[Senate Report 109-254]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 426

   109th Congress                                               Report

    2d Session                 SENATE                          109-254
_______________________________________________________________________

                     NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
                        ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                         [to accompany s. 2766]

                                   on

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
   OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR 
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 
  STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                               ----------                              

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                     


                                     

                  May 9, 2006.--Ordered to be printed
                                     










                                                       Calendar No. 426

109th Congress 
 2nd Session                     SENATE                          Report
                                                                109-254
_______________________________________________________________________
 
                     NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION

                        ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007

                               __________

                              R E P O R T


                         [to accompany s. 2766]

                                   on

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
   OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR 
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 
  STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                               __________

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                     


                                     

                  May 9, 2006.--Ordered to be printed


  

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                     (109th Congress, 2nd Session)

                    JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 CARL LEVIN, Michigan
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma            EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas                  ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama               JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine              JACK REED, Rhode Island
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada                  DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri            BILL NELSON, Florida
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia             E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina       EVAN BAYH, Indiana
JOHN CORNYN, Texas                   HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
                    Charles S. Abell, Staff Director
             Richard D. DeBobes, Democratic Staff Director

                                  (ii)

  















                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Purpose of the Bill..............................................     1
Committee overview and recommendations...........................     2
    Explanation of funding summary...............................     9
Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations.................    17
Title I--Procurement.............................................    17
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    17
        Explanation of tables....................................    17
    Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................    19
        Limitation on availability of funds for the Joint Network 
          Node (sec. 111)........................................    37
        Comptroller General report on the contract for the Future 
          Combat Systems program (sec. 112)......................    38
        Reports on Army Modularity Initiative (sec. 113).........    38
    Budget Items--Army...........................................    40
        Future Cargo Aircraft....................................    40
        Surface-launched advanced medium range air-to-air missile    40
        M1A1 Abrams tank and M2A2 Bradley fighting vehicle 
          upgrades...............................................    41
        M113 Armored personnel carrier family of vehicles........    41
        M1028 120mm tank cartridge...............................    42
        M915 105mm Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munition 
          artillery cartridge....................................    42
        Rapid wall breaching kit.................................    42
        Ammunition peculiar equipment outloading module..........    42
        Automated Tactical Ammunition Classification System......    42
        Corrosion protective covers..............................    43
        Insensitive munitions high-shear mixing system...........    43
        Lake City Army Ammunition Plant..........................    43
        Modernization of forge equipment at Scranton Army 
          Ammunition Plant.......................................    43
        Radford Army Ammunition Plant upgrades...................    43
        Defense advanced global positioning system receivers.....    44
        Nonsystem training devices...............................    44
    Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................    44
        CVN-21 class aircraft carrier procurement (sec. 121).....    67
        Construction of the first two vessels under the next-
          generation destroyer program (sec. 122)................    68
        Modification of limitation on total cost of procurement 
          of CVN-77 aircraft carrier (sec. 123)..................    69
    Budget Items--Navy...........................................    70
        MH-60S and MH-60R helicopters............................    70
        T-45TS Goshawk...........................................    70
        CH-53 Integrated Mechanical Diagnostic System (IMDS).....    71
        Allegany Ballistics Laboratory facility restoration......    71
        Mk 110 57mm naval gun....................................    71
        Mk 295/Mk 296 ammunition for Mk 110 57mm naval gun.......    71
        M67 hand grenade.........................................    71
        M290 nuclear refueling facility..........................    71
        Procurement authority for LPD-17 class ship designated 
          LPD-25.................................................    72
        Advance procurement authority for LHA replacement 
          (LHA(R)) ship designated LHA-7.........................    73
        Outfitting and post-delivery.............................    73
        Completion of prior year shipbuilding....................    74
        Amphibious ship integrated bridge system.................    74
        DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer modernization 
          program................................................    74
        High performance metal fiber brushes for shipboard motors 
          and generators.........................................    75
        Ship support items under $5.0 million....................    75
        Electronics equipment items under $5.0 million...........    75
        Sonobuoys................................................    76
        Joint service and explosive ordnance disposal improvised 
          explosive device countermeasures.......................    76
        NULKA anti-ship missile decoy............................    76
        Command support equipment................................    76
        Combat Casualty Care Equipment Upgrade Program...........    77
        Lightweight 155-millimeter towed howitzer................    77
        Modification kits........................................    78
        Laser integrated target engagement system................    78
    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................    78
        Procurement of Joint Primary Aircraft Training System 
          aircraft after fiscal year 2006 (sec. 141).............    93
        Prohibition on retirement of C-130E/H tactical airlift 
          aircraft (sec. 142)....................................    93
        Limitation on retirement of KC-135E aircraft (sec. 143)..    93
        Limitation on retirement of B-52H bomber aircraft (sec. 
          144)...................................................    94
        Retirement of B-52H bomber aircraft (sec. 145)...........    94
        Prohibition on incremental funding and multiyear 
          procurement of F-22A aircraft (sec. 146)...............    94
    Budget Items--Air Force......................................    95
        Joint Strike Fighter.....................................    95
        F-22A procurement........................................    96
        C-17A procurement........................................    97
        KC-135 tanker replacement................................    98
        A/OA-10 modifications....................................    98
        C-5 aircraft avionics modernization program..............    99
        Bomb insensitive munitions upgrade.......................    99
        Propulsion replacement program...........................    99
        Expanded intelligence support for reach-back operations..    99
        Self-deploying infrared streamer.........................   100
    Budget Items--Defense-wide...................................   107
        Army high performance computing research center..........   107
        Mini gun.................................................   107
        Time delayed firing device/sympathetic detonators........   107
        Persistent Predator operations and intelligence..........   108
        Advanced lightweight grenade launcher....................   108
        Special Operations Forces laser acquisition marker.......   108
        Special Operations Command craft modifications...........   108
        Joint threat warning system..............................   109
        Automatic Chemical Agent Detector and Alarm..............   109
        Improved chemical agent monitor..........................   109
    Items of Special Interest....................................   110
        Cost control for certain helicopter acquisition programs.   110
        Deployable/mobile command and control programs...........   110
        F-18 Hornet to Joint Strike Fighter transition...........   111
        Fully funded bomber roadmap..............................   112
        Littoral Combat Ship.....................................   112
