircraft in 
fiscal year 2006, and $445,423,000 for advance procurement of 7 
aircraft in fiscal year 2007;
     $72,200,000 to begin procurement of Active Electronically 
Scanned Array v3 radars for Air National Guard F-15s;
    $743,983,000 to restore the C-130J Air Force procurement 
program as well as $90,000,000 in advance procurement, and 
$321,089,000 for the Navy KC-130J program as well as 
$45,626,000 in advance procurement (in fiscal year 2006, the 
Air Force will procure 9 aircraft and the Navy will procure 4 
tanker variants);
    $528,978,000 to fully fund 1 advanced EHF communications 
satellite;
    a reduction of $715,992,000 associated with advance 
procurement of the DD(X) destroyer; and
    a reduction of $152,377,000 associated with advance 
procurement for the Joint Strike Fighter.

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

    In title IV of the bill, the Committee recommends a total 
of $71,656,892,000 for research, development, test and 
evaluation, an increase of $2,300,852,000 over the fiscal year 
2006 budget request and an increase of $1,724,710,000 over the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2005.
    Major initiatives and modifications include:
    $3,054,280,000 for the Defense Advanced Research Projects 
Agency, $20,000,000 above the President's request;
    $157,587,000 for the Army's non-line of sight cannon, 
$50,000,000 above the President's request;
    $581,954,000 for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), which 
funds 1 ship in research, development, test and evaluation in 
addition to the 2 ships included in the regular procurement 
account;
    $253,675,000 in full funding for the Expeditionary Fighting 
Vehicle (EFV) of the Marine Corps;
    $935,932,000 to fully support the budget request for the 
VXX Presidential vertical lift helicopter;
    $206,376,000 in further development of the V-22 Osprey 
program;
    $629,682,000 in full funding for the advanced Hawkeye 
system of the Navy;
    $2,396,513,000 in the Navy and $2,474,763,000 in the Air 
Force in full funding for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) 
development program;
    $670,000,000 in development for the DD(X) destroyer;
    $80,000,000 in development for the CG(X) next generation 
cruiser, an increase of $50,000,000;
    $7,631,534,000 for missile defense programs, a decrease of 
$1,151,873,000 from fiscal year 2005 levels and a net decrease 
of $143,712,000 from the budget request; within this amount, an 
increase of $60,000,000 above the request is provided for sea-
based mid-course defense;
    a reduction of $399,000,000 for the Transformational 
Satellite Communications program due to excessive cost growth 
and development problems;
    a reduction of $125,839,000 for the Space Radar program;
    a reduction of $449,000,000 for the Future Combat System 
due to development and contract delays; and
    a reduction of $340,100,000 for the Joint Tactical Radio 
System program due to development delays.

                         Forces To Be Supported


                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

    The fiscal year 2006 budget request is designed to support 
the Army transformation to a Modular Force (10 Active Units of 
Employment, 36 Active Brigade Combat Teams, 21 Active Support 
Brigades by fiscal year 2006) and Active forces yet to be 
transformed, consisting of 3 divisions, and 1 separate brigade. 
The reserve Modular Force will transform by fiscal year 2006 
with 3 Units of Employment, 10 Brigade Combat Teams, 26 (4 
USAR) Support Brigades and forces yet to be transferred 
consisting of 5 divisions and 10 separate brigades. These 
forces provide the minimum force necessary to meet enduring 
defense needs and execute the National Military Strategy. At 
end state, the active Army force will contain 43 Brigade Combat 
Teams, the Army National Guard will contain 34 Brigade Combat 
Teams and the Army Reserve will contain 11 Support Brigades (8 
Sustainment, 3 Maneuver Enhancement).
    A summary of the major forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Fiscal year--
                                        --------------------------------
                                            2004       2005       2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Divisions:
    Airborne...........................          1          1          0
    Air Assault........................          0          0          0
    Light..............................          1          1          0
    Infantry...........................          0          0          0
    Mechanized.........................          3          2          2
    Armored............................          2          2          1
    Medium.............................          0          0          0
                                        --------------------------------
      Divisions Total..................          7          6          3
    Non Division Combat Units:
        Armored Cavalry Regiments......          2          1          0
        Separate Brigades..............          2          2          1
                                        --------------------------------
          Non Division Combat Units              4          3          1
           Total.......................
    Modular Forces:
        Unit of Employment Y (UEy).....          0          1          2
        Unit of Employment X (UEx).....          3          5          8
        Brigade Combat Team (BCT)                4          8         13
         (Heavy).......................
        Brigade Combat Team (BCT)                6          9         18
         (Infantry)....................
        STRYKER Brigade Combat Team              3          4          5
         (SBCT)........................
        Aviation Brigade...............          3          5          8
        Sustainment Brigade............          3          4          8
        Fires Brigade..................          0          1          3
        Maneuver Enhancement Brigade...          0          0          1
        Battle Field Surveillance                0          0          1
         Brigade.......................
                                        --------------------------------
          Modular Forces Total.........         22         37         67
Guard Divisions:
    Airborne...........................          0          0          0
    Air Assault........................          0          0          0
    Light..............................          1          1          1
    Infantry...........................          1          0          0
    Mechanized.........................          4          4          3
    Armored............................          0          0          0
    Medium.............................          2          2          1
                                        --------------------------------
      Divisions Total..................          8          7          5
    Non Division Combat Units:
        Armored Cavalry Regiments......          1          1          0
        Separate Brigades..............         17         14         10
                                        --------------------------------
          Non Division Combat Units             18         15         10
           Total.......................
    Modular Forces:
        Unit of Employment Y (UEy).....          0          0          0
        Unit of Employment X (UEx).....          0          1          3
        Brigade Combat Team (BCT)                0          2          6
         (Heavy).......................
        Brigade Combat Team (BCT)                0          1          3
         (Infantry)....................
        STRYKER Brigade Combat Team              0          1          1
         (SBCT)........................
        Aviation Brigade...............          0          0         13
        Sustainment Brigade............          0          0          5
        Fires Brigade..................          0          0          1
        Maneuver Enhancement Brigade...          0          0          3
        Battle Field Surveillance                0          0          0
         Brigade.......................
                                        --------------------------------
          Modular Forces Total.........          0          5         35
Reserve Divisions:
    Airborne...........................          0          0          0
    Air Assault........................          0          0          0
    Light..............................          0          0          0
    Infantry...........................          0          0          0
    Mechanized.........................          0          0          0
    Armored............................          0          0          0
    Medium.............................          0          0          0
                                        --------------------------------
      Divisions Total..................          0          0          0
    Non Division Combat Units:
        Armored Cavalry Regiments......          0          0          0
        Separate Brigades..............          0          0          0
                                        --------------------------------
          Non Division Combat Units              0          0          0
           Total.......................
    Modular Forces:
        Unit of Employment Y (UEy).....          0          0          0
        Unit of Employment X (UEx).....          0          0          0
        Brigade Combat Team (BCT)                0          0          0
         (Heavy).......................
        Brigade Combat Team (BCT)                0          0          0
         (Infantry)....................
        STRYKER Brigade Combat Team              0          0          0
         (SBCT)........................
        Aviation Brigade...............          0          0          0
        Sustainment Brigade............          0          0          3
        Fires Brigade..................          0          0          0
        Maneuver Enhancement Brigade...          0          0          1
        Battle Field Surveillance                0          0          0
         Brigade.......................
                                        --------------------------------
          Modular Forces Total.........          0          0          4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

    The fiscal year 2006 budget request supports battle forces 
totaling 289 ships at the end of fiscal year 2006, including 14 
fleet ballistic missile submarines, 11 aircraft carriers, 231 
other battle forces ships, 1,586 Navy/Marine Corps tactical/ASW 
aircraft, 720 Undergraduate Training aircraft, 457 Fleet Air 
Training aircraft, 274 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 364 Reserve 
aircraft and 188 in the pipeline.
    A summary of the major forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Fiscal year--
                                  --------------------------------------
                                       2004         2005         2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Forces:................           14           14           14
    Fleet Ballistic Missile                 14           14           14
     Submarines..................
General Purpose:.................          244          238          242
    Aircraft Carriers............           12           11           11
    Surface Combatants...........           94           90           93
    Submarines (attack)..........           54           55           54
    Guided Missile (SSGN)                    4            4            4
     Submarines..................
    Amphibious Warfare Ships.....           35           35           35
    Combat Logistics Ships.......           34           32           34
    Mine Warfare.................           11           11           11
Support Forces:..................           19           18           18
    Mobile Logistics Ships.......            2            2            2
    Support Ships................           17           16           16
    Mobilization Cat. A (Reserve)           15           15           15
    Surface Combatants...........            9            9            9
    Amphibious Warfare Ships.....            0            0            0
    Mine Warfare.................            6            6            6
                                  --------------------------------------
      Total Ships, Battleforce:..          292          285          289
                                  ======================================
Auxiliaries/Sea Lift Forces:.....          151          147          146
    Coastal Defense..............           13            9            8
    Maritime Preposition.........           16           16           16
    MSC Reduced Operating Status.           21           21           21
    Ready Reserve Force..........           65           65           65
    MSC Naval Fleet Mobility                35           35           35
     Enhancement.................
    Active.......................            1            1            1
Naval Aircraft:
    Primary Authorized (plus             3,886        3,641        3,589
     Pipe).......................
    Authorized Pipeline..........          361          191          188
    Tactical/ASW Aircraft........        1,635        1,606        1,586
    Fleet Air Training...........          460          452          457
    Fleet Air Support............          314          309          274
    Training (Undergraduate).....          722          711          720
    Reserve......................          394          372          364
Naval Personnel:
    Active:
        Navy.....................      373,197      365,900      352,700
        Marine Corps.............      177,480      175,000      175,000
    Reserve:
        Navy.....................       82,558       83,400       73,100
            SELRES/Drilling             68,440       69,248       59,708
             Reserve.............
            Fulltime Support.....       14,118       14,152       13,392
        Marine Corps.............       39,658       39,600       39,600
            SELRES/Drilling             37,395       37,339       37,339
             Reserve.............
            Fulltime Support.....        2,263        2,261        2,261
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

    The fiscal year 2006 Air Force budget request is designed 
to support active, guard, and reserve forces, including 87 
combat coded fighter and attack squadrons and 8 combat coded 
strategic bomber squadrons. The ICBM force maintains 550 launch 
facilities with 500 Minuteman missiles, with the Peacekeeper 
missile force completing deactivation in fiscal year 2005. The 
budget also supports our critical airlift mission, including 23 
active duty airlift squadrons. To accomplish the Air Force 
mission, the 2006 budget supports a total force end strength of 
538,200.
    A summary of the major forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Fiscal year--
                                  --------------------------------------
                                       2004         2005         2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Major Forces:
    USAF Fighter and Attack                 88           87           87
     Squadrons (Active, ANG,
     AFRC).......................
        Active...................           45           46           45
        ANG......................           37           36           37
        AFRC.....................            6            5            5
    Strategic Bomber Squadrons               8            7            8
     (Active)....................
    Strategic Bomber Squadrons               1            1            1
     (AFRC)......................
    Flight Test Units (DT and OT            12           12           10
     units with assigned
     aircraft)...................
        Fighter..................            9            9            7
        Bomber...................            3            3            3
    ICBM Operational Launch                605          605          550
     Facilities/Control Centers..
    ICBM Missile Inventory.......          516          500          500
USAF Airlift Squadrons (Active):
        Strategic Airlift                   14           13           14
         Squadrons...............
        Tactical Airlift                    10            9            9
         Squadrons...............
                                  --------------------------------------
Total Active Airlift Squadrons...           24           22           23
Total Air Force Aircraft                 5,854        5,776        5,792
 Inventory.......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Note: Numbers of squadrons above reflect combat
 coded units only; i.e., no training or test units.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endstrength:
    Active Duty..................      359,300      359,700      357,400
    Reserve Component............      182,830      182,900      180,800
    Air National Guard...........      107,030      106,800      106,800
    Air Force Reserve............       75,800       76,100       74,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                TITLE I

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

  Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel Appropriations

    The President's fiscal year 2006 budget request continues 
to increase funding for military pay and allowances, recruiting 
and retention programs, and overall quality of life programs 
for active duty and Guard and Reserve personnel. The budget 
request proposed an increase in basic pay for all personnel by 
3.1 percent, effective January 1, 2006. The Committee supports 
the enhancements to recruiting, retention, military pay and 
increased benefits for Guard and Reserve personnel for fiscal 
year 2006.

   SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006





Fiscal year 2005.....................................    $91,614,333,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request......................     84,961,976,000
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation......................     84,132,276,000
Change from budget request...........................       -829,700,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$84,132,276,000 for the Military Personnel accounts. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $7,482,057,000 below the 
$91,614,333,000 appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and 
$829,700,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006. These 
military personnel budget total comparisons include 
appropriations for the active, reserve, and National Guard 
accounts. The following tables include a summary of the 
recommendations by appropriation account. Explanations of 
changes from the budget request appear later in this section.



    The fiscal year 2006 budget request includes a decrease of 
15,500 end strength for the active forces and a decrease of 
approximately 12,400 end strength for the selected reserve over 
fiscal year 2005 authorized levels. The fiscal year 2006 budget 
request does not reflect, however, the minimum active duty end 
strength levels established by the authorization committees for 
fiscal year 2005 for the Army and Marine Corps.
    The Committee recommends the following levels highlighted 
in the tables below.

                      OVERALL ACTIVE END STRENGTH




Fiscal year 2005 estimate............................          1,406,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request......................          1,367,500
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation......................          1,367,500
    Compared with Fiscal year 2005...................            -38,500
    Compared with Fiscal year 2006 budget request....  .................


                 OVERALL SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH




Fiscal year 2005 estimate............................            860,900
Fiscal year 2006 budget request......................            848,500
Fiscal year 2006 recommendation......................            848,500
    Compared with Fiscal year 2005...................            -12,400
    Compared with Fiscal year 2006 budget request....  .................



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year 2006
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      FY 2005                                       Change from
                                                     estimate     Budget request  Recommendation      request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Forces (end strength):
    Army........................................         502,400         482,400         482,400  ..............
    Navy........................................         365,900         352,700         352,700  ..............
    Marine Corps................................         178,000         175,000         175,000  ..............
    Air Force...................................         359,700         357,400         357,400  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Active Force.......................       1,406,000       1,367,500       1,367,500  ..............
Guard and Reserve (end strength):
    Army Reserve................................         205,000         205,000         205,000  ..............
    Navy Reserve................................          83,400          73,100          73,100  ..............
    Marine Corps Reserve........................          39,600          39,600          39,600  ..............
    Air Force Reserve...........................          76,100          74,000          74,000  ..............
    Army National Guard.........................         350,000         350,000         350,000  ..............
    Air National Guard..........................         106,800         106,800         106,800  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Guard and Reserve..................         860,900         848,500         848,500  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Adjustments to Military Personnel Account


                                OVERVIEW

                        END STRENGTH ADJUSTMENTS

    The Committee recommends the requested end strength levels 
as proposed in the budget request. The Committee is aware that 
the budget funds the baseline military end strength and plans 
to seek additional funds for increases in end strength above 
the levels provided for in the budget request in a supplemental 
request. The Committee addresses these additional manpower 
expenses in title IX of this Act. In addition, the Services are 
experiencing challenges in their recruiting and retention 
programs due to a difficult recruiting environment. Therefore, 
the Committee has provided additional funds for the active duty 
and Guard and Reserve personnel and operation and maintenance 
accounts in title IX of this Act.

                        ACCURACY OF OBLIGATIONS

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $403,800,000 to the 
budget request, based on the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) analysis of prior year unexpended military personnel 
account balances. The Services' accounting data continue to 
show a pattern of under executing their appropriated funds, and 
therefore, the Committee believes the military personnel budget 
requests for fiscal year 2006 are overstated and can be 
reduced.

                    GUARD AND RESERVE COST AVOIDANCE

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $430,600,000 to the 
budget request for the Guard and Reserve fiscal year 2006 
military personnel accounts. The Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) found that updated monthly strength data, when 
compared to the monthly strength data in the fiscal year 2006 
budget, had strength levels lower than budgeted, resulting in 
the above funds not being needed for the Guard and Reserve 
components.

                 EXPEDITED SERVICEMEMBER NATURALIZATION

    The Committee notes with interest past efforts of the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security 
to expedite the citizenship naturalization process for 
servicemembers in accordance with Presidential direction 
(Executive Order 3 July, 2002) and Congressional guidance and 
intent (P.L. 108-136, title XVII). The Committee, however, 
remains concerned that efforts have proceeded slowly and 
servicemembers still routinely deploy operationally with 
naturalization requests still pending. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs the Department of Defense to submit a report, 
not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this 
Act, detailing efforts to notify all non-citizens in the active 
duty and Reserve components of the expedited citizenship 
process, and to shepherd these servicemembers through the 
process to ensure that all cases are resolved prior to a 
servicemember's deployment.

                      FULL-TIME SUPPORT STRENGTHS

    There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard 
and Reserve components: civilian technicians, active Guard and 
Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component 
personnel.
    Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train, 
maintain and administer the Reserve components. Civilian 
(Military) technicians directly support units, and are very 
important to help units maintain readiness and meet the wartime 
mission of the Army and Air Force.
    Full-time support end strength in all categories totaled 
156,739 in fiscal year 2005. The fiscal year 2006 budget 
request is 159,031 end strength. The following table summarizes 
Guard and Reserve full-time support end strengths:

                                    GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTHS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      FY 2005                                       Change from
                                                     estimate     Budget request  Recommendation      request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:
    AGR.........................................          14,970          15,270          15,270  ..............
    Technicians.................................           8,094           8,344           8,344  ..............
Navy Reserve:
    AR..........................................          14,152          13,392          13,392  ..............
Marine Corps Reserve:
    AR..........................................           2,261           2,261           2,261  ..............
Air Force Reserve:
    AGR.........................................           1,900           2,290           2,290  ..............
    Technicians.................................          10,044           9,943           9,943  ..............
Army National Guard:
    AGR.........................................          26,602          27,345          27,345  ..............
    Technicians.................................          26,676          27,163          27,163  ..............
Air National Guard:
    AGR.........................................          12,253          13,089          13,089  ..............
    Technicians.................................          23,306          23,321          23,321  ..............
Total:
    AGR/AR......................................          72,138          73,647          73,647  ..............
    Technicians.................................          68,120          68,771          68,771  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation.......................    $26,039,540,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request......................     24,455,295,000
Committee recommendation.............................     24,357,895,000
Change from budget request...........................        -97,400,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$24,357,895,000 for Military Personnel, Army. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $1,681,645,000 below the 
$26,039,540,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and 
$97,400,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



     The adjustment to the budget activities for Military 
Personnel, Army is shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    3200  Unobligated Balances........................           -97,400


                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation.......................    $20,876,556,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request......................     19,439,196,000
Committee recommendation.............................     19,417,696,000
Change from budget request...........................        -21,500,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$19,417,696,000 for Military Personnel, Navy. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $1,458,860,000 below the 
$20,876,556,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and 
$21,500,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustment to the budget activities for Military 
Personnel, Navy is shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    9550  Unobligated Balances........................           -21,500


                    MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $8,527,529,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     7,845,913,000
Committee recommendation..............................     7,839,813,000
Change from budget request............................        -6,100,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,839,813,000 
for Military Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $687,716,000 below the $8,527,529,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 2005 and $6,100,000 less than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustment to the budget activities for Military 
Personnel, Marine Corps is shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    14315  Unobligated Balances.......................            -6,100


                     MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $21,145,141,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    20,254,837,000
Committee recommendation..............................    20,083,037,000
Change from budget request............................      -171,800,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$20,083,037,000 for Military Personnel, Air Force. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $1,062,104,000 below the 
$21,145,141,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and 
$171,800,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustment to the budget activities for Military 
Personnel, Air Force is shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    19620  Unobligated Balances.......................          -171,800


                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $3,373,773,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     2,938,703,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,862,103,000
Change from budget request............................       -76,600,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,862,103,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Army. The recommendation is a decrease 
of $511,670,000 below the $3,373,773,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 2005 and $76,600,000 less than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve 
Personnel, Army are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    23800  Unobligated Balances.......................           -19,800
    23810  Reserves Cost Avoidance....................           -56,800


                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,881,750,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,583,061,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,486,061,000
Change from budget request............................       -97,000,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,486,061,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Navy. The recommendation is a decrease 
of $395,689,000 below the $1,881,750,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 2005 and $97,000,000 less than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve 
Personnel, Navy are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    25300  Unobligated Balances.......................           -52,300
    25370  Reserves Cost Avoidance....................           -44,700


                    RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $584,128,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       480,592,000
Committee recommendation..............................       472,392,000
Change from budget request............................        -8,200,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $472,392,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $111,736,000 below the $584,128,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 2005 and $8,200,000 less than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve 
Personnel, Marine Corps are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    26600  Unobligated Balances.......................            -1,600
    26650  Reserves Cost Avoidance....................            -6,600


                      RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,392,169,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,243,560,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,225,360,000
Change from budget request............................       -18,200,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,225,360,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $166,809,000 below the $1,392,169,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 2005 and $18,200,000 less than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve 
Personnel, Air Force are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    27900  Unobligated Balances.......................           -18,200
    27910  Reserves Cost Avoidance....................            -4,700
    27930  932nd Airlift Wing Personnel...............             4,700


                     NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $5,467,656,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     4,669,104,000
Committee recommendation..............................     4,359,704,000
Change from budget request............................      -309,400,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,359,704,000 
for National Guard Personnel, Army. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $1,107,952,000 below the $5,467,656,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $309,400,000 less than 
the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for National Guard 
Personnel, Army are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    29350 Unobligated Balances........................           -11,600
    29410 Reserves Cost Avoidance.....................          -297,800


                  NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $2,326,091,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     2,051,715,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,028,215,000
Change from budget request............................       -23,500,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,028,215,000 
for National Guard Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is 
a decrease of $297,876,000 below the $2,326,091,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $23,500,000 less than the 
request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for National Guard 
Personnel, Air Force are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Undistributed:
    30550  Unobligated Balances.......................            -3,500
    30600  Reserves Cost Avoidance....................           -20,000


                                TITLE II

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

    The fiscal year 2006 budget request for programs funded in 
title II of this Act, Operation and Maintenance, is 
$118,982,941,000 in new budget authority, which is an increase 
of $6,140,509,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 
2005.
    The accompanying bill recommends $116,092,791,000 for 
fiscal year 2006, which is an increase of $3,250,359,000 above 
the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $2,890,150,000 
less than the request for fiscal year 2006. These 
appropriations finance the costs of operating and maintaining 
the Armed Forces, including the reserve components and related 
support activities of the Department of Defense (DoD), except 
military personnel and facilities sustainment, restoration and 
modernization costs. Included are pay for civilians, services 
for maintenance of equipment, fuel, supplies, and spare parts 
for weapons and equipment. Financial requirements are 
influenced by many factors, including force levels such as the 
number of aircraft squadrons, Army and Marine Corps divisions, 
installations, military personnel strength and deployments, 
rates of operational activity, and the quantity and complexity 
of equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles and tanks in 
operation.
    The table below summarizes the Committee's recommendations.
    

    
                   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OVERVIEW

    The President's fiscal year 2006 budget request represents 
a $6,140,509,000 increase above fiscal year 2005 in title II, 
Operation and Maintenance, exclusive of supplemental funding 
provided for continuation of military operations in Afghanistan 
and Iraq. The Administration's request did not include funding 
for the continuation of the war on terrorism in Afghanistan, 
Iraq, and elsewhere. However, the Committee has included the 
funding necessary to ensure continued full support for our 
forces operating in the combat zones. Funding for these 
purposes is addressed in title IX of the Act. The Committee has 
provided $45,254,619,000 to ensure that funds are available to 
fully support the operating, personnel support, maintenance, 
transportation, and other wartime costs of the services, 
including purchase of all necessary force protection equipment. 
The funds provided in title IX will support continuation of 
operations well into fiscal year 2006, and will ensure that 
critical base operating and maintenance accounts need not be 
diverted to support the war effort. In recognition of the fact 
that a significant number of units will be deployed throughout 
the fiscal year, the Committee has offset funding in title II 
that is not required in home station budgets.
    The budget request for normal peacetime funding in title 
II, Operation and Maintenance would sustain flying hours, ship 
steaming and ground operating tempo at approximately fiscal 
year 2005 levels. The funding requested in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army supports the continuing transformation of 
Army units to modular forces. Operation and Maintenance, Navy 
supports 10 active carrier air wings and 1,598 primary 
authorized aircraft, 289 ships, including 54 nuclear attack 
submarines and 18 missile submarines. Consistent with section 
1025 of Public Law 109-13, The Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and 
Tsunami Relief Act, 2005, the Navy will continue to support and 
operate 12 aricraft carriers until after the date of the 
submittal to Congress of the quadrennial defense review. The 
Navy's Fleet Response Plan, begun in fiscal year 2004, 
continues in 2006, with the goal of increasing availability of 
naval assets for duty worldwide. Increased funding for flying 
hours and ship operations primarily reflects increased cost of 
fuel. The Air Force flying hour program provides the funding 
necessary to maintain basic flying skill and pilot development 
and production, and to provide trained aircrews to joint forces 
combatant commanders through ten aerospace expeditionary 
forces.
    The budget request fully supports the Army's ground and 
aviation training programs including a gradual increase in the 
number of battalion rotations at ground combat training 
centers. The budget request includes increasing Army base 
operations funding from 68 percent in fiscal year 2005 to 72 
percent. The Army request includes a reduction of 
$1,428,100,000 for Business Process Reengineering Initiatives, 
and an increase of $59,110,000 for expanded foreign language 
training at the Defense Language Institute. A small increase in 
funds requested for Navy base operations support is 
attributable to implementation costs for utilities 
privatization. Increased funding for Air Force base operations 
support provides for improvements in Child Development and 
Family Centers, base communications and transportation.
    Funding is included to support a pay increase of 2.3 
percent for civilian employees. The budget request provides for 
the continued conversion of selected billets from military to 
civilian workers in all the services, in order to return 
military personnel from administrative duties to combat and 
combat support units.
    In title II of the Act, the Committee has fully supported 
the peacetime requirements of the military services for 
readiness training in flying hours, ship steaming and ground 
forces OPTEMPO training. Equipment maintenance and base support 
programs have been robustly resourced, including support for 
anti-terrorism and force protection efforts. In title IX of the 
Act, the Committee has provided funding to support continuing 
combat and peace keeping operations in Afghanistan and Iraq 
through approximately the first six months of fiscal year 2006.

                 RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS SHORTFALLS

    Despite the continuation of robust funding in operation and 
maintenance accounts requested for fiscal year 2006, testimony 
by the services' leadership and briefings by key staff members 
indicate that a certain degree of risk has been taken in some 
areas. For example, the Army flying hour program is based on 
historical execution levels of 13.1 hours, per crew, per month; 
however the Army goal remains to achieve 14.5 hours, per crew, 
per month.
    The Committee has provided over $500,000,000 in additional 
operating account funding to assist in addressing many of the 
Department's shortfalls. Funds have been added for individual 
soldier and Marine field equipment, small all terrain vehicles, 
general purpose tents and mobility shelters, improvements in 
control of logistics systems, enhanced training capabilities, 
foreign language training, training on urbanized terrain, 
military and civilian safety, education programs, and distance 
learning.
    The Committee has identified spending that does not 
directly support readiness and has moved those funds to 
programs that more directly support readiness goals.
    Much of the Army and Marine Corps equipment that was drawn 
from pre-positioned sets for military operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan will not be returned to pre-positioned status until 
after fiscal year 2006. The Army and Marine Corps have 
identified significant unfunded requirements in funding for 
repair and restocking of the equipment that has been retained 
in Afghanistan and Iraq for use by rotational units. Title IX 
of the accompanying Act includes funding for depot level and 
unit level maintenance that has been identified as executable 
by the Army and Marine Corps for pre-positioned equipment items 
and for repair of equipment in units that have rotated from 
duty in Iraq and Afghanistan back to home stations. The 
Committee strongly encourages the military services to execute 
aggressively their repair and reset programs and to avoid 
creation of a maintenance back log which could threaten 
readiness for future contingencies.

            OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET EXECUTION DATA

    The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue 
to provide the congressional defense committees with quarterly 
budget execution data. Such data should be provided not later 
than forty-five days past the close of each quarter for the 
fiscal year, and should be provided for each O-1 budget 
activity, activity group, and subactivity group for each of the 
active, defense-wide, reserve and National Guard components. 
For each O-1 budget activity, activity group, and subactivity 
group, these reports should include the budget request and 
actual obligations; the DoD distribution of unallocated 
congressional adjustments to the budget request; all 
adjustments made by DoD during the process of rebaselining the 
operation and maintenance accounts; all adjustments resulting 
from below threshold reprogrammings; and all adjustments 
resulting from prior approval reprogramming requests.
    In addition, the Committee requires that the Department of 
Defense provide semiannual written notifications to the 
congressional defense committees, which summarize Operation and 
Maintenance budget execution, to include the effect of 
rebaselining procedures, other below threshold reprogrammings, 
and prior approval reprogrammings. The Committee further 
directs that the Department of Defense provide the House of 
Representatives and Senate Committees on Appropriations written 
notification 30 days prior to executing procedures to 
rebaseline Operation and Maintenance accounts.

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REPROGRAMMINGS

    The Committee directs that proposed transfers of funds 
between O-1 budget activities in excess of $15,000,000 be 
subject to normal prior approval reprogramming procedures. In 
the Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide account, the 
Committee directs that proposed transfers of funds between 
agencies in excess of $15,000,000 be subject to prior approval 
reprogramming procedures. Items for which funds have been 
specifically provided in any appropriation in the report using 
phrases ``only for'' and ``only to'' are Congressional interest 
items for the purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD form 
1414). Each of these items must be carried on the DD1414 at the 
stated amount, or revised amount if changed during conference 
or if otherwise specifically addressed in the conference 
report. In addition, due to continuing concerns about force 
readiness and the diversion of Operation and Maintenance funds, 
the Committee directs the Department of Defense to provide 
written notification to the congressional defense committees 
for the cumulative value of any and all transfers in excess of 
$15,000,000 from the following budget activities and 
subactivity group categories:

Operation and maintenance, Army

    Operating Forces: Divisions, Corps combat forces, Corps 
support forces, Echelon above Corps support forces, Land forces 
operations support, Land forces systems readiness, and Land 
forces depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Navy

    Operating Forces: Mission and other flight operations, 
Fleet air training, Aircraft depot maintenance, Mission and 
other ship operations, Ship operational support and training, 
Ship maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

    Operating Forces: Operational forces, Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

    Operating Forces: Primary combat forces, Primary combat 
weapons, Air operations training, Depot maintenance;
    Mobilization: Airlift operations, Depot maintenance;
    Basic Skills and Advance Training: Depot maintenance;
    Logistics Operations: Depot maintenance.
    Further, the Department should follow prior approval 
reprogramming procedures for transfers in excess of $15,000,000 
out of the following budget subactivities:

Operation and maintenance, Army

    Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Navy

    Aircraft depot maintenance,
    Ship maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

    Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

    Air Operations, Depot maintenance;
    Mobility Operations, Depot maintenance;
    Basic Skills and Advanced Training, Depot maintenance; and
    Logistics Operations, Depot maintenance.

                              CIVILIAN PAY

    The Committee has fully funded the budget request for a 2.3 
percent pay increase for civilian employees of the Department 
of Defense. The Committee understands that the Department of 
Defense may implement an increase in pay that is greater than 
2.3 percent, and directs that any increase above 2.3 percent 
will be paid from within funds available to the DoD.

                             MILITARY TENTS

    The Committee recognizes that military tents, from 
individual soldier tents to large maintenance and multi-purpose 
tents, are critical to military training and contingency 
operations. Tents provide fast and flexible shelter for 
military personnel, logistical operations, command centers, 
medical services and numerous other purposes, when fixed 
facilities are not available. The combat and peace keeping 
activities in Afghanistan and Iraq continue to rely upon tents 
of many varieties, especially as operations expand and contract 
to counter the insurgents. Peace time contingency stocks have 
been depleted and the process of restocking has been offset by 
the continuing operational demand. The Committee strongly urges 
the military services to apply operation and maintenance funds 
made available in title II and title IX of this Act to ensure 
the availability of necessary stocks of military tents for 
Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, and for 
contingency reserve purposes.

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $23,797,606,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    23,491,077,000
Committee recommendation..............................    22,432,727,000
Change from budget request............................    -1,058,350,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$22,432,727,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Army. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $1,364,879,000 below the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $1,058,350,000 less than 
the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
Maintenance, Army are shown below:

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
    250  Chem/Bio Resistant Hydration on the Move.......           1,000
    250  Modular General Purpose Tent System (MGPTS)....           2,700
    250  Leakproof Transmission Drip Pans...............           2,700
    250  Lightweight Maintenance Enclosure..............             500
    250  MSR MIOX On-the-Move Individual Water 
      Purification System...............................           1,000
    250  Small All-Terrain military utility vehicles....           2,000
    250  Tactical Operations Centers (ELAMS/MECCS) for 
      USASOC............................................           4,000
    400  RFI Sustainment Peace Time Offset..............        -103,000
    450  Efficiencies in Administrative and Support 
      Activities........................................          -6,500
    550  Unjustified Growth in Operations Support Costs.         -23,000
    600  Peace Time Systems Readiness Support Offset....         -83,000
    650  Depot Maintenance Peace Time Work Load 
      Adjustment........................................        -213,000
    750  Unsupported Growth in Utilities Privatization..         -15,000
    750  High Performance Conflict Resolution, Skill 
      Development, and Team Building....................           2,000
    750  Service-Wide Safety: Breathscan Alcohol 
      Detectors.........................................           4,000
    850  Unjustified Growth in Management Headquarters..         -10,000
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
    1300  Rock Island Arsenal Industrial Mobilization 
      Capacity..........................................           4,950
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    1650  Early Commissioning Program at Military Junior 
      Colleges..........................................           2,000
    1850  Global Language Online Support System (GLOSS).           2,800
    1850  On-Line Automated Diagnostic Assessment of 
      Language Proficiency..............................           1,000
    1850  DLI--Language Laboratory Acquisition..........           2,500
    1850  Military Police training at the Multi-
      Jurisdictional Counter-Drug Task Force Training 
      (MCTFT) Program...................................           1,000
    1850  Virtual Interactive Training and Assessment 
      System (VITAS)....................................           2,000
    1900  Air Battle Captain............................           2,000
    2000  Training Doctrine Development Unsupported 
      Growth............................................         -11,300
    2000  Automated Delivery of the DLAB and Research on 
      the Next Generation Aptitude Test.................           1,000
    2000  Live Training Instrumentation for Air & 
      Missile Defense Units.............................           3,000
    2300  Mobilizing Educational Technology to Support 
      Combat Deployment.................................           1,000
    2350  Intern Program Unsupported Growth.............         -32,000
    2400  Philadelphia Military Academies...............             100
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Service-Wide 
    Activities:
    2650  Adjustment to Classified Program..............          21,000
    2750  Peace time offset for Depot Maintenance 
      transportation, port operations, and traffic 
      management support................................         -68,000
    2800  Sustainment System Technical Support Peace 
      Time Offset.......................................        -116,000
    2800  Pulse Technology--Army Battery Management 
      Program...........................................           3,600
    2800  Advanced Technology Batteries.................           2,500
    2850  Army Legacy Logistics Systems Modernization 
      (SAMS-E)..........................................           1,000
    2850  Common Logistics Operating Environment........           3,000
    2850  Sense and Respond Logistics...................           2,000
    2850  TACOM Life Cycle Management Command Integrated 
      Digital Environment Pilot Program.................           1,000
    2850  Joint US Army and USMC Autonomic Logistics 
      Prototype.........................................           2,000
    2850  Controlled Humidity Preservation Program, Soft 
      Portable Tunnels..................................           2,000
    3050  Communications Unsupported Growth.............         -11,000
    3200  Memorial Day..................................             900
    3650  Western Hemisphere Information Exchange 
      Program...........................................           2,500
Undistributed:
    3730  Repairs at Fort Baker.........................           2,500
    3790  Unobligated Balances..........................        -100,000
    4100  Administration and Service-Wide Activities....          -8,400
    4110  Civilian Pay Overstatement....................         -17,000
    4130  Military to Civilian Conversions..............         -78,400
    4140  Peace Time Training Offset....................        -250,000

SECOND DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION (SDT) SUPPORT FOR ARMY AND AIR FORCE 
                        EXCHANGE SYSTEM (AAFES)

    The Committee notes with great concern that the Army has 
chosen to budget for approximately one half the estimated 
fiscal year 2006 requirement for the Army and Air Force 
Exchange System (AAFES) Second Destination Transportation 
(SDT). This support is vital to AAFES in order to provide 
American products for sale at AAFES locations world wide, 
without forcing American service members and their families to 
pay higher prices in exchange stores in order to cover the cost 
of transportation to overseas locations. The Army, as executive 
agent for the AAFES transportation program, has been assigned 
the responsibility to budget for AAFES SDT. The Army has failed 
to do so in the fiscal year 2006 budget request, apparently 
anticipating that decreased overseas troop stationing will 
substantially reduce the need for AAFES SDT. The Committee 
strongly supports continuing full funding of AAFES SDT as 
needed to make American products available to United States 
personnel assigned overseas. The Committee directs the Army to 
fully fund the AAFES SDT requirement from within funds 
available in Operation and Maintenance, Army.

                      CONTROLLED HUMIDITY PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends an additional $2,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Army only to augment the use of 
Controlled Humidity Program Soft Portable Tunnels as currently 
used in Italy to include low water vapor transmission rate 
(WVTR) material as described in MIL-P-58102, Type II, and MIL-
C-58104 by the Department of the Army, to enhance cost 
avoidance, and support rapid storage space requirements and 
relocation capabilities for fielded equipment.

                      SENSE AND RESPOND LOGISTICS

    The Committee recommends an additional $2,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Army only to support the United 
States Army's Logistics Transformation Agency to design and 
prototype a sense and respond logistics capability to predict 
and optimize sustainment in real time, and to field a Common 
Logistics Operating Environment enabled brigade-sized unit.

              HUMANITARIAN RELIEF TRANSFER OF DOD AIRCRAFT

    The Committee understands that the Department of the Army 
is in possession of two (2) C-12 Aircraft which may be deemed 
surplus. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
convey these planes, without consideration, to a non-
governmental organization (NGO), which provides humanitarian 
airlift primarily to Afghanistan and Indonesia. Further, the 
Committee directs that from funds available in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army, $100,000 be used solely for the purpose of 
repairing the aircraft prior to transfer.

  TACOM LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT COMMAND INTEGRATED DIGITAL ENVIRONMENT 
                          (IDE) PILOT PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends an additional $1,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Army, only for a pilot program to 
evaluate the expansion of the Program Executive Officer Soldier 
and Ground Combat e-business portal to the program executive 
officers and commodity command organizations within the new 
TACOM Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC).

                     AUTONOMIC LOGISTICS PROTOTYPE

    The Committee recommends an additional $2,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Army, only to support the U.S. Army 
Logistics Transformation Agency project to develop the 
representative embedded systems architecture, integrate the 
systems architecture with the emerging Common Logistics 
Operating Environment (CLOE) Operational Architecture for Joint 
Ground Warfare, and follow guidelines established by CLOE 
Technical Standards in collaboration with the USMC.

     MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL COUNTER-DRUG TASK FORCE TRAINING (MCTFT)

    The Committee recommends an additional $1,000,000 above the 
budget request to provide military police training by the 
Multi-Jurisdictional Counter-Drug Task Force Training program 
of St. Petersburg College for federal, state, local and 
military law enforcement training and awareness training for 
public officials in support of counter-drug efforts. MCTFT 
shall provide conventional classroom/scenario driven and 
distance learning WMD training and education using blended 
technologies such as satellite, CD-ROM, web-based, and video 
training support packages.

                            FORT IRWIN ROAD

    The Congress appropriated funds over five years ago for 
improvements to a key access road for the Army's National 
Training Center and other key facilities at Fort Irwin, 
California. Since that time, there have been 27 fatalities on 
this road, many of which might have been avoided had the Army 
acted promptly to repair it and make safety improvements once 
Congress provided the funds. The Committee is very concerned 
that the Army continues to lack focus on the management of this 
project and the need to act promptly to ensure the safety of 
military personnel, their dependents and civilians at this very 
busy and important Army facility. The Committee bill 
accompanying this report includes a general provision which 
makes available additional funding toward the completion of 
this most worthwhile project. The Committee strongly urges the 
Army to proceed swiftly in the execution of this effort.

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $28,353,957,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    29,414,918,000
Committee recommendation..............................    28,719,818,000
Change from budget request............................      -695,100,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$28,719,818,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Navy. The 
recommendation is an increase of $365,861,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $695,100,000 less than 
the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    4560  Knowledge Management and Decision Support 
      System............................................           5,000
    4560  Automated Explosive Safety Assessment Tools...           2,000
    4650  Unjustified Growth in Converged ERP...........         -20,000
    4650  Low Observability Coatings and Materials 
      Maintenance Program (LOCMM).......................           2,000
    4650  Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) Support of the 
      FRP...............................................           2,000
    4650  Composite Repair Training Program.............             250
    4650  CAT & RADCOM Test Program Sets................           3,500
    4850  Man Overboard Safety System Installation......           1,000
    4850  NULKA (MK 234 Electronic Decoy Cartridge).....           1,800
    5050  Improved Engineering Design Process...........           1,500
    5400  Efficiencies in Training Support..............         -14,000
    5500  Training Support Unjustified Growth...........         -13,000
    5550  Manual Reverse Osmosis Desalinator (MROD) 
      Testing Repair and Replacement....................           1,000
    5900  Peace Time System Support Offset..............         -17,800
    6220  Base Operating Support Unjustified Growth.....         -57,000
    6220  Environmental Clean Up for Ford Island 
      Buildings 37, 54, 79, S84, and 97.................           2,700
    6220  Navy Region Northwest--Navy Shore 
      Infrastructure Transformation (NSIT)..............           5,000
    6220  Application of Technology and Simulation to 
      Reduce Vulnerability of Military Bases............           2,000
    6220  Waterfree Urinal Conservation Initiative......           2,000
    6220  Toledo Shipyard Improvement Plan..............           5,000
    6220  Service-Wide Safety: Breathscan Alcohol 
      Detectors.........................................           2,250
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    7200  Virtual Interactive Training and Assessment 
      System (VITAS)....................................           1,000
    7300  Navy Advanced Education Demonstration Project.           1,000
    7300  Center for Defense Technology and Education 
      for the Military Services (CDTEMS)................           5,000
    7700  Naval Sea Cadet Corps.........................             300
    7700  Naval Junior ROTC Marine Science Research 
      Program...........................................           2,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Service-Wide 
    Activities:
    8550  Stainless Steel Sanitary Spaces...............           1,500
    8600  Critical Infrastructure Protection Program....           1,000
    8700  Diagnosis and Prognostication of Gas Turbine 
      Problems..........................................           2,000
    8750  Total Ship Test Production (TSTP) Program.....           1,000
    9000  Local Situational Assessment Segment, NAS 
      Lemoore...........................................           2,000
    9220  Adjustment to Classified Program..............          17,100
Undistributed:
    9440  Unobligated Balances..........................         -75,000
    9550  Administration and Service-Wide Activities....         -48,900
    9570  Civilian Pay Overstatement....................        -172,000
    9580  Military to Civilian Conversion...............         -76,300
    9600  Peace Time Training Offset....................        -274,000

         DIAGNOSIS AND PROGNOSTICATION OF GAS TURBINE PROBLEMS

    The Committee recognizes the need for a Laser Motion 
Sensing and Measurement System for the diagnosis and 
prognostication of gas turbine problems in order to ensure 
their reliability. In an effort to maximize the goal of ship 
readiness, the Committee recommends an additional $2,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Navy, only for Program Element 
070801N for the development of a gas turbine diagnostic/
prognostic system able to measure displacement, velocity and/or 
acceleration over a bandwidth from 0 hertz through over 500,000 
hertz, with demonstrated dynamic range of over 180 dB 
(acceleration), and with a system measurement bandwidth 
including low frequency vibration information through 
``normal'' and ``otherwise not observed'' high frequency 
information, including Acoustic Emissions (AE).

            NAVAL STATION MAYPORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

    As the Navy's fleet of aircraft carriers evolves, it 
becomes apparent that in the not too distant future, an all-
nuclear fleet of aircraft carriers may become reality. The 
Committee strongly encourages the Navy to ensure the capability 
to base and support large-deck, deep-draft, nuclear powered 
ships, including aircraft carriers, at multiple locations on 
each coast. The Navy has such a capability on the west coast, 
but not on the east coast. Multiple nuclear-capable bases, on 
the east and west coasts, provide for continuity of operations 
for the carrier fleet notwithstanding a variety of adverse 
situations including natural disasters and acts of terrorism or 
conventional war.
    The Committee believes that the Navy should proceed 
expeditiously to accomplish all necessary actions toward 
transition of Naval Station Mayport to a nuclear capable 
aircraft carrier base. The Committee understands that key to 
this transition is completion of an environmental impact study 
and the Committee urges the Navy to take all necessary actions 
to complete an environmental impact study on the transition of 
Naval Station Mayport to be a nuclear capable facility as soon 
as practicable.

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $3,106,145,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     3,250,966,000
Committee recommendation..............................     3,123,766,000
Change from budget request............................      -127,200,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,123,766,000 
for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation 
is an increase of $17,621,000 above the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 2005 and $127,200,000 less than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    10050  High Performance Undergarments...............           2,000
    10050  Extended Cold Weather Clothing System........           3,000
    10050  Modular General Purpose Tent System (MGPTS)..           3,600
    10050  Outdoor Research Marine Corps Contact Glove 
      for MCWCEP........................................           1,000
    10050  Marine Corps Base Layer Garments with 
      Innovative Technologies...........................           2,000
    10050  Chem/Bio Resistant Hydration on the Move.....           1,000
    10100  Unjustified Growth in Administrative Support.          -5,000
    10100  Lightweight Maintenance Enclosure............           2,500
    10100  Ultra Lightweight Camouflage Net System 
      (ULCANS)..........................................           4,000
    10100  Advanced Technology Batteries................           2,500
    10200  Defense Motor Vehicle Safety Demonstration 
      Program...........................................           1,000
    10200  MAGTFTC Range Transformation Initiative......          19,000
    10350  Advanced Vapor Corrosion Inhibitor Delivery 
      System............................................           1,500
Undistributed:
    12010  Unobligated Balances.........................         -10,000
    12055  Military to Civilian Conversions.............         -59,400
    12060  Peace Time Training Offset...................         -95,900

                  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $26,121,823,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    29,705,435,000
Committee recommendation..............................    28,659,373,000
Change from budget request............................    -1,046,062,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$28,659,373,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force. The 
recommendation is an increase of $2,537,550,000 above the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $1,046,062,000 
less than the request for 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    12600  Maintain 52 F-117 Aircraft...................          11,100
    12600  MBU-20/P Oxygen Mask and Visor...............           2,500
    12700  Peace Time Training Support Offset...........         -85,100
    12750  Efficiencies in Air Operations Training 
      Support...........................................         -41,000
    12800  Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) 
      Transfer From RDT&E...............................           5,000
    12850  Unjustified Base Support Cost Growth.........         -86,000
    12850  Air Field Lighting System....................           1,600
    12850  Expert Organizational Development System 
      (Exodus)..........................................           4,000
    13000  Global C3I and Early Warning Unsupported 
      Growth in Support Costs...........................         -13,500
    13050  Notice to Airman (NOTAMS) Program Upgrade....           2,000
    13100  Enhanced Situational Awareness and Analyses 
      for Geospatial Enterprise Infrastructure..........           2,000
    13400  Maintenance and Upkeep of Rocket Engine Test 
      Stands at Edwards AFB.............................           3,500
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
    13850  Emergency Vision Assurance System (EVAS) for 
      the Total Force...................................           1,000
Budget Activity 3: Training:
    14600  Efficiencies in Specialized Skill Training 
      Support Costs.....................................         -10,500
    14700  Unsupported Growth in Professional 
      Development Education.............................          -7,000
    14750  Engineering Training and Knowledge 
      Preservation System...............................           2,700
    14750  Management Support for Air Force Battle Labs.           6,000
    14750  AFIT Geospatial Distance Learning............             500
    14800  Efficiencies in Base Support Contractor 
      Operations........................................          -7,000
    15050  Unexecutable Growth in Off Duty, Voluntary Ed          -7,000
    15100  Online Technology Training Program McChord 
      AFB...............................................           2,000
    15100  Online Technology Training Program Nellis AFB           2,000
    15100  Online Technology Training Program Mac Dill 
      AFB...............................................           2,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Service-Wide 
    Activities:
    15350  Center for Parts Configuration Management 
      (CPCM)............................................           2,000
    15350  Air Operations Combat Support (AOCS).........           3,600
    15400  Expand Rapid Retargeting Training and 
      Services at WRALC.................................           2,000
    15400  Engine Health Management Data Repository 
      Center............................................           3,000
    15950  Air Force Manufacturing and Technical 
      Assistance Production Program.....................           2,000
    15950  Air Force Data Conversion....................           4,000
    16000  Demonstration Project for Contractors 
      Employing Persons with Disabilities...............           1,500
    16050  Civil Air Patrol Operations and Support......              88
    16100  Air Force CIO Enterprise.....................           1,000
    16100  Service-Wide Safety: Breathscan Alcohol 
      Detectors.........................................           2,000
    16100  Wright Patterson AFB Critical Infrastructure 
      Data Set Development..............................             500
    16250  Security Programs Adjustment.................          -9,250
Undistributed:
    16630  Unobligated Balances.........................         -70,000
    16710  Administration and Service-Wide Activities...        -130,600
    16780  Military to Civilian Conversions.............        -172,700
    16800  Peace Time Training Offset...................        -476,000

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $17,354,619,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    18,338,069,000
Committee recommendation..............................    18,323,516,000
Change from budget request............................       -14,553,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$18,323,516,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. 
The recommendation is an increase of $968,897,000 above the 
amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and $14,553,000 less 
than the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended 