        Maritime Prepositioning Force, Future....................   113
        Ship systems commonality.................................   115
        Submarine force structure................................   115
        T-38 replacement aircraft................................   116
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............   119
        Explanation of tables....................................   119
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   121
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   121
        Independent estimate of costs of the Future Combat 
          Systems (sec. 211).....................................   121
        Funding of defense science and technology program (sec. 
          212)...................................................   122
        Hypersonics development (sec. 213).......................   122
        Trident sea-launched ballistic missiles (sec. 214).......   123
    Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs.........................   124
        Availability of research, development, test, and 
          evaluation funds for fielding ballistic missile defense 
          capabilities (sec. 231)................................   124
        Policy of the United States on priorities in the 
          development, testing, and fielding of missile defense 
          capabilities (sec. 232)................................   124
        One-year extension of Comptroller General assessments of 
          ballistic missile defense programs (sec. 233)..........   127
        Submittal of plans for test and evaluation of the 
          operational capability of the ballistic missile defense 
          system (sec. 234)......................................   127
        Annual reports on transition of ballistic missile defense 
          programs to the military departments (sec. 235)........   127
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   128
        Extension of requirement for Global Research Watch 
          Program (sec. 251).....................................   128
        Expansion and extension of authority to award prizes for 
          advanced technology achievements (sec. 252)............   128
        Policies and practices on test and evaluation to address 
          emerging acquisition approaches (sec. 253).............   129
        Development of the propulsion system for the Joint Strike 
          Fighter (sec. 254).....................................   129
        Independent cost analyses for Joint Strike Fighter engine 
          program (sec. 255).....................................   130
        Sense of the Senate on technology sharing of Joint Strike 
          Fighter technology (sec. 256)..........................   131
    Budget Items--Army...........................................   132
        Army basic research......................................   145
        PACE early career awards.................................   145
        Army materials technology................................   146
        Advanced microelectronics manufacturing..................   146
        Unmanned payload concepts................................   147
        Army missile technology..................................   147
        Hypervelocity ground testing.............................   147
        Multifunctional robot platform...........................   147
        Combat vehicle and automotive technology.................   147
        Weapons and munitions technology.........................   148
        Human factors engineering................................   148
        Mapping and detection of unexploded ordnance.............   148
        Warfighter technology....................................   149
        Army medical technology..................................   149
        Advanced aviation technology.............................   149
        Unmanned tactical combat vehicles........................   149
        Nanotechnology manufacturing.............................   150
        Combat vehicle research..................................   150
        Command and control team training........................   150
        Advanced simulated training..............................   150
        Missile recycling capability.............................   151
        Advanced electronic integration..........................   151
        Advanced fuel cell research..............................   151
        Advanced Hypersonic Weapon modeling and simulation.......   151
        Army missile and space modeling and simulation technology   151
        Distributed operational control center...................   152
        HighSentinel airship.....................................   152
        Low cost avionics........................................   152
        Protected test link......................................   153
        Standoff sensor for radionuclides and explosives.........   153
        Tactical operations center hardware and software 
          integration............................................   153
        Thermal protection system technology risk reduction......   153
        Translation devices......................................   154
        Advanced Hypersonic Weapon development...................   154
        Architecture Analysis Program............................   155
        Environmental quality technology demonstration and 
          validation at the Defense Ammunition Center............   155
        Counter rocket, artillery, and mortar....................   155
        Unmanned aerial vehicle anti-icing technology............   156
        RAND Arroyo Center.......................................   156
        Automated communications support.........................   156
        Biometric identification device..........................   156
        Portable iris enrollment and recognition device..........   157
        Biometrics technology....................................   157
        Army manufacturing technology............................   157
    Budget Items--Navy...........................................   157
        Navy university research.................................   170
        Thermal management systems...............................   170
        Force protection applied research........................   170
        High power, lightweight battery research.................   170
        Human factors and organizational design..................   171
        Sea basing technologies..................................   171
        Information sharing technologies.........................   171
        Power projection advanced technology.....................   171
        Force protection advanced technology.....................   171
        Common picture advanced technology.......................   172
        Warfighter sustainment technology........................   172
        APY-6 real-time precision targeting radar................   173
        Marine Corps advanced technology.........................   173
        Visual integrated bridge system..........................   173
        Electro-optic Passive ASW System.........................   173
        Surface Navy Integrated Undersea Tactical Technology.....   174
        Shipboard system component development...................   174
        Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms systems...   175
        Project Athena...........................................   175
        Directed energy and electric weapon systems..............   176
        Towed array improvements.................................   176
        Submarine design.........................................   177
        Ship self-defense........................................   178
        NULKA anti-ship missile decoy development................   178
        Chiropractic treatment outcomes study....................   178
        Navy medical research....................................   179
        F136 Interchangeable Engine..............................   179
        Marine Corps communications systems......................   179
        Polymer-based improvised explosive device detection tools   180
        Expeditionary assault bridge.............................   180
        Environmental intelligence for riverine operations.......   181
        Vessel integrity system..................................   181
        National Shipbuilding Research Program--Advanced 
          Shipbuilding Enterprise................................   181
        Detection and recovery of unexploded ordnance, Browns 
          Island, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina...................   182
    Budget Items--Air Force......................................   182
        Air Force basic research.................................   195
        Air Force materials research.............................   195
        Applied aerospace propulsion.............................   195
        Space technology.........................................   195
        MASINT visualization tool................................   196
        Air Force materials technologies.........................   196
        Aerospace propulsion and power technology................   196
        Radically Segmented Launch Vehicle.......................   196
        Thin film amorphous solar arrays.........................   197
        Massively parallel optical interconnects for battlespace 
          information exchange...................................   197
        Transformational Satellite Communications................   197
        Satellite command and control consolidation..............   198
        Space Radar..............................................   198
        Increased funding for O2 diesel particulate emission 
          reduction research.....................................   200
        Space control test capabilities..........................   200
        Joint space intelligent decision support.................   200
        Global awareness presentation system.....................   201
        RAND Project Air Force...................................   201
        Ballistic missile range safety technology................   201
        Global command and control development center............   201
        Single integrated space picture..........................   202
        National Security Space Office...........................   202
        Air Force industrial preparedness activities.............   202
    Budget Items--Defense-wide...................................   203
        Force protection basic research..........................   217
        National Defense Education Program.......................   217
        Detection of biological agents in water..................   217
        Organic light emitting receptor-based nanosensors........   217
        Superstructural particle evaluation......................   218