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide 
agencies are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    17050  TJS--CoCom Initiative Fund...................          -5,000
    17050  TJS--Program Growth..........................          -7,500
    17050  TJS--BA Realignment..........................        -303,164
    17100  SOCOM--Lightweight ATV Program...............           2,000
    17100  SOCOM--Combat Medic Training.................           1,500
    17100  SOCOM--Technology Transfer...................           1,350
    17100  SOCOM--Depot Maintenance.....................         -12,000
    17100  SOCOM--C4IAS CERP............................          -6,400
    17100  SOCOM--BA Realignment........................        -188,296
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
    17250  DLA--BA Realignment..........................          39,693
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    17375  AFIS--BA Realignment.........................          14,679
    17465  DCAA--BA Realignment.........................           5,605
    17480  DHRA--DLAMP Program Growth...................          -7,000
    17480  DHRA--BA Realignment.........................          39,726
    17490  DSS--BA Realignment..........................           7,543
    17510  DTRA--BA Realignment.........................           5,728
    17600  SOCOM--BA Realignment........................         124,181
    17610  NDU--Agent-based Predictive Analysis Using 
      Subject Matter Expert Generated Data Sets.........           2,000
    17610  NDU--Critical Language Training; San Diego 
      State University..................................           2,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
    17725  AFIS--BA Realignment.........................         -14,679
    17750  CMP--CA National Guard Youth Challenge 
      Program...........................................           2,000
    17750  CMP--Outdoor Odyssey.........................             500
    17800  DCAA--BA Realignment.........................          -5,605
    17830  DLA--Procurement Technical Assistance Program           7,000
    17830  DLA--Commercial Technologies for Maintenance 
      Activities........................................          12,000
    17830  DLA--BA Realignment..........................         -39,693
    17870  DTRA--BA Realignment.........................          -5,728
    17880  DODEA--Family Advocacy Program...............          20,000
    17880  DODEA--Lewis Center for Education Research...           3,000
    17880  DODEA--Jason Foundation......................           1,000
    17880  DODEA--Tennessee Center for the Study and 
      Treatment of Dyslexia Professional Development 
      Program...........................................           2,000
    17880  DODEA--Mesorah Heritage Foundation Curriculum 
      Development.......................................             500
    17900  DHRA--Defense Business Fellows Program.......          -4,800
    17900  DHRA--BA Realignment.........................         -39,726
    18050  DSS--PSI for Industry Unjustified Growth.....         -20,000
    18050  DSS--BA Realignment..........................          -7,543
    18100  OEA--Norton AFB..............................           5,000
    18100  OEA--George AFB..............................           3,000
    18100  OEA--Rialto-Colton Basin Bio-Remediation 
      Demonstration Project.............................           2,500
    18100  OEA--Port of Philadelphia....................           3,000
    18100  OEA--Philadelphia Navy Yard..................           2,000
    18100  OEA--Davids Island--Fort Slocum Remediation..           5,000
    18100  OEA--McClellan AFB Sewer Remediation.........           2,600
    18100  OEA--Citizen Soldier Support Program.........           5,000
    18100  OEA--Bayonne Military Ocean Terminal.........           6,000
    18100  OEA--Port of Port Arthur Drydock Transfer....           1,800
    18100  OEA--Watervliet Innovation Center............             750
    18100  OEA--Hunters Point Naval Shipyard............           4,000
    18100  OEA--JSFC Infrastructure.....................           2,400
    18100  OEA--Toledo Naval Weapons Reserve Plant 
      Environmental Restoration.........................           3,500
    18100  OEA--Homestead Air Reserve Base Perimeter 
      Improvement.......................................             600
    18125  OSD--Joint ROTC Military Leadership Project 
      at the University of South Florida................           4,500
    18125  OSD--Wind Demonstration Project..............           5,000
    18125  OSD--Chemical/Biological Resistant Hydration 
      on the Move.......................................           1,000
    18125  OSD--Foreign Disclosure On-Line Training, 
      Education, and Certification......................           1,000
    18125  OSD--Middle East Regional Security Issues 
      Program...........................................           3,000
    18125  OSD--National Dedicated Fiber Optic Network 
      Program...........................................           1,000
    18125  OSD--Minority Contract Enhancement Program...           3,000
    18125  OSD--Clinic for Legal Assistance to 
      Servicemembers....................................             500
    18125  OSD--Service-Wide Safety: Alcohol Breath 
      Detectors.........................................             250
    18125  OSD--Virtual Reality Spray Paint Simulator 
      System and Training Program.......................           1,500
    18125  OSD--Focus on Family at Neumann College......             500
    18150  SOCOM--BA Realignment........................          64,115
    18200  TJS--Program Growth..........................          -7,500
    18200  TJS--BA Realignment..........................         303,164
    18225  WHS--eGov Program Growth.....................         -10,000
    18225  WHS--Child Care Center Planning: Budget 
      Justification Error...............................          -4,400
Undistributed:
    19010  Impact Aid...................................          30,000
    19020  Other Programs...............................         -42,203
    19045  Unobligated Balances.........................         -43,000

                 JOINT ROTC MILITARY LEADERSHIP PROJECT

    The Committee provides $4,500,000 to continue the model 
Joint ROTC Military Leadership Project at the University of 
South Florida.

                 NATIONAL GUARD YOUTH CHALLENGE PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 above 
the budget request only to prepare facilities at Joint Forces 
Training Base Los Alamitos to expand the California National 
Guard Grizzly Program.

                       WIND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

    The Committee provides $5,000,000 to coordinate a wind 
demonstration project on a U.S. Air Force installation using 
domestically manufactured turbines that are new to the U.S. 
market to test the security and reliability of wind generation 
on base. New U.S. turbine manufacturers provide multiple blade 
designs that offer higher performance at a wider variety of 
wind speeds. From within the amount provided for this project, 
the Committee directs that $500,000 be used to fund a report to 
Congress on the related technical findings no later than 
February 2008. The Committee further directs that $500,000 of 
the amount provided be used for dedicated renewable energy 
expertise at AFCESA and DESC.

                    ADVANCED FIRST RESPONDER NETWORK

    The Committee is aware of efforts to deploy the Advanced 
First Responder Network (AFRN) throughout Iraq, which will 
begin to address the current lack of mission-critical public-
safety communications capabilities and will allow for focused 
coordination of security planning and execution, rapid data 
collection and analysis of changing security threats, rapid 
coordination and deployment of security assets to address 
threats, effective planning to prevent and reduce future 
security threats, and a more secure environment that will 
foster democracy and economic development. The AFRN 
infrastructure in Iraq has been designed to accommodate the 
entire country, including border regions and critical 
infrastructure such as pipelines. The Committee supports this 
important first step and, with funds available in this 
legislation and prior appropriations acts, encourages the 
reconstruction effort to continue to place a high value on 
completion of the nationwide deployment of a state of the art 
AFRN and related advanced networks.

                 MINORITY CONTRACT ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

    The Committee recognizes the critical importance of 
providing continued development of new products and 
technological innovations from a diversified public. The 
Committee therefore provides $3,000,000 for the Minority 
Contract Enhancement Program to increase minority contributions 
service-wide through the development of a supplier diversity 
initiative.

             SERVICE-WIDE SAFETY: ALCOHOL BREATH DETECTORS

    The impact of excessive alcohol use and driving under the 
influence continues as a leading cause of ground accidents, 
injury, death, and physical damage across the Services. The 
Committee is encouraged by the potential of the Services' 
access to patented, breath alcohol indicators/detectors. The 
Committee has therefore provided a total of $8,500,000 to 
support the procurement of waterproof, temperature-proof, 
disposable, portable breath alcohol indicators (gaseous fluid 
indicator) with a minimum 3-year shelf life and directs the 
Secretary to report to the Appropriations Committees by 
September 30, 2006, on the impact of the use of these 
indicators across the services.

                 PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASSIFICATION BOARD

    The Committee directs that from amounts available in 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, $1,000,000 shall be 
available for the Public Interest Declassification Board.

                 SPECIAL OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

    The Committee recommends $1,350,000 for Special Operations 
Technology Transfer. The Committee directs that these funds 
shall be used only for an initiative to accurately track 
portable, sensitive items exported beyond the borders of the 
United States.

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,789,987,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,783,012,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,791,212,000
Change from budget request............................        +8,200,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,791,212,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation 
is an increase of $1,225,000 above the $1,789,987,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $8,200,000 above the 
request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Army Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces
    19680  Base Support...............................            20,000
Undistributed:
    20220  Unobligated Balances.......................           -17,800
    20230  Army Reserve IT Consolidation..............             2,000
    20231  Tactical Operations Centers (ELAMS/MECCS)..             4,000


               U.S. ARMY RESERVE COMMAND IT CONSOLIDATION

    The Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 above 
the budget request only for the Army Reserve to achieve a 
continuity of operations capability for its mission critical 
information technology systems by replicating mission critical 
data between Peachtree City, Georgia and San Antonio, Texas.

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,164,228,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,182,907,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,178,607,000
Change from budget request............................        -4,300,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,178,607,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation 
is an increase of $14,379,000 above the $1,164,228,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $4,300,000 less than the 
request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Navy Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces
    21200  Aircraft Depot Maintenance.................             5,000
    21800  Combat Support Forces/Gulf Joint Harbor                 3,000
 Operations Center (JHOC).............................
Undistributed:
    22680  Unobligated Balances.......................           -12,300


            OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $175,070,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       189,829,000
Committee recommendation..............................       199,929,000
Change from budget request............................       +10,100,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $199,929,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The 
recommendation is an increase of $24,859,000 above the 
$175,070,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $10,100,000 
above the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces
    23450  Operating Forces/Initial Issue.............            10,000
    23450  Operating Forces/Lightweight Maintenance                2,000
 Enclosure (LME)......................................
Undistributed:
    24150  Unobligated Balances.......................            -1,900


              OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $2,189,534,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     2,445,922,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,465,122,000
Change from budget request............................       +19,200,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,465,122,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The 
recommendation is an increase of $275,588,000 above the 
$2,189,534,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and 
$19,200,000 above the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Air Force Reserve are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces
    24970  Depot Maintenance..........................            10,000
Undistributed:
    25665  932nd Airlift Wing.........................            23,100
    25680  Unobligated Balances.......................           -13,900


             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $4,058,342,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     4,118,175,000
Committee recommendation..............................     4,142,875,000
Change from budget request............................       +24,700,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,142,875,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard. The 
recommendation is an increase of $84,533,000 above the 
$4,058,342,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and 
$24,700,000 above the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Army National Guard are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces
    26420  Base Operations Support......................          20,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide 
    Activities:
    26680  Information Management/Integrated Command, 
      Control, Communication Unit.......................           1,000
Undistributed:
    26820  Angel Gate Academy...........................           3,000
    26830  National Emergency and Disaster Information 
      Center............................................           2,000
    26890  Joint Training and Experimentation Program...           4,000
    26970  National Guard Global Education Project......             500
    27100  Adv Emergency Medical Response Training 
      Program...........................................           2,500
    27110  Homeland Operational Planning System.........          10,000
    27345  Unobligated Balances.........................         -48,100
    27350  Enterprise Resource Planning for Army Guard 
      Installations and Deployment Support..............           2,000
    27365  Regional Geospatial Service Center...........           1,000
    27381  Community Emergency Response/Info Analysis 
      Center............................................           1,000
    27383  Strategic Biodefense Initiative..............          10,000
    27384  Advanced Starting Systems....................             500
    27390  Internal Airlift, Helicopter Slingable Units 
      (ISU).............................................           4,000
    27391  Advanced Solar Covers........................           3,200
    27392  Civil Support Team Trainer (CSTT) Program....           1,000
    27393  RCAS.........................................           5,000
    27394  Florida NG Operation Family Safe at Home.....           2,100

             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $4,242,096,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     4,554,300,000
Committee recommendation..............................     4,547,515,000
Change from budget request............................        -6,785,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,547,515,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard. The 
recommendation is an increase of $305,419,000 above the 
$4,242,096,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and $6,785,000 
less than the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 2006:



    The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and 
maintenance, Air National Guard are shown below:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
    27650  Aircraft Operations..........................           5,000
    27650  Aircraft Operations/Training Capability 
      Upgrade...........................................             315
    27650  Aircraft Operations/Air Refueling Operational 
      Support...........................................           4,000
    27750  Base Support/Advanced Video Surveillance 
      Equip.............................................           1,000
Undistributed:
    28320  Unobligated Balances.........................         -22,100
    28381  Distributed Training Technology Project......           3,000
    28382  Eagle Vision.................................           2,000

                      TRAINING CAPABILITY UPGRADE

    The Committee recommends an increase of $315,000 above the 
budget request to upgrade and enhance training for the 139th 
Airlift Wing associated with increased demands of night vision 
training operations.

                        MOFFETT FEDERAL AIRFIELD

    The Committee recommends an increase of $1,000,000 above 
the budget request for advanced video surveillance equipment 
for the monitoring of Moffett Federal Airfield.

            OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER ACCOUNT





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................       $10,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................        20,000,000
Committee recommendation..............................        20,000,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Overseas 
Contingency Operations Transfer Account. The recommendation is 
an increase of $10,000,000 from the amount appropriated in 
fiscal year 2005 and equal to the request for fiscal year 2006.

          UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................       $10,825,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................        11,236,000
Committee recommendation..............................        11,236,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,236,000 
for the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. 
The recommendation is an increase of $411,000 from the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and equal to the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

             OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................       $59,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................        61,546,000
Committee recommendation..............................        61,546,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $61,546,000 
for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. The 
recommendation is an increase of $2,546,000 from the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and equal to the request for 
fiscal year 2006.

              FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION ACCOUNT





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $409,200,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       415,549,000
Committee recommendation..............................       415,549,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $415,549,000 
for Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction Account. The 
recommendation is an increase of $6,349,000 from the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and equal to the request for 
fiscal year 2006.
                               TITLE III

                              PROCUREMENT

                  ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATIONS SUMMARY

    The fiscal year 2006 Department of Defense procurement 
budget request totals $76,635,410,000. The accompanying bill 
recommends $76,806,886,000. The total amount recommended is an 
increase of $171,476,000 above the fiscal year 2006 budget 
estimate and is $872,917,000 below the total provided for 
fiscal year 2005. The table below summarizes the budget 
estimates and the Committee's recommendations.



                         SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

    Items for which additional funds have been provided as 
shown in the project level tables or in paragraphs using the 
phrase ``only for'' or ``only to'' in this report are 
congressional interest items for the purpose of the Base for 
Reprogramming (DD 1414). Each of these items must be carried on 
the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount specifically addressed in 
the conference report. These items remain special interest 
items whether or not they are repeated in a subsequent 
conference report.

            REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

    The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue 
to follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report 
accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2005 
Department of Defense Appropriations bill (House Report No. 
108-553). Specifically, the dollar threshold for reprogramming 
will remain at $20,000,000 for procurement, and $10,000,000 for 
research, development, test and evaluation. The Department 
shall continue to follow the limitation that prior approval 
reprogrammings are set at either the specified dollar threshold 
or 20% of the procurement or research, development, test and 
evaluation line, whichever is less. These thresholds are 
cumulative. Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into 
or out of a procurement (P-1) line or research, development, 
test and evaluation (R-1) line exceed the identified threshold, 
the Department of Defense must submit a prior approval 
reprogramming to the congressional defense committees. In 
addition, guidelines on the application of prior approval 
reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest 
items are established elsewhere in this report.

        REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR BELOW THRESHOLD REPROGRAMMINGS

    The Committee is concerned about what it considers to be 
the potential abuse of below threshold reprogramming authority 
granted to the Department of Defense. A recent example 
involving the Air Force's reprogramming of B-1 research and 
development funds from a terminated program contrary the 
expressed interests of the Committee has given this concern a 
greater urgency. While not seeking to directly interfere with 
the Department's authority to transfer funds where necessary, 
the Committee needs to be informed of below threshold 
reprogrammings. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), to provide a quarterly 
report to the congressional defense committees on all below 
threshold reprogrammings from or to accounts in this title. The 
report should be submitted not later than 30 days after the end 
of the previous fiscal quarter and include the reprogramming 
source, the account to which the funds have been transferred, 
the reason for which funds are available for reprogramming, and 
the requirement for the funds to be reprogrammed.

                   EQUIPMENT RESET AND RECONSTITUTION

    The Committee understands that both the Army and Marine 
Corps face significant financial commitments to reset their 
equipment in light of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
Unfortunately, the extent of these requirements has not been 
adequately articulated to date. Accordingly, the Committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy 
to each provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees, to accompany the fiscal year 2007 Department of 
Defense budget request, that provides the best current estimate 
of the requirements to reset combat, logistical and support 
equipment items of all types supporting operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. This report shall detail requirements associated 
with replacing combat losses, assets deemed lost because they 
are no longer economically repairable, and equipment required 
to reconstruct prepositioned equipment sets.

                            CLASSIFIED ANNEX

    Adjustments to the classified programs are addressed in a 
classified annex accompanying this report.

                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $2,854,541,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     2,800,880,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,879,380,000
Change from budget request............................       +78,500,000


    This appropriation finances acquisition of tactical and 
utility airplanes and helicopters, including associated 
electronics, electronic warfare equipment for in-service 
aircraft, ground support equipment, components and parts such 
as spare engines, transmission gear boxes, and sensor 
equipment. It also funds related training devices such as 
combat flight simulators and production base support.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,879,380,000 
for Aircraft Procurement, Army, which is $24,839,000 more than 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $78,500,000 more 
than the request for fiscal year 2006.



                     MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS

    The Committee includes a general provision (Sec. 8008) 
described elsewhere in this report, that approves multiyear 
procurement authority for several Army aviation programs 
including the UH-60M Blackhawk helicopter; Apache Block II 
Conversions; and the Modernized Target Acquisition Designation 
Sight/Pilot Night Vision Sensor (MTADS/PNVS) for Apache 
helicopters.

                       UH-1 AIRCRAFT REPLACEMENT

    The Committee understands that the Army is considering 
replacement of H-1 helicopters presently assigned to the 1st 
U.S. Support Battalion attached to the Multi National Force and 
Observers deployed in the Sinai. The Committee is also aware 
that the Army is considering replacement of these aircraft with 
UH-60 Blackhawks. However, there are both operational and cost 
reasons which strongly suggest that this is not the best course 
of action. A potential alternative would be the early fielding 
of the planned Light Utility Helicopter (LUH). Accordingly, the 
Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report 
to the House Committee on Appropriations not later than 
November 1, 2005, detailing plans to replace these H-1 
helicopters.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in this bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                       MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,307,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,270,850,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,239,350,000
Change from budget request............................       -31,500,000


    This appropriation finances the acquisition of surface-to-
air, surface-to-surface, air-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault 
missile systems. Also included are major components, 
modifications, targets, test equipment and production base 
support.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriations of 
$1,239,350,000 for Missile Procurement, Army, which is 
$67,650,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 
and $31,500,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006.



             HIGH MOBILITY ARTILLERY ROCKET SYSTEM (HIMARS)

    The Committee fully supports the Army and Marine Corps 
HIMARS program and believes this to be an important part of 
DoD's future force capability. However, the Committee notes 
significant growth in the cost per launcher from fiscal year 
2005 to 2006 without any accompanying rationale. Accordingly, 
the Committee recommends a reduction of $7,500,000 from the 
Missile Procurement, Army account for the HIMARS program based 
on unit cost growth of launchers. Adjustments to the Marine 
Corps portion of this program are discussed elsewhere in this 
report.

             ADVANCED PRECISION KILL WEAPON SYSTEM (APKWS)

    While the Committee supports efforts to develop and field 
the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS), the 
Committee notes that in the transition from the System Design 
and Development (SDD) phase to production, significant problems 
have arisen with this program. This is evident in recent test 
failures and suggestions by the Army that it may take a year or 
more for the program to stabilize. Accordingly, the Committee 
recommends a reduction totaling $32,079,000 to this program, 
including $24,000,000 from Missile Procurement, Army and 
$8,079,000 from Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine 
Corps as described elsewhere in this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



        PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $2,467,495,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,660,149,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,670,949,000
Change from budget request............................       +10,800,000


    This appropriation finances the acquisition of tanks; 
personnel and cargo carriers; fighting vehicles; tracked 
recovery vehicles; self-propelled and towed howitzers; machine 
guns; mortars; modification of in-service equipment; initial 
spares; and production base support.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,670,949,000 
for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, 
which is $796,546,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal 
year 2005 and $10,800,000 more than the request for fiscal year 
2006.



               OBJECTIVE INDIVIDUAL COMBAT WEAPON (OICW)

    The fiscal year 2006 budget request includes $32,484,000 
for procurement of the Objective Individual Combat Weapon. In 
the House-passed version of the fiscal year 2005 Department of 
Defense Appropriations bill, $25,900,000 was added in an 
attempt to accelerate fielding this weapon. Although the 
procurement request for fiscal year 2006 is similar in some 
respects to the proposed acceleration of the program last year, 
the Committee notes that the Army has altered its acquisition 
strategy for the program and added requirements as well. As a 
result, the Committee recommends a reduction of $10,200,000 
from the procurement request for this program. In addition, the 
Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report 
to the congressional defense committees, not later than October 
31, 2005, which provides the following information: a detailed 
explanation of the extent to which the Army will replace the M-
16, M-4, and any other families of weapons, to include the 
overall Army Acquisition Objective; a description of the OICW 
fielding plan to include support units; and, the length of time 
over which the Army intends to field this weapon.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                    PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,590,952,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,720,872,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,753,152,000
Change from budget request............................       +32,280,000


    This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, 
modification of in-service stock, and related production base 
support including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization 
of industrial facilities and equipment.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,753,152,000 
for Procurement of Ammunition, Army, which is $162,200,000 more 
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $32,280,000 
more than the request for fiscal year 2006.



                    AMMUNITION PRODUCTION FACILITIES

    Over the past year, the Congress has provided an additional 
$109,700,000 to improve the capacity of the ammunition 
industrial base, including $51,900,000 in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act, 2005, and $57,800,000 in the fiscal 
year 2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. The 
Committee understands that DoD needs to increase production of 
small arms ammunition to a level of at least 1.5 billion rounds 
per year to meet requirements associated with fighting the 
global war on terrorism, greater training due to the Army's 
modular force initiative, and rebuilding war reserves. In light 
of these requirements, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees, not later than February 28, 2006, detailing 
projects undertaken or planned with the funding described 
above. In addition, this report should address plans to 
eliminate single points of failure for critical ammunition 
production capabilities such as Load Assemble and Pack (LAP), 
chemical constituent production, and production of other 
ammunition components.

                     LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT COMMANDS

    Since mid-2004, the Army has been engaged in implementing 
Life Cycle Management Commands (LCMCs). The Army's stated goal 
for this effort is to establish an integrated business 
enterprise to develop, test, acquire, field, sustain, 
modernize, recapitalize and dispose of Army equipment. The 
Committee understands that the LCMC construct is a pilot 
program that will undergo periodic review beginning in the 3rd 
quarter of fiscal year 2005 and thereafter. The Committee is 
concerned about the effect that LCMC may have on the Army 
overall, and on the Program Executive Officer (PEO) Ammunition 
in particular. Specifically, the Committee is concerned that 
ammunition management will be subordinated beneath the Field 
Support and Mobility functions of the Army. In addition, given 
that the Secretary of Defense has recommended that Picatinny 
Arsenal become the home for a joint integrated weapons and 
armaments specialty site for guns and ammunition, the Committee 
believes the Army must evaluate how this organization should be 
structured. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
the Army to submit a report to the House Committee on 
Appropriations, not later than November 1, 2005, that provides 
a summary of the Army's LCMC review, and that rationalizes the 
duties and responsibilities of PEO Ammunition under the LCMC 
construct and under the proposed joint integrated weapons and 
armaments specialty site for guns and ammunition.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $4,955,296,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     4,302,634,000
Committee recommendation..............................     4,491,634,000
Change from budget request............................      +189,000,000


    This appropriation finances the acquisition of (a) tactical 
and commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-trailers, and 
trailers of all types to provide mobility and utility support 
to field forces and the worldwide logistical system; (b) 
communications and electronic equipment of all types to provide 
fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile strategic and tactical 
communications; and (c) other support equipment, generators and 
power units, material handling equipment, medical support 
equipment, special equipment for user testing, and non-system 
training devices. In each of these activities, funds are also 
included for the modification of in-service equipment, 
investment spares and repair parts, and production base 
support.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,491,634,000 
for Other Procurement, Army, which is $463,662,000 less than 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $189,000,000 more 
than the request for fiscal year 2006.



            TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLE MODERNIZATION STRATEGY

    The Committee notes that the Army is actively considering 
the acquisition of a new class of non-developmental trucks. The 
Committee believes that modernizing the Army's truck fleet is 
necessary and supports the direction expressed in the House-
passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
fiscal year 2006 recommending that the Army and Marine Corps 
consider embarking on a joint program for this new class of 
trucks. However, the Committee is concerned that the strategy 
is incomplete because it fails to fully address either 
recapitalization or replacement of those tactical wheeled 
vehicles supporting the Global War on Terrorism.
    The Committee is aware that at least 20% of the Army's 
tactical wheeled vehicles are presently deployed supporting 
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a result of operating 
tempo and environmental conditions, these vehicles may be 
irreparable and thus may have to be replaced. In addition, the 
Committee understands that the prepositioned equipment sets 
supporting operations in the CENTCOM Area of Responsibility 
(AOR) may have to be largely rebuilt as operations subside. 
Similarly, the strategy does not provide an indication of how 
the Army will meet truck requirements stemming from the modular 
force initiative (Modularity). Accordingly, the Committee 
directs that the Secretary of the Army provide the 
congressional defense committees a report, not later than 
January 31, 2006, describing plans to acquire tactical wheeled 
vehicles to support modularity and reset requirements including 
requirements associated with reconstituting prepositioned 
equipment sets. The report shall include detailed estimates of 
the cost of this acquisition plan. The report shall also 
explain the relationship between modularity, reset and 
reconstitution requirements, and the Army's plans to field a 
new class of non-development tactical wheeled vehicles.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $8,912,042,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    10,517,126,000
Committee recommendation..............................     9,776,440,000
Change from budget request............................      -740,686,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of 
aircraft and related support equipment and programs; flight 
simulators; equipment to modify in-service aircraft to extend 
their service life, eliminate safety hazards and improve 
aircraft operational effectiveness; and spare parts and ground 
support equipment for all end items procured by this 
appropriation.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,776,440,000 
for Aircraft Procurement, Navy, which is $864,398,000 more than 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $740,686,000 less 
than the request for fiscal year 2006.