        Medical free electron laser..............................   218
        Alternative delivery of recombinant protein vaccines.....   218
        Chemical and biological smart materials..................   218
        Escape mask..............................................   218
        Multipurpose biodefense immunoarray......................   219
        Mustard gas antidote.....................................   219
        Next-generation chemical biological protective suit......   219
        Personal protection against infectious agents............   219
        Rapid identification of biological warfare agents........   220
        Verification and validation of chemical agent persistence 
          models.................................................   220
        Tactical technology......................................   220
        Biochemical materials....................................   220
        Modeling and simulation..................................   221
        Wearable hyperspectral imaging system....................   221
        Radiation detection technology...........................   221
        Advanced aerospace systems...............................   221
        Next Generation Gas Chromatographic Mass Spectrometer....   221
        Joint advanced concept technology demonstration..........   222
        Joint robotic autonomous systems.........................   222
        Advanced mobile gas-to-liquid fueler.....................   222
        Defense Logistics Agency research and technology 
          demonstrations.........................................   222
        Dendrimer enhanced water remediation research............   223
        Computer modernization technologies......................   223
        Command, control, and communications systems.............   224
        Portable explosive detection.............................   224
        Joint modeling, simulation, and experimentation..........   224
        Advanced tactical airborne command, control, 
          communications, computer, intelligence, surveillance, 
          and reconnaissance system..............................   225
        Advanced tactical laser..................................   225
        Flashlight soldier-to-soldier combat identification 
          system.................................................   225
        Small and medium caliber recoil mitigation technologies..   226
        Special Operations portable power source program.........   226
        Anthrax and plague oral vaccine research and development.   226
        Airborne Infrared System.................................   226
        Corrosion prevention research............................   227
        Playas command and control network.......................   227
        Militarily critical technologies support.................   228
        Operationally responsive space payloads..................   228
        DARPA management headquarters............................   228
        Armed Forces medical and food research...................   228
        High performance computational systems...................   229
        Commercial airborne interferometric synthetic aperture 
          radar imagery..........................................   229
        Credibility assessment research..........................   229
        Combat sent wideband sensor upgrade......................   229
        Castings for improved readiness..........................   230
        High performance defense manufacturing technology 
          research and development...............................   230
        Helmet mount track system................................   230
        Special Operations combat assault rifle..................   231
        Wavelet packet modulation................................   231
        Multi-spectral laboratory and analytical services center 
          program................................................   231
        Special Operations wireless management and control 
          project................................................   232
    Items of Special Interest....................................   232
        Airborne Laser...........................................   232
        Air Force science, technology, test and evaluation.......   232
        Future Combat Systems and current force interoperability.   233
        Information assurance progress report....................   234
        Joint Tactical Radio System..............................   235
        Survey of science and engineering workforce shaping 
          programs...............................................   235
Title III--Operation and Maintenance.............................   237
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   237
        Explanation of tables....................................   237
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   272
        Limitation on availability of funds for the Army 
          Logistics Modernization Program (sec. 311).............   272
        Availability of funds for exhibits for the national 
          museums of the Armed Forces (sec. 312).................   272
        Limitation on financial management improvement and audit 
          initiatives within the Department of Defense (sec. 313)   273
        Limitation on availability of operation and maintenance 
          funds for the management headquarters of the Defense 
          Information Systems Agency (sec. 314)..................   273
    Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions.........................   274
        Response plan for remediation of military munitions (sec. 
          331)...................................................   274
        Extension of authority to grant exemptions to certain 
          requirements (sec. 332)................................   274
        Research on effects of ocean disposal of munitions (sec. 
          333)...................................................   275
        Clarification of multi-year authority to use base closure 
          funds to fund cooperative agreements under 
          Environmental Restoration Program (sec. 334)...........   276
        Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for 
          certain costs in connection with Moses Lake Wellfield 
          Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington (sec. 335)......   276
    Subtitle D--Reports..........................................   277
        Comptroller General report on readiness of the ground 
          forces of the Army and the Marine Corps (sec. 351).....   277
    Subtitle E--Workplace and Depot Issues.......................   278
        Minimum capital investment levels for public depots 
          serviced by working capital funds (sec. 361)...........   278
        Permanent exclusion of certain contract expenditures from 
          percentage limitations on the performance of depot-
          level maintenance (sec. 362)...........................   279
        Additional exception to prohibition on contractor 
          performance of firefighting functions (sec. 363).......   279
        Temporary security guard services for certain work caused 
          by realignment of military installations under the base 
          closure laws (sec. 364)................................   279
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   279
        Recycling of military munitions (sec. 371)...............   279
        Incentives clauses in chemical demilitarization contracts 
          (sec. 372).............................................   280
        Extension of Department of Defense telecommunications 
          benefit program (sec. 373).............................   281
        Extension of availability of funds for commemoration of 
          success of the Armed Forces in Operation Enduring 
          Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (sec. 374).........   281
    Budget Items--Other Defense Programs.........................   282
        Chronic pain management research.........................   282
        Defense Health Program unobligated balances and 
          administrative efficiencies............................   282
        Medical education and training on Post-Traumatic Stress 
          Disorder...............................................   283
        Pregnancy recovery education program for military women 
          and military spouses...................................   283
        Primary care enhancement for early detection and 
          treatment of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder............   283
        Robotic surgery for prostate cancer......................   284
    Budget Items--Army...........................................   284
        Battlefield mobility enhancers...........................   284
        UH-60 add on armor.......................................   284
        Rapid Data Management System.............................   284
        Cognitive Air Defense Simulators.........................   284
        Army corrosion prevention and control....................   285
        Blood bag transport modernization project................   285
        Quadruple specialty containers...........................   285
        Army Strategic Management System.........................   285
        Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Management Command 
          Integrated Digital Environment pilot program...........   285
        Military to civilian conversions.........................   286
        Working capital funds....................................   287
        Unobligated balances.....................................   288
        Information assurance vulnerability alert cell...........   288
        Connect and Join.........................................   288
    Budget Items--Navy...........................................   289
        Long arm high-intensity arc metal halide handheld 
          searchlight............................................   289
        Man Overboard Identification safety system...............   289
        Mark-45 gun system overhauls.............................   289
        Navy Marine Corps Intranet program management............   289
        Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements.........   290
    Budget Items--Marine Corps...................................   290
        Acclimate high performance undergarments.................   290
        Cold Weather Layering System.............................   290
        Command Post-Large.......................................   291
        Individual Water Purifier System.........................   291
        Portable tent lighting...................................   291
        Ultra-light Camouflage Net System........................   291
        Marine Corps corrosion prevention and control............   291
    Budget Items--Air Force......................................   292
        Joint Modular Ground Targets and Urban Close Air Support 
          site...................................................   292
        F-16 supply chain management DMSMS program...............   292
        Air Force space surveillance system......................   292
        Consequence management...................................   292
        Interoperable communications.............................   293
        National capital region operational enhancements.........   293
        National Security Space Institute........................   293
        Tuition assistance.......................................   294
    Budget Items--Defense-wide...................................   294
        Gamma Radiation Detection System.........................   294
        Information assurance scholarship program................   294
        Meals Ready to Eat war reserve stockpile.................   294
        Increased funding for conservation buffer zones..........   295
        Citizen-Soldier Support Program..........................   295
        Institute for national security information analysis.....   295
    Budget Items--Army Reserve...................................   296
        Army Reserve budget justification materials..............   296
        Military technicians pay in excess of requirements.......   296
    Budget Items--Air Force Reserve..............................   296
        Air Force Reserve training, test and ferry flying hours..   296
    Budget Items--Army National Guard............................   297
        Battlefield mobility enhancers...........................   297
        Operator driving simulator...............................   297
        Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams 
          sustainment training and evaluation program............   297
        Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams upgrades.   298
    Budget Items--Air National Guard.............................   298
        Warrior skills and convoy trainer........................   298
    Budget Items--Transfer Accounts..............................   298
        Funding for Formerly Used Defense Sites..................   298
        Increased funding for clean up of unexploded ordnance at 
          BRAC sites.............................................   299
    Items of Special Interest....................................   299
        40 mm day/night training cartridge.......................   299
        Comptroller General study of the Defense Transportation 
          Coordination Initiative................................   300
        Defense Information System Network Access Transport 
          Services...............................................   300
        Defense Readiness Reporting System.......................   301
        Defense Travel System....................................   301
        Department of Defense foreign language training..........   302
        Marine Aviation Training Transformation savings..........   303
        Performance of certain work by federal government 
          employees..............................................   303
        Radio frequency identification report....................   303
        Training Range Vegetation Encroachment...................   304
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations......................   305
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   305
        End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)...............   305
        Repeal of requirement for permanent end strength levels 
          to support two major regional contingencies (sec. 402).   306
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   307
        End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............   307
        End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of 
          the Reserves (sec. 412)................................   307
        End strengths for military technicians (dual status) 
          (sec. 413).............................................   308
        Fiscal year 2007 limitation on number of non-dual status 
          technicians (sec. 414).................................   308
        Maximum number of Reserve personnel authorized to be on 
          active duty for operational support (sec. 415).........   308
    Subtitle C--Authorizations of Appropriations.................   309
        Military personnel (sec. 421)............................   309
        Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 422)..................   309
    Budget Items.................................................   309
        Unobligated balances.....................................   309
        Reserves cost avoidance..................................   309
Title V--Military Personnel Policy...............................   311
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   311
        Part I--Officer Personnel Policy Generally...............   311
            Military status of officers serving in certain 
              intelligence community positions (sec. 501)........   311
            Extension of temporary reduction of time-in-grade 
              requirement for eligibility for promotion for 
              certain active-duty list officers in grades of 
              first lieutenant and lieutenant (junior grade) 
              (sec. 502).........................................   311
            Extension of age limits for active-duty general and 
              flag officers (sec. 503)...........................   311
            Modification of authorities on senior members of the 
              Judge Advocate General's Corps (sec. 504)..........   312
            Requirement for significant joint experience for 
              officers appointed as Surgeon General of the Army, 
              Navy, and Air Force (sec. 505).....................   312
            Grade and exclusion from active-duty general and flag 
              officer distribution and strength limitations of 
              officer serving as Attending Physician to the 
              Congress (sec. 506)................................   313
            Discretionary separation and retirement of chief 
              warrant officers, W-4, twice failing selection for 
              promotion (sec. 507)...............................   313
            Increased mandatory retirement ages for Reserve 
              officers (sec. 508)................................   313
        Part II--Officer Promotion Policy........................   314
            Promotions (sec. 515)................................   314
            Consideration of adverse information by promotion 
              selection boards in recommendations on officers to 
              be promoted (sec. 516).............................   314
            Expanded authority for removal from reports of 
              selection boards of officers recommended for 
              promotion to grades below general and flag grades 
              (sec. 517).........................................   314
            Clarification of nondisclosure requirements 
              applicable to promotion selection board proceedings 
              (sec. 518).........................................   315
            Special selection board authorities (sec. 519).......   315
            Removal from promotion lists of officers returned to 
              the President by the Senate (sec. 520).............   315
        Part III--Joint Officer Management Requirements..........   316
            Modification and enhancement of general authorities 
              on management of joint qualified officers (sec. 
              526)...............................................   316
            Modification of promotion policy objectives for joint 
              officers (sec. 527)................................   317
            Applicability of joint duty assignment requirements 
              limited to graduates of National Defense University 
              schools (sec. 528).................................   317
            Modification of definitions relating to jointness 
              (sec. 529).........................................   317
    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Matters..............   318
        Enhanced flexibility in the management of Reserve 
          component personnel (sec. 531).........................   318
        Expansion of activities authorized for Reserves under 
          Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (sec. 
          532)...................................................   319
        Modification of authorities relating to the Commission on 
          the National Guard and Reserves (sec. 533).............   319
        Pilot program on reintegration of members of the National 
          Guard into civilian life after deployment (sec. 534)...   319
    Subtitle C--Military Justice and Related Matters.............   320
        Applicability of Uniform Code of Military Justice to 
          members of the Armed Forces ordered to active duty 
          overseas in inactive duty for training status (sec. 
          551)...................................................   320
    Subtitle D--Education and Training Matters...................   320
        Detail of commissioned officers as students at medical 
          schools (sec. 561).....................................   320
        Expansion of eligibility to provide Junior Reserve 
          Officers' Training Corps instruction (sec. 562)........   321
        Increase in maximum amount of repayment under education 
          loan repayment for officers in specified health 
          professions (sec. 563).................................   321
        Increase in benefits under Health Professions Scholarship 
          and Financial Assistance Program (sec. 564)............   321
        Report on Health Professions Scholarship and Financial 
          Assistance Program (sec. 565)..........................   321
        Expansion of instruction available at the Naval 
          Postgraduate School for enlisted members of the Armed 
          Forces (sec. 566)......................................   322
        Modification of actions to address sexual harassment and 
          sexual violence at the service academies (sec. 567)....   322
        Department of Defense policy on service academy and ROTC 
          graduates seeking to participate in professional sports 
          before completion of their active-duty service 
          obligations (sec. 568).................................   322
    Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education Matters.............   323
        Funding for assistance to local educational agencies that 
          benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and 
          Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 571)....   323
        Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 
          572)...................................................   323
        Plan to assist local educational agencies experiencing 
          growth in enrollment due to force structure changes, 
          relocation of military units, or BRAC (sec. 573).......   324
        Pilot program on parent education to promote early 
          childhood education for dependent children affected by 
          military deployment or relocation of military units 
          (sec. 574).............................................   324
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   325
        Administration of oaths (sec. 581).......................   325
        Military ID cards for retiree dependents who are 
          permanently disabled (sec. 582)........................   325
        Military voting matters (sec. 583).......................   325
        Presentation of Medal of Honor Flag to primary next of 
          kin of Medal of Honor recipients (sec. 584)............   326
        Modification of effective period of authority to present 
          recognition items for recruitment and retention 
          purposes (sec. 585)....................................   326
        Military severely injured center (sec. 586)..............   326
    Items of Special Interest....................................   327
        Funding for the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command.........   327
        Military medical recruiting..............................   328
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits..............   331
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   331
        Fiscal year 2007 increase in military basic pay and 
          reform of basic pay rates (sec. 601)...................   331
        Increase in maximum rate of basic pay for general and 
          flag officer grades (sec. 602).........................   331
        Clarification of effective date of prohibition on 
          compensation for correspondence courses (sec. 603).....   331
        One-year extension of prohibition against requiring 
          certain injured members to pay for meals provided by 
          military treatment facilities (sec. 604)...............   332
        Additional housing allowance for Reserves on active duty 
          in support of a contingency operation (sec. 605).......   332
        Extension of temporary continuation of housing allowance 
          for dependents of members dying on active duty to 
          spouses who are members of the uniformed services (sec. 
          606)...................................................   332
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   333
        Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities 
          for Reserve Forces (sec. 611)..........................   333
        Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities 
          for certain health care professionals (sec. 612).......   333
        Extension of special pay and bonus authorities for 
          nuclear officers (sec. 613)............................   333
        Extension of authorities relating to payment of other 
          bonuses and special pays (sec. 614)....................   333
        Increase in special pay for Selected Reserve health care 
          professionals in critically short wartime specialties 
          (sec. 615).............................................   333
        Expansion and enhancement of accession bonus authorities 
          for certain officers in health care specialties (sec. 
          616)...................................................   334
        Increase in nuclear career accession bonus for nuclear-
          qualified officers (sec. 617)..........................   334
        Modification of certain authorities applicable to the 
          targeted shaping of the Armed Forces (sec. 618)........   334
        Extension of pilot program on contributions to Thrift 
          Savings Plan for initial enlistees in the Army (sec. 
          619)...................................................   335
    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances.............   335
        Expansion of payment of replacement value of personal 
          property damage during transport at Government expense 
          (sec. 631).............................................   335
    Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits................   336
        Modification of Department of Defense contributions to 
          Military Retirement Fund and Government contributions 
          to Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (sec. 
          641)...................................................   336
        Repeal of requirement of reduction of SBP survivor 
          annuities by dependency and indemnity compensation 
          (sec. 642).............................................   336
        Effective date of paid-up coverage under Survivor Benefit 
          Plan (sec. 643)........................................   337
        Expansion of conditions for direct payment of divisible 
          retired pay (sec. 644).................................   337
        Authority for cost of living adjustments of retired pay 
          treated as divisible property (sec. 645)...............   337
        Notice and copy to members of court orders on payment of 
          retired pay (sec. 646).................................   338
        Retention of assistive technology and devices by certain 
          members of the Armed Forces after separation from 
          service (sec. 647).....................................   338
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   338
        Audit of pay accounts of members of the Army evacuated 
          from a combat zone for inpatient care (sec. 661).......   338
    Item of Special Interest.....................................   339
        Department of Defense child care services................   339
Title VII--Health Care...........................................   341
    Subtitle A--Benefits Matters.................................   341
        Improved procedures for cancer screening for women (sec. 
          701)...................................................   341
        National mail-order pharmacy program (sec. 702)..........   341
        Availability under TRICARE of anesthesia for children in 
          connection with dental procedures for which dental 
          anesthesia is inappropriate (sec. 703).................   341
        TRICARE coverage for forensic examinations following 
          sexual assaults and domestic violence (sec. 704).......   342
        Prohibition on increase in fiscal year 2007 in enrollment 
          fees for coverage under TRICARE Prime (sec. 705).......   342
        Limitation on fiscal year 2007 increase in premiums for 
          coverage under TRICARE of members of Reserve components 
          who commit to continued service in Selected Reserve 
          after release from active duty (sec. 706)..............   342
    Subtitle B--Planning, Programming, and Management............   342
        Treatment of TRICARE Retail Pharmacy Network under 
          Federal procurement of pharmaceuticals (sec. 721)......   342
        Relationship between the TRICARE program and employer-
          sponsored group health care plans (sec. 722)...........   343
        Enrollment in the TRICARE program (sec. 723).............   343
        Incentive payments for the provision of services under 
          the TRICARE program in medically underserved areas 
          (sec. 724).............................................   343
        Standardization of claims processing under TRICARE 
          program and Medicare program (sec. 725)................   344
        Requirements for support of military treatment facilities 
          by civilian contractors under TRICARE (sec. 726).......   344
        Uniform standards for access to health care services for 
          wounded or injured servicemembers (sec. 727)...........   345
        Disease and chronic care management (sec. 728)...........   345
        Post-deployment health assessments for members of the 
          Armed Forces returning from deployment in support of a 
          contingency operation (sec. 729).......................   346
    Subtitle C--Studies and Reports..............................   346
        Pilot projects on early diagnosis and treatment of Post 
          Traumatic Stress Disorder and other mental health 
          conditions (sec. 741)..................................   346
        Annual reports on certain medical malpractice cases (sec. 
          742)...................................................   347
        Comptroller General study on the Department of Defense 
          pharmacy benefits program (sec. 743)...................   348
        Comptroller General audits of Department of Defense 
          health care costs and cost-saving measures (sec. 744)..   348
        Review of Department of Defense medical quality 
          improvement program (sec. 745).........................   348
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   349
        Extension of limitation on conversion of military medical 
          and dental positions to civilian medical and dental 
          positions (sec. 761)...................................   349
    Items of Special Interest....................................   349
        Sustaining the military health care benefit..............   349
        Basrah Children's Hospital, Iraq.........................   350
        Mental Health Self-Assessment Program....................   350
        Services for autism......................................   351
        TRICARE customer service.................................   351
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and 
  Related Matters................................................   353
    Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................   353
        Additional certification requirements for major defense 
          acquisition programs (sec. 801)........................   353
        Extension and enhancement of Defense Acquisition 
          Challenge Program (sec. 802)...........................   353
        Baseline description and unit cost reports for major 
          defense acquisition systems (sec. 803).................   354
        Major automated information system programs (sec. 804)...   354
        Adjustment of original baseline estimates for major 
          defense acquisition program experiencing cost growth 
          resulting from damage caused by hurricanes Katrina, 
          Rita, and Wilma (sec. 805).............................   355
        Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the 