                            KC-130J AIRCRAFT

    The Committee recommendation provides for 4 aircraft, the 
same quantity as provided in fiscal year 2005. The reduction of 
8 aircraft and $771,654,000 from the budget estimate provides 
the offset needed to restore funding to ``Aircraft Procurement, 
Air Force'' to maintain the existing C-130J multiyear contract. 
The Department of Defense recently announced its intent to 
continue this contract throughout fiscal year 2006. The 
Committee recommendation also provides $45,626,000 for advance 
procurement of KC-130J aircraft to be acquired in fiscal year 
2007. These funds were not included in the President's budget 
because the 12 aircraft in the budget proposal would have 
bought out the entire Marine Corps requirement in fiscal year 
2006. The Committee reduction of $28,413,000 in aircraft spares 
and repair parts reflects the lower number of KC-130J aircraft 
to be procured in fiscal year 2006.

                              C-130 SERIES

    The Committee recommends $32,698,000, a reduction of 
$10,000,000 from the budget estimate. While the Committee 
supports this program, the proposed increase from $17,919,000 
in fiscal year 2005 to $42,698,000 in fiscal year 2006 is 
excessive. The Committee believes this broad portfolio of 
modernization activities can be reprioritized and rephased 
without overall impact to the program.

                            COMMON AVIONICS

    The Committee recommends $181,395,000, a reduction of 
$32,807,000 from the budget estimate. The recommendation allows 
a higher rate of growth than in fiscal year 2005, and a funding 
level more consistent with outyear funding.

                        COMMON GROUND EQUIPMENT

    The Committee recommends $475,579,000, a reduction of 
$23,890,000. The recommendation includes a reduction of 
$21,890,000 in Other Training Equipment, which finances the 
upgrade of simulators and other aviation training equipment. 
This recommendation defers two new starts, Undergraduate Naval 
Flight Officer Training and USMC Federation Simulators, due to 
lack of detailed justification and budget constraints. The 
recommended level also provides a smoother funding profile more 
consistent with outyear levels.

                              EA-6B SERIES

                IMPROVED CAPABILITIES (ICAP III) PROGRAM

    The Committee notes that this program has experienced 
significant developmental delays, and that the Navy's 
verification of correction of deficiencies is ongoing. The 
Committee remains hopeful that this improved capability will 
ultimately be declared operationally suitable and effective. At 
that time, the Committee will consider further production 
funding or a reprogramming request to continue the program.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in this bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                       WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $2,114,720,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     2,707,841,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,596,781,000
Change from budget request............................      -111,060,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of 
strategic and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes, 
guns, associated support equipment, and modification of in-
service missiles, torpedoes, and guns.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,596,781,000 
for Weapons Procurement, Navy, which is $482,061,000 more than 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $111,060,000 less 
than the request for fiscal year 2006. The following report and 
project level tables provide a summary of the Committee's 
recommendation.



                        MK 48 ADCAP TORPEDO MODS

    The Committee recommends $35,920,000 for modifications to 
the MK-48 Advanced Capability (ADCAP) torpedo, a reduction of 
$25,389,000 from the budget estimate. The Navy had proposed to 
enter full rate production in fiscal year 2006 for a 
modification involving the Common Broadband Advanced Sonar 
System (CBASS), after low rate production in fiscal years 2004 
and 2005. The Committee understands that the program has 
experienced late hardware deliveries and obligation delays 
during the past year. Given these problems, the Committee 
recommendation allows funding for 30 mod kits instead of the 84 
kits proposed. This is still twice the LRIP rate of 15 kits per 
year, and will allow a more gradual acceleration to full 
production.

                        GUN MOUNT MODIFICATIONS

    The Committee recommendation includes a reduction of 
$29,415,000 in proposed funding for the MK 38 Mod 2 gun mount. 
The budget had proposed an increase from 16 units in fiscal 
year 2005 to 113 units in fiscal year 2006, effectively funding 
three future years of requirements in a single year. While the 
Committee continues to support this program, the proposed rate 
of growth is neither justified nor affordable. The Committee 
recommendation allows one-half the planned growth, which is 
sufficient to fund 65 gun mounts in fiscal year 2006.

                                TOMAHAWK

    The Committee recommends $301,153,000 in this appropriation 
to procure 308 Tomahawk missiles. In addition, funding of 
$81,696,000 is provided in title IX for an additional 111 
missiles, for a total fiscal year 2006 buy of 419 missiles. The 
Committee is disturbed to learn that, in contrast to other 
weapon systems, the Navy is not replacing Tomahawk missiles 
consumed in the Global War on Terror, but is instead drawing 
down the existing stockpile and cross-decking weapons. The 
Committee finds this practice unacceptable. Funds in title IX 
will help restore the inventory losses caused by Operation 
Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in this bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



            PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $888,340,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       872,849,000
Committee recommendation..............................       885,170,000
Change from budget request............................       +12,321,000


    This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, 
ammunition modernization and ammunition related material for 
the Navy and Marine Corps.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $885,170,000 
for Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps, which is 
$3,170,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 
and $12,321,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2006. The 
following report and project level tables provide a summary of 
the Committee's recommendation.



                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in this bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                   SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $10,427,443,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     8,721,165,000
Committee recommendation..............................     9,613,358,000
Change from budget request............................      +892,193,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the construction of 
new ships and the purchase and conversion of existing ships, 
including hull, mechanical and electrical equipment, 
electronics, guns, torpedo and missile launching systems, and 
communication systems.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,613,358,000 
for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SC,N) which is 
$814,085,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 
and $892,193,000 more than the request for fiscal year 2006. In 
addition, the bill includes rescissions of fiscal year 2005 SCN 
appropriations totaling $325,000,000. The following report and 
project level tables provide a summary of the Committee's 
recommendation.



                  STABILITY OF NAVY SHIPBUILDING PLAN

    The Committee remains concerned over the continued 
instability in Navy's shipbuilding program. In last year's 
report, the Committee wrote:
    ``The Committee remains deeply troubled by the lack of 
stability in the Navy's shipbuilding program. Often both the 
current and outyear ship construction profile is dramatically 
altered with the submission of the next budget request. 
Programs justified to Congress in terms of mission requirements 
in one year's budget are removed from the next. The continued 
shifting of the shipbuilding program promotes confusion and 
frustration throughout both the public and private sectors''.
    Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2006 budget creates even 
more instability and uncertainty than in the recent past. The 
President's budget for fiscal year 2006 includes funds for only 
4 new ships, (and only 2 under the SCN appropriation). This is 
one-half the number funded in fiscal year 2005. However, the 
long-term Navy plan suggests that, in only three years, the 
shipbuilding program will be up to 9 ships with an annual 
budget of almost $14 billion. By the end of the Future Years 
Defense Program (FYDP), the Navy projects almost $18 billion a 
year for 12 ships. The Committee believes that not only does 
fiscal year 2006 constitute a dangerous ``notch'' in the 
shipbuilding plan, but the outyear plan appears unrealistic. To 
more effectively address these issues, the Committee directs 
the Navy to submit to the congressional defense committees a 
ten-year shipbuilding plan, not later than the date of 
submission of the fiscal year 2007 President's budget. This 
plan should include total program quantities required, unit and 
budget costs assumed, and an assessment of technological risks 
remaining in each new design class. The plan should include new 
construction vessels funded in Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation, Navy, the National Defense Sealift Fund, and the 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy appropriation.
    The Committee recommendation, over all appropriations, 
includes 8 new construction ships. This provides a more stable 
shipbuilding program than proposed, and helps bridge the gap 
between today's ongoing programs and future needs. Although 
some difficult choices have been made to offset these 
requirements, the Committee believes the proposed funding 
profile will maintain today's shipbuilding capacity and provide 
additional warfighting capability while the Navy decides what 
it needs, what it can afford, and what technology is achievable 
in the outyears. Compared to the budget request, the Committee 
recommendation includes an additional DDG-51 destroyer, an 
additional T-AKE dry cargo/ammunition ship, and two additional 
littoral combat ships.

               AFFORDABILITY OF NAVY'S SHIPBUILDING PLAN

    The Committee is concerned over the affordability of the 
Navy's future shipbuilding program. Over the current Future 
Years Defense Plan (fiscal years 2006 through 2011), the 
service plans to construct 49 new ships at a cost of 
approximately $73.5 billion. Over that time period, the amount 
of funding allocated to new construction would rise from $6.2 
billion in fiscal year 2006 to an estimated $17.7 billion in 
fiscal year 2011. The Navy is currently projecting a 
requirement for a fleet size of between 260 and 325 ships, at 
an estimated annual ship construction cost of $12 billion to 
$15 billion. However, the Congressional Budget Office, in a 
report dated April 25, 2005, concluded that those estimates are 
understated by approximately $3 billion per year. In other 
words, $18 billion annually may be needed to sustain a program 
that, in fiscal year 2006, is budgeted at slightly more than $6 
billion. OSD's Force Transformation Office recently observed 
that none of the five key financial assumptions upon which the 
Navy's plan relies are materializing. Instead, they suggest 
that ``trends in all five areas are moving in the wrong 
direction''. The Committee encourages the Navy to redouble its 
efforts to lower costs for ship classes on the drawing boards, 
to provide a more affordable plan for the future.
    The Committee believes the Navy will not be able to afford 
the fleet it needs if it cannot control costs better for ships 
under construction, and lower costs for ship classes on the 
drawing boards, as discussed more fully in the paragraphs 
below.

            COST GROWTH AND COST CONTROL IN ONGOING PROGRAMS

    The Committee is dismayed over continuing cost growth in 
ongoing shipbuilding programs. The Navy is now estimating a 
total government liability of $6,057,000,000 on the CVN-77--a 
program with a statutory cost cap of $4,600,000,000. The fiscal 
year 2006 budget includes funds for cost growth in this program 
as well as the LPD-17 and SSN-774 programs, and the Committee 
understands that even further funding may be needed to complete 
those efforts in future budgets. The Government Accountability 
Office, in a report dated February 28, 2005, found a number of 
problems in Navy's ship cost estimating process. Among other 
things, GAO auditors concluded that:
         Navy practices for estimating costs, 
        contracting, and budgeting for ships have resulted in 
        unrealistic funding of programs, increasing the 
        likelihood of cost growth;
         In the programs surveyed, Navy staff did not 
        conduct uncertainty analyses to measure and plan for 
        the probability of cost growth;
         Navy did not conduct independent cost 
        estimates for its most expensive asset, nuclear 
        aircraft carriers;
         Contract prices were negotiated and budgets 
        established without making full use of design knowledge 
        and construction experience; and
         When unexpected events occurred, the 
        incomplete and untimely reporting on program status 
        delayed the identification of problems and timely 
        budgeting for their correction.
    These substandard practices lead to cost growth, which 
drains away the resources needed to build additional ships. The 
Committee expects the Navy to expeditiously address the 
findings and recommendations of the GAO report. Further, the 
Committee directs the Navy to submit, not later than December 
31, 2005, a plan for resolving contract cost growth on existing 
shipbuilding programs such as the Virginia-class submarine and 
the LPD-17, including the option of possibly converting 
remaining work to fixed price contracts.

                      DDG-51 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $50,000,000 to continue the DDG-51 
Modernization Program. This is the same level as enacted for 
fiscal year 2005. Once again this year, the Committee expects 
the program to focus on expanded warfighting capability, 
reduced total ownership cost, and the expanded use of open 
architecture.

                          LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP

    The Committee recommends $440,000,000 to construct two 
additional Littoral Combat Ships (LCSs) out of the SCN 
appropriation. The President's budget requested, and the 
Committee bill includes, $249,000,000 for an additional LCS 
ship in the RDT&E, Navy appropriation. The Committee remains 
very supportive of the LCS program, and believes that further 
procurement in fiscal year 2006 is prudent and reasonable given 
the status of the program at this point in time. The Committee 
directs that, prior to obligation of SCN funds for the third 
and fourth ``flight zero'' LCS ships, the Navy certify in 
writing to the congressional defense committees that the ship 
designs from each prime contractor are sufficiently stable to 
allow further construction. The Committee also believes that, 
while the LCS ship itself is of stable and mature design, the 
mission modules essential to LCS warfighting capabilities are 
less mature. A number of these technologies have not been 
demonstrated in an operational environment, and cost estimates 
for the mission modules appear immature as well. To address 
this issue, the Committee directs the Navy to submit, not later 
than February 1, 2006, a report on the development and 
procurement plan for LCS mission modules, including a 
description of the development status of each subsystem. The 
report shall include a schedule showing how production of those 
modules align with planned LCS ship delivery schedules and an 
allocation scheme showing how modules would be allocated among 
LCS-class ships.

                                 LHA(R)

    The Committee recommends $200,447,000 for advance 
procurement of the LHA(R), an increase of $50,000,000 above the 
budget estimate. The Committee supports the LHA(R) program, and 
directs the Navy to reconsider its proposal to request split 
funding for LHA(R) over the FY07-08 timeframe, and instead 
follow the full funding principle for this ship class, to 
ensure an adequate budget is in hand before contract award.

                            DD(X) DESTROYER

    The Committee recommendation deletes the $715,992,000 
requested for advance procurement for the DD(X) next generation 
destroyer, and rescinds fiscal year 2005 advance procurement 
funding of $304,000,000. The recommendation on fiscal year 2006 
funding is consistent with recommendations of the House in H.R. 
1815, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2006. The DD(X) program has encountered serious problems over 
the past year, on two separate fronts:
    Outyear funding and acquisition strategy.--When internal 
budget decisions in late 2004 reduced the planned buy of this 
ship class to one per year, unit costs rose significantly, 
causing the Navy to propose an early downselect and ``winner 
take all'' competition. This change to the program of record 
was denied by the Congress. With such low quantities, ships 
included in the current FYDP would cost approximately $2.75 
billion each. This is double the cost of DDG-51 destroyers 
procured in fiscal year 2005.
    Technological difficulties.--The development program has 
run into difficulties over the past year. The integrated power 
system, the volume search radar, the peripheral vertical launch 
system, and the integrated deckhouse have all experienced 
problems. Although not unusual for a program of this size and 
complexity, these difficulties highlight the fact that much 
development work remains to be done. In addition, several 
changes have added weight to the ship design, which raises 
technical risk and reduces flexibility for potential changes in 
the future.
    Considering the uncertainty in this program and the lack of 
authorization, the Committee believes the program is likely to 
be restructured, and a new cost and acquisition strategy 
developed, before proceeding to advance procurement. As 
discussed further under ``Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation, Navy'', the Committee bill includes $670,000,000 
for DD(X) to continue development efforts.

                    DDG-51 GUIDED MISSILE DESTROYER

    In last year's report, the Committee expressed the view 
that because of likely schedule delay in the DD(X) next 
generation destroyer program, at least one DDG-51 destroyer 
would be necessary in fiscal year 2006. At that time, the 
Committee recommended advance procurement funding for a new 
DDG-51, and directed the Navy to include the remaining funds in 
its fiscal year 2006 budget request. The DDG-51 is a highly 
capable warship. This is especially true for the most recent 
ships, that have been outfitted with crew reduction 
technologies. The DDG-51 program is currently in full rate 
production, with 14 ships under construction or in the planning 
phase at shipyards by the end of this year. Because of the 
delay in the DD(X) program, as well as significant technology 
risks remaining in the DD(X) development program, the Committee 
believes it is imperative to procure an additional DDG-51 
destroyer, and $1,400,000,000 has been included for this 
purpose.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in this bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $4,875,786,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     5,487,818,000
Committee recommendation..............................     5,461,196,000
Change from budget request............................       -26,622,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of 
major equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft, 
missiles and torpedoes. Such equipment ranges from the latest 
electronic sensors for updates of naval forces, to trucks, 
training equipment, and spare parts.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,461,196,000 
for Other Procurement, Navy, which is $585,410,000 more than 
the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $26,622,000 less 
than the request for fiscal year 2006. The following report and 
project level tables provide a summary of the Committee's 
recommendation.



                          LM-2500 GAS TURBINE

    The Committee recommendation of $6,894,000 allows a 
smoother ramp up of production for FADEC shipsets by funding 3 
units in fiscal year 2006 compared to 1 in each of the previous 
two years. The budget had proposed 5 shipsets in fiscal year 
2006.

               SUBMARINE PERISCOPES AND IMAGING EQUIPMENT

    This program provides funds for ship alterations (ShipAlts) 
of Patriot type 18 and type 8 rangefinder and infrared search 
and track (IRST) systems. The Committee recommendation of 
$62,642,000 allows funding for 9 systems, which is the same 
quantity as funded in fiscal year 2005.

                    VIRGINIA CLASS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

    The Committee recommends $128,072,000, a reduction of 
$47,500,000 from the budget estimate. The Committee believes 
the proposed technology insertion upgrades and test and 
maintenance system improvements can proceed at a slower pace 
without overall impact to the program. The recommended level is 
still a significant increase over the $57,800,000 provided in 
fiscal year 2005.

                     SHIP COMMUNICATIONS AUTOMATION

    The Committee recommends $202,000,000, a reduction of 
$51,960,000 from the budget estimate. This program funds a 
variety of upgrades to both internal and external shipboard 
communications. The fiscal year 2006 budget proposed to raise 
funding in this program by 58 percent, from $160,733,000 in 
fiscal year 2005 to $253,960,000 in fiscal year 2006. This 
level of funding drops significantly in fiscal year 2007. The 
Committee recommendation provides a lower rate of growth that 
is more in line with outyear funding plans.

                         COAST GUARD EQUIPMENT

    This program provides for Navy-type, Navy-owned equipment 
for Coast Guard vessels such as the Integrated Deepwater 
Systems (IDS) National Security Cutter. Given the uncertainty 
over fiscal year 2006 funding for the IDS program, the 
Committee recommends $15,000,000 for Coast Guard equipment, a 
reduction of $16,377,000 from the budget estimate. This mirrors 
the Committee's proposed reductions in the overall IDS program, 
and is well above the amounts provided for fiscal year 2004 and 
2005.

                       SSN COMBAT CONTROL SYSTEMS

    The President's budget requested $6,981,000 for SSGN 
sustaining support, which is described in the budget 
justifications as an upgrade to the Tomahawk Weapon Control 
System. Since all 4 of these vessels are in shipyards now, with 
sea trials not beginning on the first ship until later this 
year, the Committee believes these funds are premature. The 
Committee notes that these submarine conversions are on an 
accelerated construction schedule, which would suggest that 
their mission systems incorporate the most current technology 
available. The Committee defers these funds without prejudice.

                      PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT

    The Committee recommendation reduces this program by 
$48,800,000, and includes such funds under title IX of the 
bill. The Committee is advised by the Navy that this funding is 
directly related to Operation Iraqi Freedom, and would fund the 
procurement of 16 shipsets of the Shipboard Protection System. 
These are urgent requirements to provide in-theater 
capabilities for harbor defense and shipboard protection.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in this bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                       PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,432,203,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,377,705,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,426,405,000
Change from budget request............................       +48,700,000


    This appropriation funds the procurement, delivery, and 
modification of missiles, armaments, communication equipment, 
tracked and wheeled vehicles, and various support equipment.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,426,405,000 
for Procurement, Marine Corps, which is $5,798,000 less than 
provided in fiscal year 2005 and $48,700,000 more than the 
request for fiscal year 2006.



                MAGTFTC RANGE TRANSFORMATION INITIATIVE

    The Committee recognizes the need for a large-scale urban 
warfare training facility to ensure realistic training is 
provided for our troops preparing to deploy overseas to hostile 
combat zones. The United States Marine Corps has proposed a 
fiscal year 2008 initiative to begin construction of an urban 
operations training complex of unprecedented capability. The 
Committee applauds this effort and has provided funding to 
accelerate this initiative in fiscal year 2006.

             HIGH MOBILITY ARTILLERY ROCKET SYSTEM (HIMARS)

    The Committee fully supports the Army and Marine Corps 
HIMARS program and believes this to be an important part of 
DoD's future force capability. However, Committee notes that 
there is a cost differential of $2,000,000 between launchers 
purchased for the Marine Corps and for the Army. The Army 
budget materials indicate the unit cost of launchers is just 
over $3,000,000 and the Marine Corps budget request indicates 
that the cost is just under $5,100,000. This difference is 
especially striking considering that the Army and Marine Corps 
purchase the same launcher using the same contracting vehicle. 
In this respect, the Marine Corps budget justification 
materials indicate that the unit price for HIMARS launchers is 
determined by Army contract pricing and includes a contract 
surcharge for full rate product contracting cost to the Marine 
Corps. The Committee believes this surcharge and cost 
differential are excessive, and therefore recommends a 
reduction of $30,000,000 from the budget request.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                    AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation.................          $13,648,304,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request................           11,973,933,000
Committee recommendation.......................           12,424,298,000
Change from budget request.....................             +450,365,000


    This appropriation provides for the procurement of 
aircraft, and for modification of in-service aircraft to 
improve safety and enhance operational effectiveness. It also 
provides for initial spares and other support equipment to 
include aerospace ground equipment and industrial facilities. 
In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of flight 
training simulators to increase combat readiness and to provide 
for more economical training.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$12,424,298,000 for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, which is 
$1,224,006,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 
2005 and $450,365,000 more than the request for fiscal year 
2006.



                JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER ADVANCE PROCUREMENT

    The budget request includes $152,400,000 for procurement of 
long lead items to support the low rate initial production of 
five conventional take-off and landing variants of the Joint 
Strike Fighter. The Committee notes that under the revised 
aircraft build sequence all of these aircraft do not require 
full funding prior to the beginning of fiscal year 2008. 
Accordingly, a request to begin advance procurement of long 
lead items two years prior, in fiscal year 2006, is funding 
early to need and contrary to a conventional aircraft 
procurement strategy. Advance procurement funds should be 
requested in the Air Force's fiscal year 2007 budget 
submission. Full funding for these five aircraft should be 
requested in the fiscal year 2008 budget.
    The Committee believes it remains to be seen whether the 
JSF program will be able to keep the aggressive schedule to 
begin production of the 23 developmental test aircraft in the 
next thirty-three months. Previous aircraft production programs 
have all faced significant schedule delays in delivering test 
aircraft, which have in turn consistently forced delays in the 
delivery of early production representative aircraft. In an 
effort to prevent any instability in the system development and 
demonstration (SDD) of the Joint Strike Fighter, the Committee 
has fully funded the joint Air Force and Navy request of 
$4,867,776,000 for the development program. The Committee 
believes that keeping SDD on schedule and on budget will be 
critical to preventing these kinds of production delays and any 
subsequent reductions in aircraft procurement.

        FUTURE YEARS PROCUREMENT STRATEGY FOR THE F/A-22 RAPTOR

    The budget request proposes reducing advance procurement 
for three F/A-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2007 based upon a 
Department of Defense program budget decision to terminate 
procurement in fiscal year 2009. In hearings on the fiscal year 
2006 request, the Committee questioned the basis for this 
decision and received a response that the decision was under 
review and would be evaluated as part of the Quadrennial 
Defense Review (QDR).
    The Committee believes that a fair and objective review of 
the F/A-22 business case is necessary and that consideration 
should be given to options to continue procurement of this 
aircraft after 2009. The Committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to report to the congressional defense committees on 
alternatives for the continued acquisition of the F/A-22. The 
report should consider, but not be limited to, the following; 
an analysis of the costs and benefits of a multiyear 
procurement program, extending the F/A-22 procurement profile, 
and the effects of F/A-22 procurement on the Joint Strike 
Fighter production line.

          F-15 ACTIVE ELECTRONICALLY SCANNED ARRAY PROCUREMENT

    The Committee has provided an additional $72,200,000 to 
begin procurement of APG-63(V)3 radars. Of the funds provided, 
$20,000,000 is to procure low rate factory specialized test 
equipment, fund array verification and procure one APG-63(V)3 
array that can be used for attrition reserve for the Alaska F-
15C/D squadron. The remaining funds, $52,200,000, are to 
procure six systems for Air National Guard F-15s. Funds have 
also been included in Research, Development, Test and 
Evaluation, Air Force for continued development of these radars 
to increase capability. 

                  C-130J MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT PROGRAM

    The C-130J multiyear procurement program of record as 
approved in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005, 
provided advance procurement funding for nine Air Force C-130J 
aircraft in fiscal year 2006. The fiscal year 2006 budget 
request proposes terminating the C-130J multiyear procurement 
program, eliminating all of these aircraft, and instead 
providing funding in Aircraft Procurement, Navy, for an 
additional eight Marine KC-130J aircraft for a total of twelve 
Marine aircraft. The Committee denies this recommendation and 
has provided funding to restore the multiyear procurement 
program of record by transferring funding from Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy, to Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, for the 
procurement of nine Air Force C-130J and four Marine KC-130J 
aircraft in fiscal year 2006.
    The Committee notes that during hearings on the fiscal year 
2006 budget request with the Secretary of Defense, the 
Committee raised significant concerns regarding the 
department's recommendation to terminate the multiyear 
procurement program. In a letter to the Committee dated May 10, 
2005, the Secretary of Defense acknowledged these concerns and 
recommended the continuation of the multiyear procurement 
program.
    The Committee continues to be concerned with the terms of 
the C-130J multiyear procurement contract as identified in the 
Committee report on the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 2005, including terms that reduced future flexibility. 
However, given the capability of these new aircraft, the 
requirement for them as emphasized by the recent grounding of a 
large number of older C-130 aircraft, and the taxpayer savings 
derived from the multiyear procurement commercial nature of 
this contract, the Committee believes there are justifiable 
reasons for continuation of procurement. The Committee expects 
the Air Force and the manufacturer to work together to ensure 
that present and future C-130Js under the multiyear contract 
meet all operational requirements and that manufacturing 
achieves economic order quantities.