          Department of Defense by certain non-defense agencies 
          (sec. 806).............................................   356
        Regulations on use of fixed price contracts in 
          development programs (sec. 807)........................   356
        Availability of funds for performance-based logistics 
          contracts for weapons systems logistics support (sec. 
          808)...................................................   358
        Quality control in procurement of ship critical safety 
          items and related services (sec. 809)..................   359
        Three-year extension of requirement for reports on 
          commercial price trend analyses of the Department of 
          Defense (sec. 810).....................................   359
        Pilot program on time-certain development in acquisition 
          of major weapon systems (sec. 811).....................   359
    Subtitle B--Defense Industrial Base Matters..................   360
        Removal of hand and measuring tools from certain 
          requirements (sec. 821)................................   360
        Substitution of speciality metals with titanium and 
          nickel under certain requirements (sec. 822)...........   360
        Waiver authority for domestic source or content 
          requirements (sec. 823)................................   360
        Repeal of requirement for identification of essential 
          military items and military system essential item 
          breakout list (sec. 824)...............................   361
        Consistency with United States obligations under trade 
          agreements (sec. 825)..................................   361
    Subtitle C--Defense Contractor Matters.......................   361
        Requirements for defense contractors relating to certain 
          former Department of Defense officials (sec. 841)......   361
        Lead systems integrators (sec. 842)......................   361
        Linking of award and incentive fees to acquisition 
          outcomes (sec. 843)....................................   362
        Prohibition on excessive pass-through charges (sec. 844).   363
        Report on Department of Defense contracting with 
          contractors or subcontractors employing members of the 
          Selected Reserve (sec. 845)............................   364
    Subtitle D--Program Manager Matters..........................   364
        Program Manager Matters (secs. 861-865)..................   364
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   366
        Clarification of authority to carry out certain prototype 
          projects (sec. 871)....................................   366
        One-year extension of special temporary contract closeout 
          authority (sec. 872)...................................   366
        One-year extension of inapplicability of certain laws to 
          contracting with employers of persons with disabilities 
          (sec. 873).............................................   366
    Items of Special Interest....................................   367
        Application and interpretation of the Berry amendment....   367
        Brand-name specifications................................   368
        Clarification of rapid acquisition authority to respond 
          to combat emergencies..................................   369
        Coal gasification report.................................   369
        Contracting with Federal Prison Industries...............   370
        Past performance evaluations.............................   370
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management......   373
    Subtitle A--Duties and Functions of Department of Defense 
      Officers and Organizations.................................   373
        United States Military Cancer Institute (sec. 901).......   373
        Senior acquisition executive for Special Operations 
          within staff of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
          Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflicts (sec. 
          902)...................................................   373
    Subtitle B--Space Activities.................................   373
        Establishment of operationally responsive space 
          capabilities (sec. 911)................................   373
        Extension of authority for pilot program on provision of 
          space surveillance network services to non-United 
          States Government entities (sec. 912)..................   374
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   374
        Department of Defense policy on unmanned systems (sec. 
          921)...................................................   374
        Executive Schedule level IV for Deputy Under Secretary of 
          Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness (sec. 922)   375
        Three-year extension of joint incentives program on 
          sharing of health care resources by the Department of 
          Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs (sec. 923)..   376
Title X--General Provisions......................................   377
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   377
        Transfer authority (sec. 1001)...........................   377
        Authorization of supplemental appropriations for fiscal 
          year 2006 (sec. 1002)..................................   377
        Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings 
          relating to lower inflation (sec. 1003)................   377
        Increase in fiscal year 2006 general transfer authority 
          (sec. 1004)............................................   378
        United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets 
          in fiscal year 2007 (sec. 1005)........................   378
        Modification of date of submittal of OMB/CBO report on 
          scoring of outlays (sec. 1006).........................   378
        Prohibition on parking of funds (sec. 1007)..............   378
    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels....................................   379
        Repeal requirement for 12 operational aircraft carriers 
          within the Navy (sec. 1011)............................   379
        Approval of transfer of naval vessels to foreign nations 
          by vessel class (sec. 1012)............................   380
    Subtitle C--Counterdrug Matters..............................   381
        Extension of availability of funds for unified 
          counterdrug and counterterrorism campaign in Colombia 
          (sec. 1021)............................................   381
        Extension of authority of Department of Defense to 
          provide additional support for counterdrug activities 
          of other governmental agencies (sec. 1022).............   381
        Extension and expansion of certain authorities to provide 
          additional support for counterdrug activities (sec. 
          1023)..................................................   381
    Subtitle D--Defense Intelligence and Related Matters.........   382
        Two-year extension of authority to engage in commercial 
          activities as security for intelligence collection 
          activities (sec. 1031).................................   382
        Annual report on intelligence oversight activities of the 
          Department of Defense (sec. 1032)......................   382
        Administration of pilot project on Civilian Linguist 
          Reserve Corps (sec. 1033)..............................   382
        Improvement of authorities on the National Security 
          Education Program (sec. 1034)..........................   383
    Subtitle E--Defense Against Terrorism and Related Security 
      Matters....................................................   383
        Enhancement of authority to pay monetary rewards for 
          assistance in combating terrorism (sec. 1041)..........   383
        Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies (sec. 
          1042)..................................................   383
        Treatment under Freedom of Information Act of certain 
          confidential information shared with State and local 
          personnel (sec. 1043)..................................   385
    Subtitle F--Miscellaneous Authorities on Availability and Use 
      of Funds...................................................   385
        Acceptance and retention of reimbursement from non-
          Federal sources to defray Department of Defense costs 
          of conferences (sec. 1051).............................   385
        Minimum annual purchase amounts for airlift from carriers 
          participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (sec. 
          1052)..................................................   386
        Increased flexibility in the use of funds for Joint Staff 
          exercises (sec. 1053)..................................   386
    Subtitle G--Report Matters...................................   387
        Report on clarification of prohibition on cruel, inhuman, 
          and degrading treatment or punishment (sec. 1061)......   387
        Reports on members of the Armed Forces and civilian 
          employees of the Department of Defense serving in the 
          Legislative Branch (sec. 1062).........................   387
        Additional element in annual report on chemical and 
          biological warfare defense (sec. 1063).................   388
        Report on Local Boards of Trustees of the Armed Forces 
          Retirement Home (sec. 1064)............................   388
        Repeal of certain report requirements (sec. 1065)........   388
    Subtitle H--Technical and Conforming Amendments..............   389
        Uniform definition of national security system for 
          certain Department of Defense purposes (sec. 1071).....   389
        Conforming amendment relating to redesignation of Defense 
          Communications Agency as Defense Information Systems 
          Agency (sec. 1072).....................................   389
        Technical amendment (sec. 1073)..........................   389
    Subtitle I--Other Matters....................................   389
        National Foreign Language Coordination Council (sec. 
          1081)..................................................   389
        Support of successor organizations of the disestablished 
          Interagency Global Positioning System Executive Board 
          (sec. 1082)............................................   390
        Sense of Congress on the Quadrennial Defense Review (sec. 
          1083)..................................................   390
    Items of Special Interest....................................   391
        Developing a new staff structure for combatant command 