                            C-17 PROCUREMENT

    The Committee recognizes the tremendous performance of the 
C-17 and the contributions these aircraft have made in the 
global war on terrorism and other operations. Having flown over 
85,000 airlift missions and having logged over 400,000 flying 
hours in support of the war on terror, Operation Enduring 
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, C-17s have proven 
themselves as one of the most reliable of our airlift assets. 
These aircraft have also been key enablers for non-combat 
operations as well, such as during the tsunami relief effort in 
Southeast Asia when they carried over 2.4 million pounds of 
cargo in 30 days.
    The Committee has fully funded the budget request for 15 C-
17 aircraft in fiscal year 2006 and provided the requested 
advance procurement funding for an additional 7 aircraft in 
fiscal year 2007. These funds are provided to protect the 
option of continuing procurement beyond the current multiyear 
procurement program which ends in fiscal year 2007. However, 
the Committee believes it is premature to provide authorization 
for the Air Force to enter into a follow-on multiyear pending 
the conclusion of the Mobility Capabilities Study and the 
Quadrennial Defense Review. Should these efforts establish a 
requirement for further C-17 aircraft, the Committee would 
support procurement through a multiyear strategy in accordance 
with the requirements identified in section 8008 of this bill, 
and section 2306b of title 10, United States Code.

                              GLOBAL HAWK

    The budget request includes $327,700,000 for procurement of 
five Global Hawk unmanned air vehicles and $70,000,000 for 
advance procurement of six air vehicles in fiscal year 2007. 
The Committee has reduced the request for fiscal year 2006 
aircraft by 2 air vehicles and $110,000,000. Advance 
procurement for fiscal year 2007 is reduced by 1 air vehicle 
and $10,000,000.
    In the Committee's report accompanying the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act, 2005, the Committee expressed 
concern with the Air Force strategy to accelerate the Global 
Hawk development and production programs. The compressed 
schedule created significant cost and schedule risk as the 
program transitioned from the stable design and manufacturing 
of the RQ-4A model to the larger RQ-4B model. The Air Force's 
failure to heed these concerns has since resulted in 
$194,000,000 in development cost overruns, a Nunn-McCurdy 
breach due to cost growth in the average procurement unit cost 
of 18 percent since the last rebaseline in December of 2002, 
and air vehicle delivery delays of up to 12 months.
    The Committee does not dispute the requirement for these 
aircraft or their capability to provide persistent high value 
surveillance. However, the contractor has been unable to meet 
the production levels that the Air Force has requested. The 
Committee believes that reducing the number of air vehicles to 
be procured in fiscal years 2006 and 2007 will give the program 
an opportunity to stabilize both the development and the 
manufacturing programs.

                 A-10 MIDS JOINT TACTICAL RADIO SYSTEM

    The budget request includes $42,800,000 for procurement and 
installation of MIDS JTRS radios on A-10 aircraft. The 
Committee notes that this request was based on a delivery 
schedule that has since experienced a six-month delay in 
initial deliveries. Based upon an estimated 12-18 month lead-
time to produce the MIDS JTRS terminals and corresponding Group 
A kits, the AF requirement now is only $17,920,000. 
Accordingly, the request has been reduced by $24,000,000.

                     AIRBORNE FIRE-FIGHTING SYSTEM

    The Committee notes the drastically decreased availability 
of commercial firefighting aircraft and applauds the Department 
of Defense for its willingness to provide assets to assist 
states in mitigating the impact of wild fires. The Committee is 
concerned, however, that even though Congress has for three 
years provided funding specifically for the development and 
procurement of a replacement for the obsolete Modular Airborne 
Fire Fighting System used by Air National Guard and Air Force 
Reserve units to fight wild fires for more than 30 years, the 
designated replacement system, the Airborne Fire-Fighting 
System (AFFS) has yet to be fielded. As civilian airborne 
assets become increasingly unavailable, expedited AFFS fielding 
for C-130J aircraft has become a critical issue for western 
States and other regions routinely afflicted with massive wild 
fires.
    The Committee understands that final specifications for a 
replacement system still have yet to be determined. In 
addition, specifications originally approved by an Air Force 
Technical Review Board have been substantially changed by the 
Air Force. These factors are causing both a delay in fielding a 
replacement system and a substantial increase in projected per 
unit cost. The Committee directs the Air Force to identify the 
specifications required for the AFFS system within 120 days of 
enactment of this legislation. In identifying these 
specifications, the Air Force shall include development 
representatives from all federal activities normally involved 
with fighting wild fires and from Service agencies normally 
involved in the air worthiness certification process. The 
Committee expects AFFS systems to be fully certified and 
fielded to Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units with 
C-130Js by March 2006 in time to support fire fighting needs 
during the 2006 fire fighting season, and at a per unit cost 
commensurate with the original replacement system cost briefed 
to Congress. 

                         EURO-AFGHAN AIR SAFETY

    Recent aircraft crashes in Afghanistan that claimed over 
100 lives and over 40 other documented incidents that required 
maneuver to avoid collision have raised the Committee's 
concerns about the safety of aircraft operations along the 
Euro-Afghan corridor and in Afghanistan. Aircraft operations 
along this heavily traveled route are conducted in an area of 
mountainous, hostile, and remote terrain along a corridor that 
possesses minimal or no air safety capabilities. While the 
Committee understands that the Air Force is undertaking some 
measures to improve the air safety situation in Afghanistan, 
the Committee believes that the nature of the problem and the 
urgency of the matter justifies a broader comprehensive 
approach. The Committee directs that the Secretary of Defense 
provide the congressional defense committees by January 1, 
2006, a report detailing a plan, timeline and budget providing 
options for improving air safety along the Euro-Afghan 
corridor, as well as in Afghanistan, consistent with 
authorities in existing law.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                     MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $4,458,113,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     5,490,287,000
Committee recommendation..............................     5,062,949,000
Change from budget request............................      -427,338,000


    This appropriation provides for procurement, installation, 
and checkout of strategic ballistic and other missiles, 
modification of in-service missiles, and initial spares for 
missile systems. It also provides for operational space 
systems, boosters, payloads, drones, associated ground 
equipment, non-recurring maintenance of industrial facilities, 
machine tool modernization, and special program support.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,062,949,000 
for Missile Procurement, Air Force, which is $604,836,000 more 
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $427,338,000 
less than the request for fiscal year 2006.



                 JOINT AIR TO SURFACE STANDOFF MISSILE

    The Committee continues to have grave concerns regarding 
the viability of the Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile 
(JASSM). Responding to the Committee's concerns included in the 
House Report accompanying the fiscal year 2005 defense 
appropriations act, the Air Force stated that the Committee's 
findings regarding flight tests were outdated and based on old 
test data. ``The JASSM design is sound and proven in testing'', 
stated the Air Force, while the contractor stated that the 
Committee's views did not ``reflect corrective actions nor 
validations of fixes incorporated during or after those flight 
tests''. Despite these assurances, in the summer of 2004 
another JASSM test failed and testing was ordered to stop.
    When the program returned to test earlier this year, two 
successful verification tests enabled the program to resume 
follow-on operational tests. On April 26th, 2005, two separate 
JASSMs were launched from B-2s. One missile successfully 
achieved its objectives, while the other failed to obtain 
controlled flight and crashed at sea. During the most recent 
test on May 16th, a JASSM was launched from a B-52 at White 
Sands Missile Range. The wings failed to properly deploy and 
the missile crashed before hitting its target. Preliminary 
findings have indicated that binding of the wings on deployment 
may have caused the failure, a potential new production related 
deficiency.
    The statement of the managers accompanying the conference 
report on the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 
stated that failure to increase the reliability of JASSM would 
cause the Committee to reconsider support for the program. The 
Committee has lost the confidence it may have had in JASSM's 
ability to achieve even its minimal reliability and mission 
performance requirements. Accordingly the Committee has 
provided no funding for JASSM missile procurement and instead 
recommends the program be terminated.

               EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE (EELV) 

    The Air Force requested $838,347,000 for the Evolved 
Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). The Committee recommends 
$747,347,000, a reduction of $91,000,000 for the launch vehicle 
associated with the first Space Based Infrared High (SBIRS 
High) geo-synchronous satellite.
    The SBIRS High program is extremely troubled. The total 
estimated cost for the program has increased from $4 billion to 
over $10 billion. The Air Force has experienced three Nunn-
McCurdy breaches in four years and satellite launch dates have 
slipped repeatedly. The Air Force request in fiscal year 2006 
includes $91,000,000 to support a fourth quarter 2008 launch of 
the first SBIRS High satellite. Given the troubled history of 
this program, the Committee believes it is highly likely that 
over the next three and a half years the first SBIRS satellite 
will experience additional slips. A launch delay of just three 
months would defer the requirement to budget for the launch 
vehicle to fiscal year 2007. The Committee believes such a 
delay is highly likely, and has deferred the associated fiscal 
year 2006 funding accordingly.
    The Committee recommendation also includes a Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) recommended rescission of 
$92,000,000 from the launch services associated with the first 
Advanced EHF (AEHF) satellite. These funds are available based 
on the restructured method the Air Force has adopted for the 
EELV contracting.
    Finally, the Committee directs that all future EELV 
contracts be negotiated on an annual basis, eliminating the 
practice of ``block buys'' and ``pre-awards'' of outyear launch 
services. The Committee notes that competition has effectively 
been eliminated in the program, and such ``multiyear''-like 
contracts are no longer in the interest of the taxpayers.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                  PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,327,459,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,031,207,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,031,907,000
Change from budget request............................          +700,000


    This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, 
modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related 
items for the Air Force.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,031,907,000 
for Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force, which is $295,552,000 
less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $700,000 
more than the request for fiscal year 2006.



                           LASER GUIDED BOMB

    The Committee is pleased to note that since the Air Force 
started to procure Laser Guided Bomb (LGB) kits from two 
vendors in fiscal year 2002, the savings to the Treasury have 
been over $300,000,000. Since the second source supplier paid 
the qualification costs for entry, there were no initial costs 
to the government. A second source provides the benefits of 
cost competition and a surge capacity requiring low quantity to 
maintain an economic sustaining rate. The synergies of 
engineering expertise engendered by competition have led to 
recent improvements in the performance of the GBU-10, increased 
LGB accuracies in other configurations and additional cost 
savings. LGB capability is further enhanced by the competitive 
development of a dual mode guided bomb that would provide both 
visual and all-weather guidance for General Purpose Bombs. Dual 
source competition has produced a superior product with 
significant cost savings, better serving both the war fighter 
and the taxpayer.
    The Committee is a strong believer in the benefits provided 
by a competitive sourcing procurement strategy for LGB. 
Therefore, prior to any determination by the Air Force, which 
also procures LGBs for the Navy, to move to a single supplier, 
the Secretary of the Air Force is directed to provide a report 
to the congressional defense committees detailing the benefits 
derived from a single source procurement. The report should 
contain a cost-benefit analysis of how a single source would 
retain the benefits of the current procurement while preventing 
cost growth in the future.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                      OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation.......................    $13,071,297,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request......................     14,002,689,000
Committee recommendation.............................     13,737,214,000
Change from budget request...........................       -265,475,000


    This appropriation provides for the procurement of weapon 
systems and equipment other than aircraft and missiles. 
Included are vehicles, electronic and telecommunications 
systems for command and control of operational forces, and 
ground support equipment for weapon systems and supporting 
structure.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$13,737,214,000 for Other Procurement, Air Force, which is 
$665,917,000 more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 
and $265,475,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006.



                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                       PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $2,956,047,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     2,677,832,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,728,130,000
Change from budget request............................       +50,298,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement, 
production, and modification of equipment, supplies, materials, 
and spare parts.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,728,130,000 
for Procurement, Defense-Wide, which is $227,917,000 less than 
the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2005 and $50,298,000 
more than the request in fiscal year 2006. The following report 
and project level tables provide a summary of the Committee's 
recommendations.



            USSOCOM--EMERGENT CRITICAL COMBAT MISSION NEEDS

    The Committee is aware that the United States Special 
Operations Command (USSOCOM) receives numerous Combat Mission 
Needs Statements from its war fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan 
to provide equipment, which is urgently needed to fulfill 
unforeseen requirements. These requirements are often met by 
below threshold reprogrammings because of their urgency, which 
is inconsistent with the intent of Congress. The Committee has 
provided $43,000,000 in a new program for the Special 
Operations Command to begin to meet these needs and directs the 
Commander of USSOCOM to provide a quarterly report to the 
Congressional defense committees on the use of these funds. The 
Committee also strongly suggests that funds for this program be 
included in future budget requests.

           USSOCOM--MODERNIZATION OF THE HC-130 LEGACY FLEET

    The Committee is aware and concerned about the aircraft 
shortfall in the Air Force Special Operations aerial refueling 
fleet and the Air Force Combat Search and Rescue HC-130 fleet. 
This shortfall is exacerbated by the recent groundings and 
operational restrictions placed on the fleet as a result of 
center wing box cracks found in the oldest models of HC-130s. 
The Committee directs the Air Force to investigate whether 
spending additional funds for repair of legacy C-130s would be 
better spent modernizing variants of the C-130J, and to report 
its findings to the Committee not later than six months after 
enactment of the fiscal year 2006 Defense Appropriations Act.

                              BUY AMERICA

    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to instruct 
the relevant offices within the Department of Defense to take 
note of subsection 2553a, of Title 10, United States Code, 
referred to as the ``Berry amendment,'' giving protection to 
certain domestic products. It is not only vital, but required, 
that Defense FAR Supplement clauses relating to the ``Berry 
Amendment'' are incorporated by reference in all solicitation 
contracts by checking the clause in the appropriate box where 
they are applicable so as to insure that department 
procurements are consistent with the requirements of this 
provision. Compliance with the ``Berry amendment'' is vital to 
support the U.S. industrial base for these products, which help 
to preserve U.S. national security.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                  NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $350,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................  ................
Committee recommendation..............................  ................
Change from the budget request........................  ................


    The Committee has provided funds for National Guard and 
Reserve forces consistent with the budget request and has 
earmarked funds within the procurement accounts as requested. 
The Committee has also added funding for Guard and Reserve 
equipment in several of the procurement accounts as described 
elsewhere in this report. Therefore, the Committee considers 
the earmarks included in the bill designating dollar amounts 
for the Guard and Reserve components a floor rather than a 
ceiling. In addition, the Committee has also added $200,370,000 
for Army Reserve equipment in title IX of this bill. Since 
Guard and Reserve forces are so integral to our efforts in Iraq 
and Afghanistan, the Committee expects the Department to 
provide deploying and deployed Guard and Reserve units with the 
same quality and quantity of equipment as they provide to the 
active duty components.

                    DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................       $42,765,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................        19,573,000
Committee recommendation..............................        28,573,000
Change from budget request............................        +9,000,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,573,000 
for Defense Production Act Purchases, which is $14,192,000 less 
than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and $9,000,000 
more than the request for fiscal year 2006.
    The Committee recommendation shall be distributed as 
follows:

        Project                                                   Amount
High performance coatings production initiative.........      $3,868,000
High performance batteries and fuel cells production 
    initiative..........................................       5,800,000
Next generation radiation hardened microprocessors......       2,905,000
Beryllium supply industrial base........................       6,000,000
Amplifying fluorescent polymer based IED detection 
    devices.............................................       2,000,000
Flexible aerogel material supplier initiative...........       2,000,000
ALON and spinel optical ceramics........................       3,000,000
Thermal battery industrial base infrastructure..........       3,000,000
                                TITLE IV

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

                  ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

    The fiscal year 2006 Department of Defense research, 
development, test and evaluation budget request totals 
$69,356,040,000. The accompanying bill recommends 
$71,656,892,000. The total amount recommended is an increase of 
$2,300,852,000 above the fiscal year 2006 budget estimate and 
is $1,724,710,000 above the total provided in fiscal year 2005. 
The table below summarizes the budget estimate and the 
Committee's recommendations.



                    SPECIAL TERMINATION COST CLAUSE

    The Committee reaffirms the existing policy (as previously 
stated in House Report No. 106-244) of providing the 
congressional defense committees notification 30 days prior to 
contractual implementation of a special termination cost clause 
(STCC). Further, the Committee notes that the need to budget 
for termination liability for each contract is a fundamental 
financial management principle and therefore discourages, as a 
general principle, the use of special termination cost clauses 
or any variations of the special termination cost clause such 
as including areas not covered by STCC and the potential use of 
funds that are obligated on other contracts and in other 
Program Elements to cover termination liability.

                   VISUAL INFORMATION DISPLAY SYSTEM

    The Committee understands that the Air Force and the Navy 
are developing new systems for controlling and monitoring 
navigational and visual aids for implementation at their 
airfield towers. The Committee further understands that the FAA 
has implemented the Integrated Control and Monitor System 
(ICMS) at several airports nationally. ICMS controls, monitors 
and displays the operational/ready status of many precision 
landing and visual aids. It also provides for the interlocking 
of ILSs, a NAS safety requirement, and archives data/
information essential in providing historical information 
regarding the integrity of the operational status of NAVAIDS 
and VISAIDS. The Committee directs the Navy and Air Force to 
work together and leverage, as much as possible, the ICMS as 
the solution for controlling and monitoring of navigational and 
visual aids for our military airfields' towers.

                     PROBLEMS IN DOD SPACE PROGRAMS

    The Committee appreciates the Administration's emphasis on 
space programs and firmly believes that these programs provide 
critical capabilities in support of the nation's security. 
However, in recent years the acquisition of these capabilities 
has become increasingly problematic with recurring rounds of 
significant cost growth and schedule delay. The Committee is 
deeply concerned about the negative trends in space acquisition 
which, if left unchecked, could reduce the nation's strategic 
advantages in this area. The Committee notes that these 
problems are occurring despite heavy investment of taxpayer 
dollars.
    In 2002, DoD leadership saw unsettling trends in the 
management of these programs and commissioned a Defense Science 
Board (DSB) task force to conduct an independent review. In 
2003, the task force reported numerous systemic problems, 
including a strong bias towards unrealistic cost estimates, an 
undisciplined process for requirements definition, and a 
serious erosion in government management and engineering 
expertise. Since publication of the DSB report, the programs 
have collectively gotten worse, with virtually every major 
space acquisition program under the cloud of a Nunn-McCurdy 
cost breach. One notable example, the Space Based Infrared High 
(SBIRS HIGH) satellite, has experienced three Nunn-McCurdy 
breaches in just four years. SBIRS High costs have grown from 
$4 billion to over $10 billion.
    Rather than slowing down to take stock of the problems, DoD 
has instead embarked on a path that requires a significant 
ramp-up in space expenditures over the future year defense 
plan. Thus, the same space acquisition professionals (both in 
the government and in industry) that are struggling to execute 
the current level of investment will soon face greater 
challenges managing the additional programmatic content and 
complexity that comes with the budget ramp-up. Unless DoD takes 
significant corrective action, the Committee is very concerned 
that the space acquisition workforce may not meet these 
challenges effectively. In fact, the Committee is concerned 
whether DoD is in a position to make appropriate choices 
regarding which programs to pursue given the systemic 
deficiencies that reduce the availability of good data (cost, 
technical maturity, acquisition approach, schedule) to senior 
leadership.
    Given these concerns, the Committee has worked closely with 
the House Armed Services Committee to develop a package of 
recommendations responsive to the problems we currently face in 
the space community. In particular, the Committee has funded 
the Space Radar and the Transformational Satellite Programs at 
the levels authorized by the House. Further, the Committee has 
also included additional funds, as authorized, for the Office 
of Force Transformation to promote development of low cost, 
quick to launch satellites that have the potential of 
responding to warfighter needs in months rather than decades. 
The Committee also fully supports the space acquisition reform 
measures authorized by the House. The Committee expects DoD to 
take the problems in space acquisition seriously and implement 
appropriate management reforms expeditiously.

                      JOINT TACTICAL RADIO SYSTEM

    The Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) program is 
developing a software-defined radio designed to interoperate 
with existing radios and significantly increase communications 
capabilities. A Joint Program Executive Office is responsible 
for developing the JTRS architecture and waveforms, while 
service-led program offices are working on development, and 
eventual procurement of radio hardware for platforms with 
similar requirements. Estimates from the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) indicate that the total cost of 
JTRS Clusters 1 and 5 (ground vehicle and helicopter mounted 
radios, and man-portable radios, respectively) may exceed 
$24,000,000,000. The Committee supports the concepts behind 
JTRS and has generally supported full funding of the program. 
However, events of the past several months indicate that the 
program is experiencing serious difficulties in several 
respects which the Committee understands will result in a 
significant restructuring of the program.
    In January 2005, the Undersecretary of Defense 
(Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) placed a stop work 
order on the JTRS program which the Committee understands will 
not be lifted until the Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meeting 
scheduled for August 2005. The Office of the Secretary of 
Defense (OSD) also directed that the schedule for JTRS 
development be extended by 22-24 months. On April 25, 2005, OSD 
issued a Show Cause Notice for JTRS Cluster 1. The fundamental 
program concerns include: hardware design immaturity; hardware 
components that do not meet specifications and will require 
major redesign; inability to meet size, weight, and power 
(SWaP) requirements; inability to manage waveform simultaneity; 
software immaturity; no ability to estimate overall costs and 
schedule; and no ability to estimate integration and its effect 
on cost and schedule. As a result of these developments, the 
Committee recommends a reduction totaling $340,100,000 which 
includes reductions for procurement of radios as well as 
hardware development, both of which will be significantly 
altered due to the impending changes to the program. 
$82,100,000 of this amount is taken in the form of rescissions 
of fiscal year 2005 funding since this amount has been withheld 
from the program. Despite these reductions, the Committee has 
fully funded amounts requested for fiscal year 2006 to continue 
waveform development, and has allowed for modest growth in 
research and development funding to continue hardware 
development. The table below summarizes the reductions included 
in the Committee's recommendation:
Fiscal Year 2006 Reductions:                               ($ thousands)
    Aircraft Procurement, Army................................   -12,300
    Procurement, Marine Corps.................................    -7,000
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force...........................   -24,100
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army..........   -69,500
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy 
      (including Marine Corps programs).......................   -54,100
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force.....   -94,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

            Total.............................................  -258,000
Rescissions:
    Other Procurement, Army FY 05/06..........................   -60,500
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army FY 05/06.   -21,600
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

            Total.............................................   -82,100
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

Grant Total...................................................  -340,100

    In addition, the Committee directs that the Secretary of 
Defense provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees not later than September 30, 2005, on the status of 
JTRS which shall include the following elements: mitigation 
plans of the Military Services to compensate for the 
restructuring of the JTRS program including a detailed 
description of the legacy or other radios required, as well as 
detailed estimates of the cost of these plans; an assessment of 
changes to the JTRS Waiver process which has limited 
procurement of legacy radios; an explanation of Army plans to 
meet Future Combat System requirements associated with all 
developmental spirals as a result of the JTRS program revisions 
to include a detailed description of the compatibility between 
legacy radios and the Army's Warfighter Information Network-
Tactical (WIN-T) as well as the compatibility between JTRS and 
WIN-T; and a summary of DoD acquisition decisions including the 
results of the scheduled JTRS status meeting scheduled for May 
2005 and the results of the JTRS rebaselining DAB scheduled for 
the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2005. In addition, the Committee 
directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to continue 
its ongoing review of the JTRS program to include a review of 
technical, management, cost and schedule issues associated with 
the program.

                          JOINT COMMON MISSILE

    The Joint Common Missile (JCM) program involves the Army 
(lead), Navy and Marine Corps and an associated Cooperative 
Development Program with the United Kingdom. The Committee 
notes that the program is succeeding in meeting its 
developmental milestones and was the first system to 
successfully clear the requirements determination process 
implemented in the Joint Capabilities Integration and 
Development System (JCIDS). This process prioritizes 
requirements from a joint perspective and incorporates revised 
DoD 5000 series acquisition policies early in the process. 
Given the thorough review to which JCM has been subjected, it 
strikes the Committee as counterintuitive that DoD chose to 
recommend terminating this program in the fiscal year 2006 
budget request. Given the relative success of the program thus 
far, and the fact that the partners to this program will 
require an eventual replacement for the Hellfire missile, the 
Committee recommends $50,000,000 for this program to continue 
its development. Of this amount, $45,000,000 is provided in 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, and 
$5,000,000 is available for Research, Development, Test and 
Evaluation, Navy, as described elsewhere in this report.

                         SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

    Items for which additional funds have been provided as 
shown in the project level tables or in paragraphs using the 
phrase ``only for'' or ``only to'' in this report are 
congressional interest items for the purpose of the Base for 
Reprogramming (DD 1414). Each of these items must be carried on 
the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, specifically addressed 
in the conference report. These items remain special interest 
items whether or not they are repeated in a subsequent 
conference report.

            REPROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR ACQUISITION ACCOUNTS

    The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue 
to follow the reprogramming guidance specified in the report 
accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2005 
Department of Defense Appropriations bill (House Report No. 
108-553). Specifically, the dollar threshold for reprogramming 
will remain at $20,000,000 for procurement, and $10,000,000 for 
research, development, test and evaluation. The Department 
shall continue to follow the limitation that prior approval 
reprogrammings are set at either the specified dollar threshold 
or 20% of the procurement or research, development, test and 
evaluation line, whichever is less. These thresholds are 
cumulative. Therefore, if the combined value of transfers into 
or out of a procurement (P-1) line or research, development, 
test and evaluation (R-1) line exceed the identified threshold, 
the Department of Defense must submit a prior approval 
reprogramming to the congressional defense committees. In 
addition, guidelines on the application of prior approval 
reprogramming procedures for congressional special interest 
items are established elsewhere in this report.

        REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR BELOW THRESHOLD REPROGRAMMINGS

    The Committee is concerned about what it considers to be 
the potential abuse of below threshold reprogramming authority 
granted to the Department of Defense, as discussed elsewhere in 
the report. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), to provide a quarterly 
report to the congressional defense committees on all below 
threshold reprogrammings from or to accounts in this title. The 
report should be submitted not later than 30 days after the end 
of the previous fiscal quarter and include the reprogramming 
source, the account to which the funds have been transferred, 
the reason for which funds are available for reprogramming, and 
the requirement for the funds to be reprogrammed.

            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $10,698,989,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     9,733,824,000
Committee recommendation..............................    10,827,174,000
Change from budget request............................    +1,093,350,000


    This appropriation finances the research, development, test 
and evaluation activities of the Department of the Army.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$10,827,174,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Army, which is $128,185,000 more than the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2005 and $1,093,350,000 more than the request for 
fiscal year 2006.



                       FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEM (FCS)

    The Committee notes that within the past year the Army has 
initiated two major revisions to the FCS program. First, in 
July 2004 the Army restructured the program and introduced 
developmental spirals with the objective of fielding mature 
elements of FCS more quickly. Second, the Army is in the 
process of changing the current FCS contract from Other 
Transaction Authority (OTA) to a Federal Acquisition Regulation 
(FAR) based contract. The Committee understands that this 
revision will be in place by the end of fiscal year 2005, and 
will be utilized for the remainder of System Development and 
Design (SDD) for FCS. In addition to these changes, the Army 
describes fiscal year 2006 as a critical year during which 
there is a planned broad industry ramp-up in both the FCS 
network and platforms. This should include extensive software 
and hardware deliveries as well as the first major FCS field 
experiment: Experiment 1.1, JEFX06.
    Despite the revisions to the program, and the Army's 
optimistic assessment of progress for the coming fiscal year, 
the Committee harbors serious concerns about the FCS program. 
The Committee notes that for the foreseeable future FCS will 
equip only a small portion of the Army. Yet it is the most 
expensive and complicated modernization program ever undertaken 
by the Army. At the same time, the Army has initiated its 
modular force initiative (Modularity), and will have to reset 
much of the equipment presently deployed in support of the 
global war on terrorism. The Committee has deep concerns about 
whether there will be sufficient funding available in the 
coming years for the Army to afford these efforts. In addition, 
despite the claimed acceleration of FCS due to the 
incorporation of spiral development, the Committee notes that 
the schedule to field all of the elements of FCS required for a 
complete Unit of Action was extended to 2014 in the 
restructuring described above. Accordingly, the Committee 
recommends a reduction of $449,000,000 from the Armored Systems 
Modernization program element. The Committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to report to the congressional defense 
committees within 30 days of enactment of this Act on its plan 
to distribute this reduction to the projects within the Armored 
Systems Modernization program element as outlined below. In 
addition, the Committee directs the Army to provide a report to 
the congressional defense committees not later than December 1, 
2005, which provides a detailed list and description of the 
systems and technologies to be included in each of the FCS 
developmental spirals.
    The statement of the managers accompanying the conference 
report on the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 
(House Report No. 108-622) established a structure for budget 
preparation and execution for FCS which included broadly 
defined projects within the Armored Systems Modernization 
program element. In addition, the conferees directed the Army 
to establish separate program elements for the Non Line of 
Sight Launch System (NLOS-LS) and the Non Line of Sight Cannon 
(NLOS-C). The Committee believes that this remains a reasonable 
structure and directs the Army to continue to use this as the 
basis for executing appropriations provided by the Congress, 
and as the basis for preparing the fiscal year 2007 and 
subsequent budget submissions. This funding structure includes 
the following components:
    Program Element 0604645A Armored Systems Modernization to 
include the following projects:
          F52-FCS Reconnaissance Platforms & Sensors
          F53-FCS Unmanned Ground Vehicles
          F54-Unattended Sensors
          F55-Sustainment
          F57-Manned Ground Vehicles
          F61-System of Systems Engineering and Program 
        Management
    Program Element 0604646A  Non Line of Sight Launch System 
(NLOS-LS) 
    Program Element 0604647A  Non Line of Sight Cannon (NLOS-C)
    In addition, the projects identified within program element 
0604645A, Armored Systems Modernization, are congressional 
special interest items for the purpose of prior approval 
reprogrammings as discussed elsewhere in this report. The NLOS-
LS and NLOS-C program elements are subject to normal prior 
approval reprogramming procedures as described elsewhere in 
this report.

                   NON LINE OF SIGHT CANNON (NLOS-C)

    The Committee is increasingly concerned by the Army's 
apparent lack of progress in complying with the provisions of 
section 8109 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 
2005 (Public Law 108-287). This section requires the Army to 
field 8 operational pre-production NLOS-C vehicles by the end 
of calendar year 2008. A variation of this language has been 
included in each of the past three Department of Defense 
Appropriations Acts. The Committee understands that the Army 
has failed to adequately program and budget sufficient funding 
to meet the requirements of this provision. Informal Army 
estimates suggest that $77,000,000 is needed over the next 
three years, above the currently programmed levels, to produce 
the required number of vehicles. Accordingly, the Committee 
recommends an increase of $50,000,000 above the budget request 
to initiate the purchase of a sufficient number of NLOS-C 
chassis. In addition, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
the Army to provide a report to the House Committee on 
Appropriations prior to conference on the DoD Appropriations 
Act, 2006, providing detailed cost estimates and a detailed 
program plan to comply with the requirements of section 8109.

       EXCALIBUR, XM982 155MM EXTENDED RANGE ARTILLERY PROJECTILE

    The Committee is aware that U.S. commanders in Iraq have 
submitted an Urgent Need Statement calling for an artillery-
fired guided projectile that can respond to enemy mortar and 
rocket fire while minimizing collateral damage. U.S. forces are 
under increasing attack from insurgents employing highly mobile 
weapons that do not require great accuracy to do harm. 
Commanders require a lethal and accurate artillery-fired 
munition that can address this threat efficiently without 
causing civilian casualties, particularly in an urban 
environment. Based on the current demonstrated capability of 
the Excalibur XM982, the Committee recommends that this 
capability be fielded according to the Advance Early Fielding 
schedule which calls for fielding in the second quarter of 
fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $17,043,812,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    18,037,991,000
Committee recommendation..............................    18,481,862,000
Change from budget request............................      +443,871,000


    The appropriation provides funds for the research 
development, test and evaluation activities of the Department 
of the Navy, which includes the Marine Corps.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$18,481,862,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Navy, which is $1,438,050,000 more than the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2005 and $443,871,000 more than the request for 
fiscal year 2006. The following report and project level tables 
provide a summary of the Committee's recommendation.



                                 DD(X)

    The Committee recommends $670,000,000 for further 
development of the next generation DD(X) destroyer. As 
discussed under ``Shipbuilding and conversion, Navy'', this 
program has experienced numerous difficulties over the past 
year, and the total requirement for these vessels is still 
uncertain. Despite these issues, however, the Committee 
believes there is value in keeping the DD(X) development effort 
moving forward. In addition, many of these technologies are 
expected to have utility for the next generation CG(X) cruiser, 
currently funded for lead ship procurement in fiscal year 2011 
and discussed further below. Considered together, the bill 
includes $750,000,000 for development of the DD(X) and CG(X).

                                 CG(X)

    The Committee recommendation accelerates concept design, 
concept studies, and other development work for the CG(X) next 
generation cruiser. Given the age of the current CG-47 
Ticonderoga class and the potential use of CG(X) to fulfill 
ballistic missile defense and other missions, the Committee 
believes it is imperative to accelerate this work. The 
Committee bill raises this funding from $30,000,000 to 
$80,000,000.

                          LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP

    The Committee recommends $576,454,000 for Littoral Combat 
Ship (LCS), the same as the budget request. Funding includes 
$249,236,000 for construction of one flight zero LCS ship, 
$209,908,000 for mission modules, and $117,310,000 for other 
program costs. Additional funding of $440,000,000, for 
procurement of two ships, is discussed under ``Shipbuilding and 
Conversion, Navy''.

    MAST-MOUNTED IN-PORT VIDEO FORCE PROTECTION SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM

    The bill includes $5,000,000 for SBIR phase III development 
of a mast-mounted, video-based system capable of detecting 
terrorist threats to naval vessels in ports and harbors.

                         MARITIME BATTLE CENTER

    The Committee recommendation allows $24,000,000 for 
Maritime Battle Center, an increase of $9,622,000 over the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $8,519,000 below the budget 
estimate. The reduction is due to budget constraints and lack 
of justification.

                                EA-18(G)

     The Committee recommends $400,000,000 for further 
development of the EA-18(G) aircraft, a reduction of $9,097,000 
from the budget estimate. The Committee continues to strongly 
support this program. However, some non-contract support costs 
appear to be overstated and excess to fiscal year 2006 needs.

                          BONE MARROW REGISTRY

    The Committee provides $35,000,000, to be administered by 
the C. W. Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research 
Program, also known and referred to, within the Naval Medical 
Research Center, as the Bone Marrow Registry. This DoD donor 
center has recruited more than 358,000 DoD volunteers, and 
provides more marrow donors per week than any other donor 
center in the Nation. Over 1,800 service members and other DoD 
volunteers from this donor center have provided marrow to save 
the lives of patients. The Committee is aware of the continuing 
success of this national and international life saving program 
for military contingencies and civilian patients, which now 
includes over 5,600,000 potential volunteer donors, and 
encourages agencies involved in contingency planning to 
continue to include the C. W. Bill Young Marrow Donor 
Recruitment and Research Program in the development and testing 
of their contingency plans. DD Form 1414 shall show this as a 
special congressional interest item, and the Committee directs 
that all of the funds appropriated for this purpose be released 
to the C. W. Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research 
Program within 60 days of enactment of the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act, 2006.

                   MULTINATIONAL INFORMATION SHARING

    The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for Multinational 
Information Sharing (MNIS), a reduction of $11,557,000 from the 
budget estimate. MNIS is a DoD joint program designed to 
provide an enterprise network standard for the exchange of 
classified information with foreign nations. The Navy may be 
designated the executive agent for this program. The 
recommendation defers a portion of funding for this new start 
due to lack of justification and the uncertain organization and 
schedule for the development effort.

                       TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $41,555,000 for Target Systems 
Development, a reduction of $11,408,000 from the budget 
estimate. The recommendation includes $1,000,000 for 
development of the Air Coyote Supersonic Sea-Skimming Target, 
and $11,000,000 for the QF-4 Full-Scale Aerial Target. The 
recommendation finances the procurement of 3 QF-4 targets, 
which is the same level as in fiscal year 2005, and more 
consistent with outyear procurement plans.

                      MOBILE USER OBJECTIVE SYSTEM

    The Navy requested $470,000,000 for the Mobile User 
Objective System (MUOS) within the Satellite Communications 
budget line-item. The Committee recommends $370,000,000, a 
reduction of $100,000,000. The Committee notes that the MUOS 
development contract was awarded at the end of fiscal year 
2004. In fiscal year 2005, contract manning is expected to 
steadily ramp-up before leveling out next year. Though, on 
average, fiscal year 2006 will have significantly more 
personnel on the contract than in the prior year, the funding 
available to the contract in fiscal year 2006 is not comparably 
higher. Consequently, the Committee believes significant 
funding in fiscal year 2005 will carry forward into the 
following year and will be available to cover fiscal year 2006 
requirements. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation 
includes a reduction of $100,000,000 to account for this prior 
year carryforward.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



         RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $20,890,922,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    22,612,351,000
Committee recommendation..............................    22,664,868,000
Change from budget request............................       +52,517,000


    This appropriation finances the research, development, test 
and evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$22,664,868,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Air Force, which is $1,773,946,000 more than the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2005 and $52,517,000 more than the 
request for fiscal year 2006.



                  OPTICAL MAXIMUM ENTROPY VERIFICATION

    The Committee supports the Optical Maximum Entropy 
Verification (OMEV) authentication verification technology, 
begun as an Air Force prototype demonstration program. OMEV has 
the potential to satisfy several critical military, government 
and commercial security requirements on a global scale. The 
Committee therefore recommends an additional $5,000,000 in the 
Aerospace Sensors budget line-item only to develop integrated 
systems designs and prototype hardware for a fully integrated 
secure laboratory facility demonstration for near term fielding 
of OMEV. The Committee further encourages the Army and Navy to 
consider participation in this program.

               TRANSFORMATIONAL SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

    The Air Force requested $835,769,000 for the 
Transformational Satellite Communications program (TSAT). The 
Committee recommends $435,769,000, a decrease of $400,000,000 
consistent with the amount authorized by the House. The 
Committee agrees with the House Armed Services Committee on the 
risks associated with the TSAT program, especially given the 
concerns about the current capabilities of the space 
acquisition community. The Committee further supports an 
independent review and analysis that includes alternatives that 
would defer TSAT in favor of evolving the Advanced Extremely 
High Frequency (AEHF) and the Wideband Gapfiller (WGF) 
satellite programs.

                              SPACE RADAR

    The Air Force requested $225,839,000 for the Space Radar 
program (otherwise known in the budget as Space Based Radar). 
The Committee recommends $100,000,000, a reduction of 
$125,839,000 consistent with recommendations made by the House 
Armed Services Committee and approved by the House.
    The Committee recommendation includes funds only for the 
purposes authorized by the House, including: 1) development of 
ground exploitation capabilities; 2) horizontal integration; 3) 
radar technology maturation; and especially, 4) new technology 
breakthroughs that will lower program cost. The Committee 
directs that 30 days prior to obligation of fiscal year 2006 
funds, the Air Force provide the congressional defense 
committees with a spend plan for the funds consistent with the 
activities described above.

                          SMALL DIAMETER BOMB

    The budget request includes $46,000,000 to begin 
development of Increment II of the Small Diameter Bomb attack 
mode for mobile targets in weather. The Air Force recently 
announced that it would comply with the Government 
Accountability Office recommendation to compete Increment II. 
This decision was made subsequent to the budget submission and 
will likely effect program schedule as a result. The Committee 
recommends providing $26,000,000 of the funds requested for 
Increment II contract award due to this program delay.

                       PERSONNEL RECOVERY VEHICLE

    The budget request includes $113,825,000 to begin 
development of the Air Force replacement for the HH-60 combat 
search and rescue vehicle. A Request for Proposal is scheduled 
to be released in June 2005, with a contract award in February 
2006. The Committee believes that eight months from RFP to 
contract award on a program of this magnitude is unrealistic 
given the amount of interest in this competition. The Committee 
has provided $71,825,000 to realign the program with a more 
realistic schedule and contract award date.

           NEXT GENERATION BOMBER TIER I SUPPLIER SUSTAINMENT

    The Committee directs that of the amount appropriated in PE 
060401F for Next Generation Bomber, not less than $3,500,000 
shall be applied to develop and test major structural 
assemblies directly applicable to technical challenges inherent 
in the Next Generation Bomber. This effort shall be performed 
by a Tier I supplier with the innate ability to translate 
system technical challenges into structural concepts and then 
design, build, and test the resulting structural components. 
The results will be provided uniformly to all major prime 
system integrators.

                   LASER SPARK COUNTERMEASURE PROGRAM

    The Committee has provided an additional $6,000,000 in 
Advanced Weapons Technology only for Laser Spark development, 
integration, design and test with existing IRCM based subsystem 
elements such as tracker hardware.

               ADVANCED SATELLITE THERMAL CONTROL PROGRAM

    The Committee has provided an increase of $2,000,000 in 
Aerospace Propulsion and Power only for the development of 
Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition techniques for 
thermal control satellite coatings for the Advanced Satellite 
Thermal Control Program, to enable advancement of mission ready 
thermal control satellite coatings.

                NATIONAL AEROSPACE LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE

    As charged by Congress, the National Aerospace Leadership 
Initiative (NALI) has been initiated under the direction of the 
Secretary of the Air Force. This initiative is designed to 
counter the pervasive and growing global challenge to United 
States aerospace leadership and the potential adverse effects 
on our national defense. A primary focus of NALI is to develop 
programs that will enhance the U.S. aerospace manufacturing 
supply chain and attract qualified scientists and engineers 
into the aerospace field. The Committee appreciates the Air 
Force's response to this initiative and strongly encourages the 
service to continue to work with the Committee and the 
participating public and private sector entities to further the 
goals of this program. As such, the Committee recommends an 
additional $25,000,000 under this heading for NALI.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



        RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................   $20,983,624,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................    18,803,416,000
Committee recommendation..............................    19,514,530,000
Change from budget request............................      +711,114,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the research, 
development, test and evaluation activities of the Department 
of the Defense for defense-wide activities.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$19,514,530,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Defense-Wide, which is $1,469,094,000 less than the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2005 and $711,114,000 more than the 
request for fiscal year 2006. The following report and project 
level tables provide a summary of the Committee's 
recommendation.



          MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY--PROGRAM ELEMENT RESTRUCTURE

    The Committee recommends $7,631,531,000 for the Missile 
Defense Agency, which is a $1,151,873,000 decrease from fiscal 
year 2005 and $143,712,000 below the President's request. The 
Committee commends the Missile Defense Agency on achieving an 
initial defensive capability (IDC) by December 2004 in response 
to the Presidential Directive issued in 2002. In order for MDA 
to achieve this goal, considerable financial flexibility was 
granted by Congress to allow the agency to respond rapidly to 
achieve IDC. Now that a working system operated by trained 
warfighters has been fielded, the Committee wishes to enhance 
financial oversight as the missile defense effort continues to 
move forward. The Administration's budget request distributed 
funding in only twelve program elements many of which total 
greater than $400,000,000 in a single line. This level of 
funding in an individual program element obscures funding 
details and creates significant oversight issues. Accordingly, 
the Committee has included in it's recommendation a restructure 
of the Missile Defense Agency program elements to allow for 
greater visibility and oversight of the programs. The Committee 
directs the Missile Defense Agency to follow the recommended 
budgetary program element construction in the future.

             MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY--TERMINATION LIABILITY

    The Missile Defense Agency budget assumes approval of a new 
type of Special Termination Cost Clause, which waives the 
requirement to budget for termination liability on a contract-
by-contract basis. The Special Termination Cost Clause (STCC) 
approach as recognized by the Department of Defense and the 
Congress allows for a contract clause that identifies certain 
contingent termination costs and allows those costs to be 
covered with available funds not on the contract. MDA proposes 
a variation of the STCC, with two modifications: all contingent 
termination costs are eligible (vice just the five categories 
in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations) and if funds 
are not available on contract to cover termination(s), 
termination costs are sourced from all available Ballistic 
Missile Defense System funds, including funds obligated on 
contracts but not earned (vice just unobligated funding). The 
Committee notes that the Missile Defense Agency has not yet 
submitted an STCC-like notification letter to the Congress nor 
has MDA provided justification for the change.
    Therefore, the Committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense (Comptroller) to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees no later than 60 days after the enactment of 
this Act on the degree to which MDA is complying with the DFAR 
and FAR with respect to termination liability and the reasons 
why MDA would be exempt from complying with current 
regulations.

                         DUAL BOOSTER STRATEGY

    The Committee is concerned that the Missile Defense Agency 
is planning to discontinue using a dual booster strategy for 
the Ground-based Midcourse Defense program. The Committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees within 60 days after the 
enactment of this Act regarding the implications of going to a 
single booster and its potential impact on the United States 
industrial base.

             SPACE SURVEILLANCE AND TRACKING SYSTEM (SSTS)

    The Missile Defense Agency requested $235,536,000 for the 
Space Surveillance and Tracking System. The Committee 
recommends $231,358,000, a decrease of $4,178,000 including a 
reduction of $3,640,000 for program support and $538,000 for 
the SSTS Block 12 program. The Committee anticipates that the 
Block 12 program will require significant investment. To gain a 
better understanding of the associated life cycle costs, the 
Committee expects the OSD Cost Analysis Improvement Group (OSD 
CAIG) to complete an independent cost estimate for the SSTS 
Block 12 program for delivery to the congressional defense 
committees no later than February 1, 2006.

                BOOST AND ASCENT PHASE ENGAGEMENT STUDY

    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
joint study with the Government Accountability Office to review 
the early engagement of ballistic missiles to include boost and 
ascent phase intercepts. The report should be submitted to the 
congressional defense committees no later than 90 days after 
the enactment of this Act. Specifically, the report should 
include but not be limited to the following elements in its 
comparison:
    (1) An assessment of the operational capabilities of 
systems against ballistic missiles launched from North Korea or 
a location in the Middle East against the continental United 
States, Alaska, or Hawaii;
    (2) An assessment of the quantity of operational assets 
required for deployment periods of seven days, thirty days, 
ninety days and one year;
    (3) Basing options; and
    (4) An assessment of life-cycle costs to include research 
and development efforts, procurement, deployment, operating and 
infrastructure costs.

                       ASYMMETRIC MISSILE THREAT

    The Committee has become increasingly concerned about the 
possibility of an asymmetric missile threat against the United 
States homeland. In particular, the Committee believes that a 
sea-based missile threat now has a low probability of 
detection, despite the fact that such a threat could place 
important U.S. economic assets, population, and property at 
risk. As such, the Committee recommends an additional 
$20,000,000 for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to initiate a 
comprehensive analysis of the need for and deployment of an 
asymmetric missile defense capability. This analysis should 
consider deployment options that would protect significant 
population centers, use mature technologies, and include 
progressions for spiral technology upgrades that would enhance 
missile defense capabilities over time. The Committee expects 
the MDA to periodically inform the Committee of its progress on 
this matter.

                      VENTURE AND INITIATIVE FUNDS

    While the Committee believes the Department needs some 
flexibility to address emergent issues, the Committee is 
troubled by the proliferation of initiative and venture funds 
that have developed within the Department of Defense. The 
Committee has identified multiple programs in various 
appropriations that request funds but do not have specific 
programmatic justification and in some cases, the programs seem 
duplicative. The Committee is also concerned about the apparent 
lack of oversight across the various funds. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs the Department to review all appropriations 
for such programs for duplication and oversight and report the 
findings to the congressional defense committees no later than 
60 days after the enactment of this Act.
    Additionally, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to provide quarterly reports beginning the first fiscal 
quarter after the enactment of this Act to the congressional 
defense committee detailing the specific programs that are 
funded from the Quick Reaction Special Projects, the Counter 
Terrorism Technology Support Program and the Combating 
Terrorism Technology Task Force Fund to include project 
descriptions with funding levels, potential transition plans to 
the services for further development and lessons learned from 
completed projects. The Committee further recommends that the 
Secretary of Defense provide the reports to the Director of 
National Intelligence and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

                CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

    The Committee commends the Department on the continued 
execution of the ``Chem-Bio Defense Initiatives Fund'' and 
recommends continuing the program within the Department's 
Chemical and Biological Defense Program. The Committee's 
recommendation provides an increase of $25,000,000 for this 
fund. The Secretary of Defense is directed to allocate these 
funds among the programs that yield the greatest gain in our 
chem-bio defensive posture. The Committee further directs that 
funds not be obligated for the Chem-Bio Initiative Fund until 
15 days after a report, including a description of projects to 
be funded, is provided to the congressional defense committees.

                  ANTI-TERRORISM PROTECTION STANDARDS

    The Committee directs the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense, in cooperation with the military services, to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by December 30, 
2005, which identifies the costs for implementing the DoD 
Minimum Anti-terrorism Standards (UFC 4-010-01) and compares 
DoD and GSA anti-terrorism standards for buildings. The report 
should explain differences in criteria used by the two agencies 
and propose alternatives for reconciling any conflicts between 
the standards to ensure that managers have one set of rules for 
meeting federal government anti-terrorism criteria. Finally, 
the report should identify DoD advanced anti-terrorism 
technology capabilities that can be incorporated into UFC 4-
010-01, particularly anti-blast technologies.

              ROLL-ON ROLL-OFF INFECTION CONTROL FACILITY

    The Committee is aware of the role the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention (CDC) play in the Nation's efforts to 
protect the homeland. As the lead federal organization for 
safeguarding the health of the public, CDC is often called upon 
to investigate and contain disease threats caused by 
biological, chemical or radiological agents. The CDC 
collaborates closely with the Department of Defense, and in 
particular the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of 
Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), on a variety of issues 
including outbreak investigations. Over the last several years, 
CDC has encountered difficulties due to a variety of reasons in 
transporting infectious patients and specimens from remote 
parts of the world to CDC's Atlanta facilities that house 
state-of-the-art laboratories, including Biosafety level 4 labs 
that contain deadly microbes such as biological agents 
potentially used in terrorist events, and to state-of-the-art 
patient isolation and treatment facilities.
    To address this critical need for safe, secure, rapid, and 
timely transport, the Committee has provided $3,000,000 for 
USAMRIID to collaborate with the CDC and the Air Force in the 
exploration, design, and development of a military transport 
aircraft-based Roll-on Roll-Off Infection Control Facility. 
This facility shall include appropriate infection control, 
medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) capabilities, a patient isolation 
area, patient medical life support and treatment equipment, and 
a medical crew rest/operations area.

    DEMANUFACTURING OF ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR REUSE AND RECYCLING

    The Committee recognizes the potential environmental 
hazards associated with the disposal of a rapidly increasing 
number of expiring legacy computer and electronic systems, and 
encourages the Department to pursue recovery methods to reuse 
and recycle these components in an environmentally friendly 
manner. An August 2000 Mission Need Statement for the 
Demanufacturing of Electronic Equipment for Reuse and Recycling 
(DEER2) expressly stated needs of industry for such methods and 
appropriations were subsequently provided to the Department for 
this purpose. However, it has come to the Committee's attention 
that this initiative has since stalled. Therefore, the 
Committee directs the Department to review the need for 
component reuse and recycling, to investigate cost-effective 
partnerships with industry to utilize existing recovery 
solutions, and to provide a report to the House Committee on 
Appropriations not later than 180 days after enactment of this 
Act.

                     OPERATIONALLY RESPONSIVE SPACE

    The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$47,000,000 for Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) projects. 
Of this amount, $20,000,000 is only for standardized bus 
development, and $25,000,000 is only for operationally 
responsive payload development. The Committee strongly supports 
the ORS concept and expects DoD to increase its funding 
commitment in this area in future budget submissions.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE





Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $314,835,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       168,458,000
Committee recommendation..............................       168,458,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    This appropriation funds the Operational Test and 
Evaluation activities of the Department of Defense.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $168,458,000 
for Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense, which is 
$146,377,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 
and equal to the budget request. The reduction from the fiscal 
year 2005 level in this account is primarily due to the 
transfer of the Defense Test Resources Management Center to the 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide 
account.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006:



                                TITLE V

                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

                     DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,174,210,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,471,340,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,154,340,000
Change from budget request............................      -317,000,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,154,340,000 
for the Defense Working Capital Funds. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $19,870,000 below the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 2005 and a decrease of $317,000,000 from the fiscal 
year 2006 request.

                     NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,204,626,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,648,504,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,599,459,000
Change from budget request............................       -49,045,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation 
and supply of pre-positioning ships, operation of the Ready 
Reserve Force, and acquisition of ships for the Military 
Sealift Command, the Ready Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,599,459,000 
for the National Defense Sealift Fund, which is $394,833,000 
more than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 and 
$49,045,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006. The 
following report and project level table provides a summary of 
the Committee's recommendation.



                    T-AKE DRY CARGO/AMMUNITION SHIP

    The Committee recommends $714,143,000 for two T-AKE ships, 
which is one ship and $334,000,000 more than the budget 
request. If enacted, the budget proposal would cause 
termination of the existing contract options and renegotiation 
of the prices under those options. Navy officials consider the 
existing prices to be favorable to the Government as well as 
executable within the overall program budget. The expected 
additional cost to the Government, and potential program delay, 
is unacceptable to the Committee.

                            MPS LEASE BUYOUT

    The Committee recommends $375,000,000 for the planned 
buyout of Maritime Prepositioning System (MPS) leased vessels. 
The President's budget proposed $749,787,000 for the buyout of 
13 vessels of the Amsea class, the Maersk class, and the 
Waterman class. The Committee believes the Navy has made a good 
business case for this program, but would support a program 
phased over the next few years rather than entirely funded in 
fiscal year 2006. Although the purchase price of these vessels 
is likely to be determined through negotiation, the Committee 
believes the funding provided will be sufficient to procure 
approximately 6 of these vessels.

                 MARITIME PREPOSITIONING FORCE (FUTURE)

    The Committee recommends $59,000,000 for further 
development, concept studies, and concept design for the 
Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future), or MPF(F). This is more 
than twice the $28,000,000 provided for fiscal year 2005, and a 
reduction of $7,301,000 from the budget request. The reduction 
should be allocated to management, engineering, and acquisition 
overhead, which otherwise would account for approximately 40 
percent of the total program budget.

                                TAOE(X)

    The Committee recommends the budget request level of 
$22,490,000 for concept studies for a new oiler class 
designated TAOE(X). This program received $9,412,000 in fiscal 
year 2005.
                                TITLE VI

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

            CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................    $1,372,990,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................     1,405,827,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,355,827,000
Change from budget request............................       -50,000,000


    This appropriation funds the Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction activities of the Department of the Army.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,355,827,000 
for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, which is 
$17,163,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2005 
and $50,000,000 less than the request for fiscal year 2006.

                          Program Recommended

    The total program recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 2006.



            CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY

    The Committee believes the Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction program has been operating at less than expected 
budget execution rates and therefore, without prejudice against 
any particular program or site, recommends a reduction in 
Operation and Maintenance of $50,000,000.

         DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $906,522,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       895,741,000
Committee recommendation..............................       906,941,000
Change from the budget................................       +11,200,000


    This appropriation provides funds for Military Personnel; 
Operation and Maintenance; Procurement; and Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation for drug interdiction and 
counter-drug activities of the Department of Defense to include 
activities related to narcoterrorism.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Department of Defense requested $895,741,000 for Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. The Committee 
recommends $906,941,000, which is $419,000 more than the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2005 and an increase of $11,200,000 
above the budget request for fiscal year 2006.

                  EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

                        [In thousands of dollars]



Southwest Border Fence................................           +$5,000
Multi-Jurisdictional Counter-Drug Task Force Training.            +3,500
Florida National Guard Counter-Drug Activities........            +3,000
Young Marines.........................................            +2,700
Indiana National Guard Counter-Drug Activities........            +1,000
Nevada National Guard Counter-Drug Program............            +3,500
Project Athena Beta Site..............................            +2,500
ADNET.................................................            -1,000
RINGGOLD..............................................            -1,000
OCONUS OPS Support....................................            -2,000
ROTHR.................................................            -2,000
ISR/AEW/Tanker Support................................              -500
SOF CN Support........................................            -1,500
SOUTHCOM CN Operational Support.......................            -2,000


                    OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $204,562,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       209,687,000
Committee recommendation..............................       209,687,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $209,687,000 
for the Office of the Inspector General. Of this amount, 
$208,687,000 shall be for operation and maintenance, and 
$1,000,000 shall be for procurement. The recommendation is an 
increase of $5,125,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal 
year 2005 and equal to the fiscal year 2006 request.
                               TITLE VII

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                     NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM

    The National Intelligence Program (NIP) consists of those 
intelligence activities of the government that provide the 
President, other officers of the Executive Branch, and the 
Congress with national intelligence on broad strategic concerns 
bearing on U.S. national security. These concerns are stated by 
the National Security Council in the form of long-range and 
short-range requirements for the principal users of 
intelligence.
    The National Intelligence Program budget funded in the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act consists primarily of 
resources for the Director of National Intelligence, the 
Intelligence Community Management Staff, the Central 
Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Defense Intelligence Agency, the 
National Reconnaissance Office, the National Security Agency, 
the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the intelligence 
services of the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, 
and the CIA Retirement and Disability Fund.

                            CLASSIFIED ANNEX

    The Committee's budget reviews are published in a separate, 
detailed and comprehensive classified annex. The intelligence 
community, Department of Defense and other organizations are 
expected to fully comply with the recommendations and 
directions in the classified annex accompanying the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006.

   CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $239,400,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       244,600,000
Committee recommendation..............................       244,600,000
Change from budget request............................  ................


    This appropriation provides payments of benefits to 
qualified beneficiaries in accordance with the Central 
Intelligence Agency Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain 
Employees (P.L. 88-643), as amended by Public Law 94-522. This 
statute authorized the establishment of a CIA Retirement and 
Disability System (CIARDS) for certain CIA employees and 
authorized the establishment and maintenance of a fund from 
which benefits would be paid to those beneficiaries.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $244,600,000 
for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability 
System Fund. This is a mandatory account.

               INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................      $310,466,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................       354,844,000
Committee recommendation..............................       376,844,000
Change from budget request............................       +22,000,000


    This appropriation provides funds for the activities that 
support the Director of National Intelligence and the 
intelligence community.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $376,844,000 
for the Intelligence Community Management Account, an increase 
of $22,000,000 above the President's budget. Of the amount 
appropriated under this heading, $39,000,000 is for transfer to 
the Department of Justice for operations at the National Drug 
Intelligence Center (NDIC).
    The National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC) has a unique 
position as both a member of the intelligence community and a 
component of the Department of Justice. As such, it serves as a 
critical link between law enforcement and intelligence 
activities--a connection that increases in value as the nation 
continues its battle against terrorism. The NDIC's expertise in 
analyzing classified and open source materials to uncover 
possible connections between drug suppliers, criminal 
activities, and terrorists make it uniquely positioned to 
address a wide variety of threats to this country. For example, 
shortly after the September 11th attacks, NDIC deployed 
analysts to the FBI Terrorist Financing Operation Section 
(TFOS) to provide analytical and technical support. The TFOS 
selected a database created by NDIC, entitled the Real Time 
Analytical Intelligence Database (RAID), to collect and analyze 
the voluminous data gathered in the wake of the attacks. 
Further, NDIC's document exploitation analysts have played a 
key role in high profile international investigations, to 
include corruption in the Nicaraguan and Haitian governments, 
and drug trafficking and money laundering in the United States, 
Mexico, Columbia, Canada, Jamaica, and Vietnam.
    The Committee strongly endorses the work of NDIC and 
provides a total of $39,000,000 to fund NDIC at current 
operating levels. The Committee urges the Administration to 
take full advantage of the expertise available at NDIC and 
allocate in future budget requests funding sufficient to 
maintain current operations.

                 NATIONAL SECURITY EDUCATION TRUST FUND




Fiscal year 2005 appropriation........................        $8,000,000
Fiscal year 2006 budget request.......................  ................
Committee recommendation..............................  ................
Change from budget request............................  ................


    The National Security Education Trust Fund was established 
to provide scholarships and fellowships to U.S. students to 
pursue higher education studies abroad and to provide grants to 
U.S. institutions for programs of study in foreign areas and 
languages.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends no funding for these activities 
under this appropriations account, as requested. The Committee 
understands that funds for these activities are now included in 
the Community Management Account.
                               TITLE VIII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The accompanying bill includes 102 general provisions. Most 
of these provisions were included in the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 and many have been 
included in the Defense Appropriations Act of a number of 
years.
    Actions taken by the Committee to amend last year's 
provisions or new provisions recommended by the Committee are 
discussed below or in the applicable section of the report.

              Definition of Program, Project and Activity

    For purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act 
of 1987 (Public Law 100-119) and by the Budget Enforcement Act 
of 1990 (Public Law 101-508), the following information 
provides the definition of the term ``program, project, and 
activity'' for appropriations contained in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act. The term ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items, identified in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 2006, the accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, 
the conference report and the accompanying joint explanatory 
statement of the managers of the Committee in Conference, the 
related classified reports, and the P-1 and R-1 budget 
justification documents as subsequently modified by 
Congressional action.
    In carrying out any Presidential sequestration, the 
Department of Defense and agencies shall conform to the 
definition for ``program, project, and activity'' set forth 
above with the following exceptions:
    For Military Personnel and Operation and Maintenance 
accounts the term ``program, project, and activity'' is defined 
as the appropriations accounts contained in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act.
    The Department and agencies should carry forth the 
Presidential sequestration order in a manner that would not 
adversely affect or alter Congressional policies and priorities 
established for the Department of Defense and the related 
agencies and no program, project, and activity should be 
eliminated or be reduced to a level of funding which would 
adversely affect the Department's ability to effectively 
continue any program, project, and activity.
                                TITLE IX

                       ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS

                              Introduction

    The Committee is recommending $45,254,619,000 in funding 
for overseas contingency operations as a ``bridge fund'' for 
the first six months of fiscal year 2006 in order to ensure the 
uninterrupted delivery of resources to our troops in the field, 
and to avoid any disruption in funding for the global war on 
terrorism. The appropriation of these funds for contingency 
operations related to the global war on terrorism is made 
pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), 
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006. 
The Committee is determined to ensure continuity of combat 
operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere around the world 
as part of the global war on terrorism.
    The Committee recognizes that as in fiscal year 2005, the 
military services cannot support the present level of combat 
operations by the numbers of ground maneuver brigades, and 
expeditionary air and naval forces, solely by diverting 
resources from peace time training and support activities. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends the additional funds in 
this title to ensure robust and uninterrupted resourcing of 
military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq without degrading 
home station training, maintenance, and base operations. The 
amounts recommended are based on the best budget execution 
information available from the Department of Defense, the so-
called ``budget burn rate''.

                        Committee Recommendation

    In this title, the Committee recommends total new 
appropriations of $45,254,619,000. Funding by category is as 
follows:




Military Personnel....................................    $8,015,755,000
Operation and Maintenance.............................    32,238,450,000
Procurement...........................................     2,857,314,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation............        88,100,000
Defense Working Capital Funds.........................     2,055,000,000


    Funds are provided for specific appropriations accounts, 
and quarterly reports are required on the obligation of funds.
    The Committee recommends providing appropriations for the 
Iraq Freedom Fund to provide flexibility to the Department of 
Defense, as was done in the Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-287). Funds would be 
available for obligation five days after written notification 
is provided to the Congress. Also, the Committee bill provides 
transfer authority for funds in this title, permitting up to 
$2,500,000,000 to be reprogrammed among activities following 
approval by the congressional defense committees through 
regular order prior-approval notification and reprogramming 
procedures.
    The Committee bill also includes certain authorities 
providing war-related support to allied forces, and training 
and equipping Iraqi and Afghan military and security forces, 
consistent with similar authorities provided in prior Acts and 
in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006 
as approved by the House.
    The following table summarizes, by appropriations account, 
the Committee's recommendations.

(In thousands of dollars)

        Account                                           Recommendation
Military Personnel:
    Military Personnel, Army............................       5,877,400
    Military Personnel, Navy............................         282,000
    Military Personnel, Marine Corps....................         667,800
    Military Personnel, Air Force.......................         982,800
    Reserve Personnel, Army.............................         138,755
    National Guard Personnel, Army......................          67,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Military Personnel..........................       8,015,755
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance:
    O&M, Army...........................................      20,398,450
    O&M, Navy...........................................       1,907,800
    O&M, Marine Corps...................................       1,827,150
    O&M, Air Force......................................       3,559,900
    O&M, Defense-Wide...................................         826,000
    Iraq Freedom Fund...................................       3,500,000
    O&M, Army Reserve...................................          35,700
    O&M, Marine Corps Reserve...........................          23,950
    O&M, Army National Guard............................         159,500
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance...................      32,238,450
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Procurement:
    Procurement of WTCV, Army...........................         455,427
    Procurement of Ammunition, Army.....................          13,900
    Other Procurement, Army.............................       1,501,270
    Weapons Procurement, Navy...........................          81,696
    Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps....         144,721
    Other Procurement, Navy.............................          48,800
    Procurement, Marine Corps...........................         389,900
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.....................         115,300
    Other Procurement, Air Force........................           2,400
    Procurement, Defense-Wide...........................         103,900
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Procurement.................................       2,857,314
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation:
    RDT&E, Navy.........................................          13,100
    RDT&E, Defense-Wide.................................          75,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total RDT&E.......................................          88,100
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Revolving and Management Funds:
    Defense Working Capital Funds:
        Fuel............................................       1,738,000
        WCF Wartime Costs (war reserves, etc.)..........         317,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
          Total Revolving and Management Funds..........       2,055,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
    General Provision--Transfer Authority (non-add).....     [2,500,000]
          Grand Total Title IX..........................      45,254,619

                          Classified Programs

    Recommended adjustments to classified programs are 
addressed in a classified annex accompanying this report.

                         Reporting Requirements

    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
report to the congressional defense committees within 30 days 
of enactment of this legislation on the allocation of the funds 
within the accounts listed in this title. The Secretary shall 
submit updated reports 30 days after the end of each fiscal 
quarter until funds listed in this title are no longer 
available for obligation. The Committee directs that these 
reports shall include: a detailed accounting of obligations and 
expenditures of appropriations provided in this title for the 
continuation of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan; and a listing 
of equipment procured using funds provided in this title.
    Finally, the Committee expects that in order to meet 
unanticipated requirements, the Department of Defense may need 
to transfer funds within these appropriations accounts for 
purposes other than those specified in this report. The 
Committee directs the Department of Defense to follow normal 
prior-approval reprogramming procedures should it be necessary 
to transfer funding between different appropriations accounts 
in this title.

                           Military Personnel

    The Committee recommends a total of $8,015,755,000 for the 
active duty and Guard and Reserve military personnel accounts. 
Of the amount provided, the Committee provides $6,809,000,000 
for six months incremental wartime costs of pays and allowances 
for active duty and Reserve personnel deployed in support of 
Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and 
Operation Noble Eagle; $734,800,000 to support the services' 
recruiting, retention and advertising programs; and sufficient 
funds in support of the enhanced levels for the Death Gratuity 
and Servicemembers Group Life Insurance program, and other 
wartime authorities authorized in the Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and 
Tsunami Relief Act, 2005.
    The following table provides details of the recommendations 
for the military personnel accounts:

(In thousands of dollars)

        Account                                           Recommendation
Military Personnel, Army:
    Incremental OIF/OEF wartime costs...................       5,119,600
    Army active duty overstrength.......................         346,800
    Recruiting and Retention Initiatives................         257,000
    SGLI/Death Gratuity.................................         154,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Military Personnel, Army....................       5,877,400
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Military Personnel, Navy:
    Incremental OIF/OEF wartime costs...................         276,000
    SGLI/Death Gratuity.................................           6,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Military Personnel, Navy....................         282,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Military Personnel, Marine Corps:
    Incremental OIF/OEF wartime costs...................         435,600
    Marine Corps active duty end strength increase......         167,200
    SGLI/Death Gratuity.................................          65,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Military Personnel, Marine Corps............         667,800
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Military Personnel, Air Force:
    Incremental OIF/OEF wartime costs...................         752,400
    Incremental Operation Noble Eagle costs.............         225,400
    SGLI/Death Gratuity.................................           5,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Military Personnel, Air Force...............         982,800
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Reserve Personnel, Army:
    Recruiting and Retention Initiatives................          68,000
    SGLI/Death Gratuity.................................             855
    Special Training....................................          47,700
    Branch Officer Basic Course.........................          22,200
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Reserve Personnel, Army.....................         138,755
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
National Guard Personnel, Army:
    Initial Entry Training..............................          67,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Military Personnel..........................       8,015,755
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________

                       Operation and Maintenance

    The Committee recommends $32,238,450,000 for operation and 
maintenance accounts. Funds are provided for personnel support 
requirements including travel, subsistence, individual and 
organizational equipment, reserve component activation costs, 
and incremental civilian personnel costs. Increases for 
operating support costs include funds for military operations, 
including spare parts and consumable supplies, transportation, 
pre-deployment training and training in theater, forward base 
operating costs, communications, vehicle maintenance, and 
contracts for linguists, logistics and infrastructure support.
    The following table provides details of the recommendations 
for the operation and maintenance accounts:

(In thousands of dollars)

Operation and Maintenance, Army:                          Recommendation
    Incremental Wartime Operating Costs.................      13,543,000
    Incremental Operation Noble Eagle Costs.............         181,000
    Depot Maintenance...................................       1,151,400
    Reset (Unit and Intermediate Maintenance)...........       1,747,400
    Rapid Fielding Initiative; Force Protection; IBA....       1,233,000
    Coalition Support; CERP; Other......................       1,314,600
    Base Support Costs of Mobilization and 
      Demobilization....................................         448,700
    Unit of Action Implementation.......................          37,200
    Second Destination Transportation...................         101,700
    Operational C2 Connectivity.........................          46,000
    Sustainment System Technical Support................         168,000
    Personnel Sustainment for Added End Strength........         124,700
    Recruitment and Advertising.........................         200,000
    Virtual Combat Trainer..............................           7,700
    Ammunition Depot Operations and Maintenance.........          91,800
    Travel for Family Member of Hospitalized Soldier....           2,250
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Army.............      20,398,450
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Navy:
    Incremental Wartime Operating Costs.................       1,870,000
    Counter IED Collection and Exploitation.............          17,800
    Recruiting and Advertising..........................          20,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Navy.............       1,907,800
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps:
    Incremental Wartime Operating Costs.................       1,195,900
    Base Support Including Mobilization.................          18,500
    Second Destination Transportation...................         163,500
    Reset, Organizational Maintenance, Spare Parts......         250,000
    Recruiting and Advertising..........................           9,600
    Depot Maintenance...................................         151,400
    Initial Issue Including Clothing, Body Armor, Tents.          25,500
    Personnel Sustainment for Added End Strength........          12,000
    Travel for Family Member of Hospitalized Marine.....             750
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps.....       1,827,150
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force:
    Incremental Wartime Operating Costs.................       2,967,800
    Incremental Operation Noble Eagle Costs.............         270,000
    Predator Operations and Support.....................          85,100
    B-1 Deployable Phase Maintenance Kit................          34,000
    B-52 Deployable Phase Maintenance Kit...............          52,000
    Depot Maintenance...................................         151,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Air Force........       3,559,900
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide:
    Incremental Wartime Operating Costs.................         490,000
    DISA................................................          62,000
    DLA.................................................         264,000
    DHRA--Joint Advertising, Market Research and Studies          10,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide.....         826,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Iraq Freedom Fund:
    Incremental Wartime Operating Costs.................       1,000,000
    Classified Programs.................................       2,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Iraq Freedom Fund...........................       3,500,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve:
    Recruiting and Retention Support....................          13,900
    Army Reserve Family Support Centers.................          12,500
    Advertising and Marketing Support...................           9,300
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve.....          35,700
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve:
    Operating Forces....................................          22,575
    Training Support....................................           1,000
    Base Operation Support..............................             375
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps 
      Reserve...........................................          23,950
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard:
    Recruiting and Advertising..........................         147,000
    National Guard Family Support Centers...............          12,500
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance, Army National 
      Guard.............................................         159,500
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Operation and Maintenance...................     32,238,450 

                           IRAQ FREEDOM FUND

    The Committee recommends $3,500,000,000 for the Iraq 
Freedom Fund to address emergent requirements. Of this amount, 
not less than $2,500,000,000 is available only for classified 
programs as described in a classified annex accompanying this 
report. Consistent with direction in prior appropriations acts, 
funds in the Iraq Freedom Fund may not be transferred for 
obligation unless the Secretary of Defense notifies the 
congressional defense committees in writing of the details of 
any transfer from this account five days prior to transfer. The 
Secretary is also directed to submit a report not later than 30 
days after the end of each fiscal quarter to the congressional 
defense committees summarizing the details of the transfer of 
funds from this appropriation.

                              Procurement

    The Committee recommends $2,857,314,000 for the procurement 
accounts.
    The following table provides details of the recommendations 
for the procurement accounts:

(In thousands of dollars)

        Account                                           Recommendation
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, 
    Army:
    Gun Trucks..........................................           2,450
Small Arms Programs:
        M16 rifle mods..................................          55,300
        M240 medium machine gun mods....................           9,372
        M240 medium machine gun (7.62mm)................         107,944
        M4 carbine mods.................................          29,595
        M4 carbine......................................         168,237
        M249 SAW mods...................................           5,728
        M249 SAW machine gun (5.56mm)...................          54,111
        M107, Cal. 50 sniper rifle......................           9,274
        Small Arms Equipment (Soldier Enhancement 
          Program)......................................           3,416
        M2HB Enhanced .50 Caliber Machine Gun Kits......          10,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
            Total Procurement of WTCV, Army.............         455,427
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Procurement of Ammunition, Army:
    First Destination Transportation....................           2,000

(In thousands of dollars)

        Account                                           Recommendation
    Ammunition Production Force Protection..............          11,900
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
            Total Procurement of Ammunition, Army.......          13,900
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Other Procurement, Army:
    Up-Armor HMMWVs: M1114, M1151, M1152................         170,000
    Add-on-Armor plate for level III and ballistic glass          20,000
Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Recap Modernization Program:
        HMMWV Recap.....................................         193,000
        HMMWVs--Army Reserve............................          60,000
        Up-armored HMMWVs (M1114)--Army Reserve.........           5,370
        FMTVs...........................................          50,000
        Light Medium Tactical Vehicle (LMTV) 2.5 ton--
          Army Reserve..................................          15,000
        Medium Tactical Vehicle 5 ton--Army Reserve.....          41,000
        HEMTT Recap.....................................          60,400
        Truck Cargo PLS M1075--Army Reserve.............          37,000
        PLS Trailers--Army Reserve......................           9,000
        M915A1 Replacements.............................          15,000
    SINCGARS Family.....................................          87,000
    High Frequency Radio--Army Reserve..................          21,000
    Defense advanced global positioning system receiver 
      (DAGR)............................................           5,000
    Mounted Battle Command on the Move (MBCOTM).........          30,000
    Prophet/COBRA.......................................         145,000
    IED Jammers.........................................          35,000
    Low cost ECM production.............................          10,000
    Force XXI Battle Command BDE and Below (FBCB2)......         116,900
    Multi-Band SHF Terminal (Phoenix)--Army Reserve.....          12,000
    Tactical Common Data Link...........................          72,000
    Biometrics Automated Toolset (BAT)..................          14,700
    Tactical Operations Centers.........................          84,000
    Construction Equipment SLEP.........................          25,000
    Quick Clot Hemorrhage Control.......................           5,000
    Chitosan Hemorrhage Control Dressing................           5,000
    Self-contained Reusable Blood Container.............          10,000
    HMMWV and Tactical Truck Crew Trainers..............          25,000
    Counter Rocket, Artillery and Mortar (C-RAM)........         107,900
    Persistent Threat Detection System, OIF loss 
      replacement.......................................          15,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Other Procurement, Army...................       1,501,270
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Weapons Procurement, Navy:
    Tomahawk Missiles...................................          81,696
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Weapons Procurement, Navy.................          81,696
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps:
    Ammunition Requirements for FSRG....................          20,221
    155mm Fuze-Electronic Time M762A1...................          10,000
    Igniter-Time Blasting Fuze M81......................           5,000
    Detonator, Non-Electric MK154.......................          10,000
    66mm Rocket-High Explosive M72A7....................          11,000
    155mm Multi Option Fuze M782........................           6,000
    120mm Tank Ammunition-M1028 Canister................           3,000
    155mm High Explosive Projectile M795................          15,000
    .50 Caliber Cartridges..............................          13,000
    7.62mm Cartridges...................................           1,500
    40mm M430 HEDP......................................          30,000
    120mm Cartridges M830A1 HEAT-MP-T...................          10,000

(In thousands of dollars)--Continued

        Account                                           Recommendation
    C4 Charges M58A4 HE.................................          10,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine 
          Corps.........................................         144,721
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Other Procurement, Navy:
    Physical Security Equipment.........................          48,800
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Weapons Procurement, Navy.................          48,800
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Procurement, Marine Corps:
    Miniature Transceiver (Blue Force Tracker)..........           7,400
    Light Armored Vehicle (LAV)--48 vehicles to support 
      FSRG..............................................         102,500
    Weapons under $5 million............................          10,800
    Night Vision Equipment..............................         225,000
    PSS-14 Metal Detectors and Other Items..............           1,300
    Tactical Radios (PRC-117 and PRC-150 radios)........          25,000
    JTRS Legacy Bridge--EPLRS...........................          17,900
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Procurement, Marine Corps.................         389,900
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force:
    C-17 Modifications--LAIRCM installs.................          84,000
    C-130 Modifications--LAIRCM installs................           7,200
    War Consumables--Initial/replacement of towed decoys 
      and rocket launcher motors........................          24,100
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Aircraft Procurement, Air Force...........         115,300
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Other Procurement, Air Force:
    HMMWV, Up-Armored...................................           2,400
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Other Procurement, Air Force..............           2,400
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Procurement, Defense-Wide:
    MH-47 infrared engine exhaust suppressor............           7,700
    High performance mobility FLIR (ground).............          10,800
    High performance mobility FLIR (maritime)...........           6,000
    Multi-bank inter/intra team radio...................          13,500
    Multi-band multi mission radio......................          65,900
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
        Total Procurement, Defense-Wide.................         103,900
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
            Total Procurement...........................       2,857,314

               Research, Development, Test and Evaluation

    The Committee recommends $88,100,000 for the research, 
development, test and evaluation accounts.
    The following table provides details of the recommendations 
for the research, development, test and evaluation accounts:

(In thousands of dollars)

        Account                                           Recommendation
RDT&E, Navy:
    Classified Program..................................          13,100
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total RDT&E, Navy.................................          13,100
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
RDT&E, Defense-Wide:
    Counter-Terrorism Technical Working Group...........          25,000
    Quick Reaction Special Projects.....................          50,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total RDT&E, Defense-Wide.........................          75,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total RDT&E.......................................          88,100

                     Defense Working Capital Funds

    The Committee recommends an additional $2,055,000,000 for 
the Defense Working Capital Funds. These funds are recommended 
to address shortfalls due to unforeseen fuel price increases as 
well as to provide for the increased rate of consumption during 
wartime. In addition, funds are provided within this account to 
address necessary costs such as war reserves, spare parts, and 
underutilized plant capacity.

                     GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS TITLE

    Title IX of the Committee bill contains 12 general 
provisions. Several of these extend or modify war-related 
authorities included in Public Law 108-287, enacted in August 
of 2005. A description of the recommended general provisions 
follows.
    Section 9001 has been included which establishes the period 
of availability for obligation for appropriations provided in 
this title.
    Section 9002 has been included which provides that funds 
made available in title IX are in addition to amounts provided 
elsewhere in this Act.
    Section 9003 has been included which provides for the 
transfer of funds between appropriations of up to 
$2,500,000,000 of the funds in title IX, and provides that the 
transfer authority in this section is in addition to any other 
transfer authority available to the Department of Defense.
    Section 9004 has been included which deems funds 
appropriated in this Act for intelligence activities to be 
authorized by the Congress until an Intelligence Authorization 
Act for FY 2006 is enacted.
    Section 9005 has been included which provides that none of 
the funds in title IX may be used to finance programs or 
activities denied by Congress, or to initiate a new start 
without prior congressional notification.
    Section 9006 has been included which provides that not to 
exceed $500,000,000 of operation and maintenance funds made 
available in title IX may be used to train and equip military 
or security forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that such 
authority is in addition to any other authority to provide 
assistance. The provision also includes a requirement to notify 
congressional committees prior to providing assistance under 
the authority of this provision.
    Section 9007 has been included which makes available 
$500,000,000 of operation and maintenance funds provided by 
title IX to fund the Commander's Emergency Response Program. In 
addition, the provision requires quarterly reports to the 
congressional defense committees, places certain limitations on 
the use of funds, and requires the Secretary of Defense to 
issue guidance on activities eligible for funding.
    Section 9008 has been included which provides that 
operation and maintenance funds in title IX may be used to 
provide supplies, services, and transportation to coalition 
forces supporting military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, 
and provides for quarterly reports.
    Section 9009 has been included in which the Congress 
reaffirms that torture of prisoners of war and detainees is 
illegal and does not reflect the policies of the United States 
government or the values of the people of the United States.
    Section 9010 has been included concerning reporting 
requirements for the use of funds provided in this Act.
    Section 9011 has been included which provides that the 
Secretary of Defense may present promotional materials, 
including a United States Flag, to military members who 
participate in Operations Enduring Freedom or Iraqi Freedom.
    Section 9012 has been included which expresses the sense of 
the Congress concerning the United States Air Force Academy.
            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

    The following items are included in accordance with various 
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives:

               Changes in the Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following statements are 
submitted describing the effect of provisions in the 
accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the 
application of existing law.
    Language is included in various parts of the bill to 
continue on-going activities which require annual authorization 
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
    The bill includes a number of provisions which place 
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing 
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be 
construed as changing the application of existing law.
    The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been 
virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically 
considered legislation.
    The bill provides that appropriations shall remain 
available for more than one year for some programs for which 
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize 
each extended availability.
    In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked 
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific 
programs, and has adjusted some existing earmarking.
    Those additional changes in the fiscal year 2006 bill, 
which might be interpreted as changing exiting law, are as 
follows:

                        APPROPRIATIONS LANGUAGE

    Language has been amended in the active duty Military 
Personnel accounts to include language concerning the Reserve 
Officers' Training Corps, and deletes this language from the 
related Reserve appropriations paragraphs.
    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Army'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses, and earmarks funds for Fort Baker.
    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Navy'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses.
    Language has been deleted in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Air Force'' which provides funds for minority aviation 
training.
    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide'' which changes the amount provided for emergency 
and extraordinary expenses; deletes language which earmarks 
funds for an internship program for university students to 
participate in Defense educational programs; deletes language 
which provides funds for commercial imagery purchases; deletes 
language which provides authority for the Office of Economic 
Adjustment to make grants; includes language which provides 
funds to conduct a wind test demonstration project on an Air 
Force installation and to execute a renewable energy purchasing 
plan; and deletes language which provides funds for the 
Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program.
    Language has been amended in ``Overseas Contingency 
Operations Transfer Account'' which deletes the reference for 
transfer of funds in this paragraph to the Defense Health 
Program appropriation.
    Language has been deleted in ``Former Soviet Union Threat 
Reduction Account'' which earmarks funds for dismantling and 
disposal of nuclear submarines.
    Language has been included in the Army's procurement 
accounts which earmarks funds for the Army Reserve and Army 
National Guard.
    Language has been included in ``Aircraft Procurement, 
Army'' which procures additional helicopters and designates 
these aircraft for the Army Reserve.
    Language has been deleted in ``Other Procurement, Army'' 
concerning the purchase of vehicles required for physical 
security of personnel.
    Language has been included in the Navy and Marine Corps' 
procurement accounts which earmarks funds for the Navy Reserve 
and Marine Corps Reserve.
    Language has been deleted in ``Other Procurement, Navy'' 
concerning the purchase of vehicles required for physical 
security of personnel; and deletes language which allows funds 
to be available for TRIDENT modifications associated with force 
protection and security requirements.
    Language has been included in the Air Force's procurement 
accounts which earmarks funds for the Air Force Reserve and Air 
National Guard.
    Language has been deleted in ``Aircraft Procurement, Air 
Force'' with regard to the procurement of C-17 aircraft.
    Language has been deleted in ``Other Procurement, Air 
Force'' concerning the purchase of vehicles required for 
physical security of personnel.
    The appropriations account ``National Guard and Reserve 
Equipment'' has been deleted.
    Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Army'' which earmarks funds for Molecular 
Genetics and Musculoskeletal Research.
    Language has been deleted in ``Office of the Inspector 
General'' which provides funds for Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation.
    Language has been amended in ``Intelligence Community 
Management Account'' which earmarks $27,454,000 for the 
Advanced Research and Development Committee; and which 
transfers $39,000,000 to the Department of Justice.
    The appropriations account ``National Security Education 
Trust Fund'' has been deleted.
    Language has been included in Title IX which provides 
$45,254,619,000 to certain appropriations accounts for 
additional war related expenses for ongoing military operations 
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Language has been included in Title IX in the ``Iraq 
Freedom Fund'' that provides for the transfer of funds into and 
out of this account; provides that no less than $2,500,000,000 
shall be for classified programs; requires the Secretary of 
Defense to notify the congressional defense committees prior to 
making transfers from this appropriation; and requires the 
Secretary of Defense to report quarterly on the transfer of 
funds from this appropriation.
    Language has been included in Title IX in ``Other 
Procurement, Army'' which provides that not less than 
$200,370,000 shall be available only for the Army Reserve.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Section 8005 has been amended which increases the level of 
general transfer authority for the Department of Defense, and 
provides that transfers between military personnel 
appropriations shall not be taken into account for purposes of 
the limitation of funds which may be transferred under this 
section.
    Section 8008 has been amended to include language which 
provides multiyear authority for UH-60/MH-60 Helicopters, 
Apache Block II conversions, and MTADS/PNVS programs.
    Section 8024 has been amended which earmarks $33,767,000 
for the Civil Air Patrol Corporation.
    Section 8025 has been amended to change the number of staff 
years of technical effort that may be funded for defense 
Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs); 
deletes language on the number of staff years that may be 
funded for defense studies and analysis by FFRDCs; amends 
language which changes the name of the National Intelligence 
Program referenced in this provision; and amends the amount for 
reduction for FFRDCs.
    Section 8042 has been amended to make a change to the name 
of the National Intelligence Program referenced in this 
provision.
    Section 8043 has been included which provides that of the 
funds available under ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-
Wide'', the Office of Economic Adjustment is authorized to make 
grants.
    Section 8044 has been amended to include language which 
rescinds $633,550,000 from the following programs:

2005 Appropriations:
    Other Procurement, Army:
        Joint Tactical Radio System.....................     $60,500,000
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy:
        DD(X) Advance Procurement.......................     304,000,000
        Service Craft...................................      21,000,000
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force:
        Global Hawk Advance Procurement.................       10,00,000
    Other Procurement, Air Force:
        Classified Programs.............................       3,400,000
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army:
        Joint Tactical Radio System.....................      21,600,000
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy:
        Unit Operations Centers (Marine Corps)..........       5,100,000
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air 
      Force:
        AEHF............................................      92,000,000
        Classified Programs.............................      50,000,000
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
      Wide:
        GMD Flight Test Delays..........................      60,000,000
        Classified Programs.............................       5,950,000

    Section 8047 has been amended to make a change to the name 
of the National Intelligence Program referenced in this 
provision.
    Section 8060 has been amended to make a change to the name 
of the National Intelligence Program referenced in this 
provision.
    Regarding section 8061, the Committee has taken careful 
notice of the growing challenges to U.S. security interests in 
Asia. These include the nuclear weapons program in North Korea, 
the attempts by that government to develop more capable 
ballistic missiles, and the rapid modernization of the Chinese 
military. The Committee urges the Administration to work with 
U.S. allies in the region to meet the challenges presented by 
these changing realities. Discussion with U.S. allies should, 
where deemed appropriate, include relevant information about 
future planned U.S. military capabilities. Section 8061 of this 
Act should not be interpreted as inhibiting such discussions.
    Section 8066 has been amended which requires that funds 
provided under ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Defense-Wide'' for a new start advanced concept technology 
demonstration project may only be obligated after a report is 
provided to the congressional defense committees.
    Section 8067 has been amended which requires the Secretary 
of Defense to provide quarterly reports on certain matters 
directed in the classified annex to this Act.
    Section 8075 has been amended to change the dollar amount 
available for transfer, and amends subsection (b) providing for 
additional transfers.
    Section 8077 has been amended which provides funds for a 
grant to the Fisher House Foundation, Inc.
    Section 8078 has been amended which reduces funds available 
in Operation and Maintenance accounts by $264,630,000 to 
reflect savings attributable to efficiencies and management 
improvements in the funding of the Services' miscellaneous or 
other contracts.
    Section 8079 has been amended which reduces funds available 
in Operation and Maintenance accounts by $167,000,000 to limit 
excessive growth in the procurement of advisory and assistance 
services.
    Section 8080 has been amended which requires that of the 
funds provided in ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Defense-Wide'' $77,616,000 shall be for the Arrow missile 
program; and $15,000,000 shall be available for producing Arrow 
missile components in the United States and Israel.
    Section 8081 has been amended to reflect fiscal year 2006 
requirements for prior year shipbuilding costs, makes such 
funds available for obligation until September 30, 2006, and, 
for proper accounting purposes, transfers such funds to the 
original appropriations of the vessels for which the additional 
costs are needed.
    Section 8086 has been amended which reduces funds available 
in Operation and Maintenance accounts by $250,000,000 to 
reflect cash balance and rate stabilization adjustments in 
Defense Working Capital Funds.
    Section 8089 has been amended which provides $14,400,000 
for various grants.
    Section 8097 has been amended which earmarks funds in 
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'' for the Fort Irwin Road 
project for which funds were appropriated in section 8103 of 
public law 106-79, and provides for limitations on using funds 
in this or any other Act for support of certain recreational 
facilities at Fort Irwin until completion of the project; and 
includes language which earmarks funds in ``Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps'' for the Secretary of the Navy to 
make a grant for the widening of Adobe Road.
    Section 8100 has been amended which reduces funds available 
in Operation and Maintenance accounts by $147,000,000, and 
deletes language concerning the effective date of this section 
on travel and transportation of persons.
    Section 8101 has been included which reduces $176,500,000 
from the title III procurement accounts for offsets due to the 
Global War on Terror.
    Section 8102 has been included which provides for the 
transfer of unobligated balances from ``Research, Development, 
Test and Evaluation, Army'' for the continuation of the Army 
Venture Capital Fund.
    An explanation for each of the general provisions included 
in title IX of the bill are provided in that title.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table lists the 
appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not 
authorized by law:



                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is submitted describing 
the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.

                               TRANSFERS

    Language has been included in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Army'' which provides for the transfer of funds to Fort Baker.
    Language has been included in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide'' which provides for the transfer of funds 
relating to classified activities.
    Language has been included in ``Overseas Contingency 
Operations Transfer Account'' which provides for the transfer 
of funds out of and into this account.
    Language has been included in ``Drug Interdiction and 
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'' which transfers funds to 
other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense.
    Language has been included in ``Intelligence Community 
Management Account'' which provides for the transfer of funds 
to the Department of Justice for the National Drug Intelligence 
Center.
    Twelve provisions (Sections 8005, 8006, 8015, 8024, 8033, 
8049, 8056, 8075, 8080, 8081, 8099, and 8102) contain language 
which allows transfers of funds between accounts.
    Language has been included in title IX, ``Iraq Freedom 
Fund'' which transfers funds to other appropriations accounts 
of the Department of Defense.
    Language has been included in title IX, section 9003, which 
provides transfer authority for funds in title IX.

                              Rescissions

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted 
describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying 
bill:




Other Procurement, Army, 2005/2007....................       $60,500,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 2005/2011..........       325,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2005/2007............        10,000,000
Other Procurement, Air Force, 2005/2007...............         3,400,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2005/       21,600,000
 2006.................................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2005/        5,100,000
 2006.................................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force,       142,000,000
 2005/2006............................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-          65,950,000
 Wide, 2005/2006......................................


         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of 
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure 
authorizes funding:
    The Committee on Appropriations considers program 
performance, including a program's success in developing and 
attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing 
funding recommendations.

                        Constitutional Authority

    Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives states that: ``Each report of a committee on a 
bill or joint resolution of a public character, shall include a 
statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in 
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint 
resolution.''
    The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to 
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I 
of the Constitution of the United States of America which 
states: ``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in 
consequence of Appropriations made by law . . .''
    Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to 
this specific power granted by the Constitution.

                 Comparison With the Budget Resolution

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with 
section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, which requires that the report accompanying a bill 
providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing 
how that authority compares with the reports submitted under 
section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to 
concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from 
the Committee's section 302(a) allocation. This information 
follows:

                        [In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                302(b) allocation         This bill
                             -------------------------------------------
                                Budget                Budget
                              authority   Outlays   authority   Outlays
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary...............    363,440    372,696    363,440    371,740
Mandatory...................        245        245        245        245
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Five-Year Outlay Projections

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following table contains 
five-year projections associated with the budget authority 
provided in the accompanying bill.
                                                              (Millions)
Budget Authority........................................         363,440
Outlays:
    2006................................................         273,635
    2007................................................          94,854
    2008................................................          25,705
    2009................................................           7,527
    2010 and beyond.....................................           5,737

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, no new budget or outlays are 
provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to 
State and local governments.




              ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE DAVID OBEY

    Two issues addressed during Committee consideration of the 
FY 2006 Defense appropriations measure warrant further 
discussion.

                  IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN ``BRIDGE FUND''

    In May, Congress passed an FY 2005 emergency supplemental 
funding bill that provided $75.9 billion for continuing 
military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even as that bill 
was being signed into law, the military let it be known that 
additional supplemental funds would be need by October to avoid 
severe financial dislocation.
    The Republican budget resolution set aside $50 billion to 
cover the FY 2006 costs of the war. In response to the 
military's pleas and ``consistent'' with the Republican budget 
resolution, this bill included $45.3 billion. At current 
expenditure rates, this funding will only cover 6 months worth 
of the wars' costs. Thus, the Republican budget resolution 
fails to accurately account for the full year's cost of the 
war, thereby continuing the fiction created by the Bush 
Administration surrounding our ongoing military involvement in 
the region. Since this bridge funding is only adequate to cover 
the costs of the war for half the year, the hard reality is 
that before the year is over the Pentagon will have to ask for 
more money for the war. This likely will ``bust'' the recently 
passed Republican budget resolution by more than $40 billion.
    I offered two amendments related to this bridge funding. 
The first would have, in essence, required that the Majority 
take up a real budget resolution that included the full cost of 
the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The second would have paid for 
roughly half of the bridge fund by reducing the size of the tax 
cuts for people making more than $1 million a year in order to 
reduce the amount the deficit will rise when the full annual 
costs of the war is finally revealed. The Committee rejected 
these amendments.
    The purpose of both amendments was to force the 
Administration and the Congressional Majority to begin to face 
up to the full cost of the war in Iraq. As the Washington Post 
recently noted its editorial of March 12, 2005:
    For the third year in a row, the Bush administration has 
chosen to fund operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with a 
grab bag of other programs, outside the normal appropriations 
process. To call this emergency spending is farcical. Though 
the precise cost of military operations was not known, there 
was no reason, especially as the war continued, not to budget 
for most, if not all, of it in the ordinary course of business. 
After a single emergency supplemental, the war in Vietnam was 
financed through regular appropriations.
    Of course, if the Administration requested funds for Iraq 
and Afghanistan through the regular appropriations process it 
would force tradeoffs within the Federal budget, such as 
s1ending cuts or tax increases, to pay for the war. These are 
precisely the types of tradeoffs the Administration and the 
Congressional Majority have avoided and continue to avoid. 
Instead of making the tough choices, the cost of military 
operations and related expenses for these two engagements has 
been added directly to the deficit, forcing future generations 
to pay for this Administration's failure to pay the full price 
of its Iraq policy.
    To date, according the Congressional Research Service, the 
Defense Department has received $277.1 billion in ``emergency'' 
funding for combat operations, occupation and support for 
military personnel or supporting operations for Iraq, 
Afghanistan and for enhanced security at military 
installations. Nearly 60 percent of these funds--$165.8 
billion--were provided after the President declared an end to 
major combat operations in Iraq. Nearly 70 percent of the 
$277.1 billion provided--$192 billion--is solely for the Iraq 
war. Should Congress approve this $45.3 billion supplemental, 
which will only fund operations in Iraq for half the year, 
total funding for the Iraq war will reach nearly $240 billion. 
And this is not the end. Tens of billions, if not more, will be 
required as the Army fully expects to still be in Iraq at least 
through January 2007.
    To put all this in context--even as Congress prepares to 
bust the Republican budget by more than $40 billion to pay for 
the cost of this misguided war, the Republican majority is 
simultaneously slashing the Labor-HHS-Education bill by $1.6 
billion, decimating programs for children and gutting efforts 
to protect workers wages, all in the name of fiscal 
responsibility. The Majority's brand of fiscal responsibility 
is farcical at best, duplicitous at worst. It is past time the 
Republican Majority comes clean about the full cost of the Iraq 
policy. The Congress is being set up to bust the budget by an 
estimated $40 billion to pay for the remaining costs of the 
war--an amount more than 20 times larger than the amount they 
are saving by cutting the Labor-HHS bill.
    House Democrats make no apologies for demanding greater 
accountability from the Administration about its conduct of the 
war in Iraq. Our efforts, however, should in no way be 
construed as criticism of our troops. Democrats strongly 
support the men and women of our military. Many of us worked in 
the last supplemental to increase the maximum death benefit for 
service members. We have also urged the Administration and the 
Congress to provide additional resources for the Veterans 
Administration so that returning service members receive the 
health care they deserve.
    It is this support for the troops that leads to question 
the Administration's management of the war and to demand 
greater accountability. The Moran amendment, which was included 
in the most recent supplemental, is an example of the type of 
oversight Congress must conduct. The Moran amendment directs 
the Secretary of Defense to fully evaluate the situation in 
Iraq and provide Congress measurable, achievable criteria that 
will provide an accurate assessment of our progress in the war. 
If one thing has become clear through the fog of war, it is 
that this Administration will not come clean unless the 
Congress continues to ask questions. We must keep pressing for 
answers.

               RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AT THE AIR FORCE ACADEMY

    The Los Angeles Times reported on April 20, 2005, that an 
atmosphere existed on the campus of the U.S. Air Force Academy 
that appeared to tolerate disrespectful treatment of persons 
who were not evangelicals. Air Force officials have 
acknowledged the problem, which initially surfaced in early May 
2004 when a survey of present and former cadets revealed that 
some students felt that ``born-again'' Christians received 
favorable treatment and that persons of faith that did not 
consider themselves born-again had been verbally abused.
    I am pleased that the Committee responded to these reports 
by adopting an amendment condemning coercive or abusive 
proselytizing at the Academy and reaffirming that the military 
must be a place of tolerance for all faiths and backgrounds. 
The text of the amendment follows:
        SEC. 9012. SENSE OF CONGRESS AND REPORT CONCERNING 
        INAPPROPRIATE PROSELYTIZING OF UNITED STATES AIR FORCE 
        ACADEMY CADETS.
    (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
          (1) the expression of personal religious faith is 
        welcome in the United States military, but coercive and 
        abusive religious proselytizing at the United States 
        Air Force Academy by officers assigned to duty at the 
        Academy and others in the chain-of-command at the 
        Academy, as has been reported, is inconsistent with the 
        professionalism and standards required of those who 
        serve at the Academy;
          (2) the military must be a place of tolerance for all 
        faiths and backgrounds; and
          (3) the Secretary of the Air Force and other 
        appropriate civilian authorities, and the Chief of 
        Staff of the Air Force and other appropriate military 
        authorities, must continue to undertake corrective 
        action, as appropriate, to address and remedy the 
        inappropriate proselytizing of cadets at the Air Force 
        Academy.
    (b) Report on Plan.--
          (1) Plan.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall 
        develop a plan to ensure that the Air Force Academy 
        maintains a climate free from coercive religious 
        intimidation and inappropriate proselytizing by Air 
        Force officials and others in the chain-of-command at 
        the Air Force Academy. The Secretary shall work with 
        experts and other recognized notable persons in the 
        area of pastoral care and religious tolerance to 
        develop the plan.
          (2) Report--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
        to the congressional defense committees a report 
        providing the plan developed pursuant to paragraph (1). 
        The Secretary shall include in the report information 
        on the circumstances surrounding the removal of Air 
        Force Captain Melinda Morton from her position at the 
        Air Force Academy on May 4, 2005.
    There are two things we do not want at any institution of 
higher learning, especially the military academies. First, we 
do not want disrespectful treatment of any student or cadet by 
their colleagues on the basis of religious differences. Second, 
we do not want this type of conduct from anyone in positions of 
authority or in the chain of command. America is blessed by the 
Air Force Academy cadets who have volunteered to serve their 
nation and defend our freedom. In taking up arms, those cadets 
are also agreeing to defend one of America's most cherished 
rights--religious freedom.

                                                        David Obey.

                                  