          headquarters...........................................   391
        Distributed decision support systems.....................   391
        Report on Special Operations Command UAV intelligence 
          collection requirements................................   392
Title XI--Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Policy........   393
        Accrual of annual leave for members of the uniformed 
          services on terminal leave performing dual employment 
          (sec. 1101)............................................   393
        Strategy for improving the senior management, functional, 
          and technical workforce of the Department of Defense 
          (sec. 1102)............................................   393
        Authority to equalize allowances, benefits, and 
          gratuities of personnel on official duty in Iraq and 
          Afghanistan (sec. 1103)................................   394
    Item of Special Interest.....................................   395
        Highly qualified experts.................................   395
Title XII--Matters Relating to Other Nations.....................   397
    Subtitle A--General Matters..................................   397
        Expansion of humanitarian and civic assistance to include 
          communications and information capacity (sec. 1201)....   397
        Modification of authorities relating to the Regional 
          Defense Counterterrorism Fellowship Program (sec. 1202)   397
        Logistic support of allied forces for combined operations 
          (sec. 1203)............................................   397
        Exclusion of petroleum, oil, and lubricants from 
          limitations on amount of liabilities the United States 
          may accrue under acquisition and cross-servicing 
          agreements (sec. 1204).................................   398
        Temporary authority to use acquisition and cross-
          servicing agreements to loan significant military 
          equipment to foreign forces in Iraq and Afghanistan for 
          personnel protection and survivability (sec. 1205).....   398
        Modification of authorities relating to the building of 
          the capacity of foreign military forces (sec. 1206)....   399
        Participation of the Department of Defense in 
          multinational military centers of excellence (sec. 
          1207)..................................................   401
        Distribution of education and training materials and 
          information technology to enhance interoperability 
          (sec. 1208)............................................   401
    Subtitle B--Report Matters...................................   402
        Report on increased role and participation of 
          multinational partners in the United Nations Command in 
          the Republic of Korea (sec. 1221)......................   402
        Report on interagency operating procedures for 
          stabilization and reconstruction operations (sec. 1222)   403
Title XIII--Cooperative Threat Reduction With States of the 
  Former Soviet Union............................................   405
        Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs 
          and funds (sec. 1301)..................................   405
        Funding allocations (sec. 1302)..........................   405
        Extension of temporary authority to waive limitation on 
          funding for chemical weapons destruction facility in 
          Russia (sec. 1303).....................................   405
Title XIV--Authorization for Increased Costs Due to Operation 
  Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom...................   407
        Overview.................................................   407
        Summary table of authorization...........................   407
        Purpose (sec. 1401)......................................   413
        Army procurement (sec. 1402).............................   413
        Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1403).....................   413
        Air Force procurement (sec. 1404)........................   413
        Operation and Maintenance (sec. 1405)....................   413
        Defense Health Program (sec. 1406).......................   413
        Military personnel (sec. 1407)...........................   413
        Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1408)   413
        Classified programs (sec. 1409)..........................   413
        Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1410)............................   413
        Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1411).......   414
        Transfer authority (sec. 1412)...........................   414
        Availability of funds (sec. 1413)........................   414
    Budget Items.................................................   414
        UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters............................   414
        CH-47F cargo helicopters.................................   414
        Patriot missile defense system...........................   414
        M1A1 Abrams integrated management and tank urbanization 
          upgrade kits...........................................   415
        High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles..............   415
        Heavy expanded mobile tactical truck extended service 
          program................................................   416
        Land mobile radios.......................................   416
        Profiler.................................................   416
        Assault Amphibious Vehicle/7A1 product improvement 
          program................................................   416
        High mobility artillery rocket system re-supply system 
          armor..................................................   417
        Gunner protection kits...................................   417
        Family of explosive ordnance demolition equipment........   417
        Up-armored high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles...   418
        Abrams M1A1 Abrams Integrated Management program.........   418
        Navy flying hour program.................................   418
        Aviation depot maintenance...............................   418
        Ship operations..........................................   419
        Ship depot maintenance...................................   419
        Marine Corps depot maintenance funding...................   419
        Joint improvised explosive device defeat defense fund....   419
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations.................   421
        Explanation of funding tables............................   421
        Costs to implement the decisions of the 2005 Defense Base 
          Closure and Realignment round..........................   443
        2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment accounts 
          authorized for appropriations in 2006..................   444
        2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment accounts.......   448
        Short title (sec. 2001)..................................   455
Title XXI--Army..................................................   457
    Summary......................................................   457
        Authorized Army construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2101)...................................   457
        Family housing (sec. 2102)...............................   457
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103)   457
        Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)........   457
        Items of Special Interest................................   457
        Planning and design, Army................................   457
        Management of military programs in the United States Army 
          Corps of Engineers.....................................   458
Title XXII--Navy.................................................   461
        Summary..................................................   461
        Land Acquisition, Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort, 
          South Carolina.........................................   461
        Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2201)...................................   462
        Family housing (sec. 2202)...............................   463
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)   463
        Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........   463
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2006 projects (sec. 2205).........................   463
Title XXIII--Air Force...........................................   465
        Summary..................................................   465
        Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2301)...................................   465
        Family housing (sec. 2302)...............................   465
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)   465
        Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)...   466
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2006 project (sec. 2305)..........................   466
    Item of Special Interest.....................................   466
        Change of project title at Cape Canaveral, Florida.......   466
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies.....................................   467
        Summary..................................................   467
        Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2401).......................   468
        Family housing (sec. 2402)...............................   468
        Energy conservation projects (sec. 2403).................   468
        Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 
          2404)..................................................   468
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2006 projects (sec. 2405).........................   468
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
  Program........................................................   469
        Summary..................................................   469
        Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2501)...................................   469
        Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........   469
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities..................   471
        Summary..................................................   471
        Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2601).......................   471
    Item of Special Interest.....................................   471
        Planning and design, Air National Guard..................   471
Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations..........   473
        Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
          specified by law (sec. 2701)...........................   473
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2004 
          projects (sec. 2702)...................................   473
        Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2003 
          projects (sec. 2703)...................................   473
        Effective date (sec. 2704)...............................   473
Title XXVIII--General Provisions.................................   475
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   475
        Three-year extension of temporary, limited authority to 
          use operation and maintenance funds for construction 
          projects outside the United States (sec. 2801).........   475
        Authority to carry out military construction projects in 
          connection with industrial facility investment program 
          (sec. 2802)............................................   475
        Modification of notification requirements related to cost 
          variation authority (sec. 2803)........................   476
        Consideration of local comparability of floor areas in 
          construction, acquisition, and improvement of military 
          unaccompanied housing (sec. 2804)......................   476
        Increase in thresholds for unspecified minor military 
          construction projects (sec. 2805)......................   477
        Inclusion of military transportation and support systems 
          in energy savings programs (sec. 2806).................   477
        Repeal of authority to convey property at closed or 
          realigned military installations to support military 
          construction (sec. 2807)...............................   477
        Repeal of requirement to determine availability of 
          suitable alternate housing for acquisition in lieu of 
          construction of new family housing (sec. 2808).........   478
        Updating foreign currency fluctuation adjustment for 
          certain military family housing leases in Korea (sec. 
          2809)..................................................   478
        Pilot projects for acquisition or construction of 
          military unaccompanied housing (sec. 2810).............   479
        Certification required for certain military construction 
          projects (sec. 2811)...................................   479
        Modification of land acquisition authority, Perquimans 
          County, North Carolina (sec. 2812).....................   480
        Naming of research laboratory at Air Force Rome Research 
          Site, Rome, New York, in honor of Sherwood L. Boehlert, 
          a Member of the House of Representatives (sec. 2813)...   480
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   480
        Consolidation of easement provisions (sec. 2821).........   480
        Authority to grant restrictive easements for conservation 
          and environmental restoration purposes (sec. 2822).....   480
        Consolidation of provisions relating to transfers of real 
          property within the Department of Defense and to other 
          Federal agencies (sec. 2823)...........................   481
        Authority to use excess property as exchange under 
          agreements to limit encroachments on military training, 
          testing, and operations (sec. 2824)....................   481
        Modification of utility system authority and related 
          reporting requirements (sec. 2825).....................   481
        Increase in authorized maximum lease term for certain 
          structures and real property relating to structures in 
          foreign countries (sec. 2826)..........................   482
        Modification of land transfer authority, Potomac Annex, 
          District of Columbia (sec. 2827).......................   482
    Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment.....................   482
        Defense Economic Adjustment Program: research and 
          technical assistance (sec. 2831).......................   482
        Extension of eligibility for community planning 
          assistance related to certain military facilities not 
          under Department of Defense jurisdiction (sec. 2832)...   483
        Modification of deposit requirement in connection with 
          lease proceeds received at military installations 
          approved for closure or realignment after January 1, 
          2005 (sec. 2833).......................................   483
    Subtitle D--Land Conveyances.................................   483
        Land conveyance, Radford Army Ammunition Plant, Virginia 
          (sec. 2841)............................................   483
        Modifications to land conveyance authority, Engineering 
          Proving Ground, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (sec. 2842).....   484
        Land conveyance, Omaha, Nebraska (sec. 2843).............   484
    Items of Special Interest....................................   484
        Electronic access to data related to 2005 Defense Base 
          Closure and Realignment Round..........................   484
        Facilities for Headquarters, United States Southern 
          Command................................................   485
        National Guard Training Site, Camp Atterbury, Indiana....   486
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
  and Other Authorizations.......................................   489
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs......   489
        Overview.................................................   489
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs.......................   512
        National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101).....   512
        Defense environmental clean-up (sec. 3102)...............   515
        Other defense activities (sec. 3103).....................   516
        Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104)...............   517
    Subtitle B--Other Matters....................................   518
        Notice and wait requirement applicable to certain third 
          party financing arrangements (sec. 3111)...............   518
        Utilization of international contributions to the Global 
          Threat Reduction Initiative (sec. 3112)................   518
        Utilization of international contributions to the Second 
          Line of Defense Core Program (sec. 3113)...............   519
        Extension of Facilities and Infrastructure 
          Recapitalization Program (sec. 3114)...................   519
        Two-year extension of authority for appointment of 
          certain scientific, engineering, and technical 
          personnel (sec. 3115)..................................   519
        Extension of deadline for transfer of lands to Los Alamos 
          County, New Mexico, and of lands in trust for the 
          Pueblo of San Ildefonso (sec. 3116)....................   520
        Limitation on availability of funds for Waste Treatment 
          and Immobilization Plant (sec. 3117)...................   520
        Limitation on availability of funds for implementation of 
          the Russian Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition 
          Program (sec. 3118)....................................   522
        Limitation on availability of funds for construction of 
          MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (sec. 3119)..............   523
        Technical correction related to authorization of 
          appropriations for fiscal year 2006 (sec. 3120)........   523
    Items of Special Interest....................................   524
        The role of the Kansas City Plant in the nuclear weapons 
          program................................................   524
        Transparency in budgeting for security requirements......   524
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.............   525
        Authorization (sec. 3201)................................   525
    Legislative Requirements.....................................   525
        Departmental Recommendations.............................   525
        Committee Action.........................................   526
        Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate................   526
        Regulatory Impact........................................   526
        Changes in Existing Law..................................   526
    Additional Views of Senator John Cornyn......................   527
    Additional Views of Senator Bill Nelson, Florida.............   528











109th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     109-254

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


AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
   OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR 
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 
  STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                  May 9, 2006.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Warner, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 2766]

    The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an 
original bill to authorize appropriations during the fiscal 
year 2007 for military activities of the Department of Defense, 
for military construction, and for defense activities of the 
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such 
fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes, and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    This bill would:
          (1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b) 
        research, development, test and evaluation, (c) 
        operation and maintenance and the revolving and 
        management funds of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 2007;
          (2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each 
        military active duty component of the Armed Forces for 
        fiscal year 2007;
          (3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the 
        Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of 
        the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2007;
          (4) impose certain reporting requirements;
          (5) impose certain limitations with regard to 
        specific procurement and research, development, test 
        and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide 
        certain additional legislative authority, and make 
        certain changes to existing law;
          (6) authorize appropriations for military 
        construction programs of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 2007; and
          (7) authorize appropriations for national security 
        programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
        2007.

Committee overview and recommendations 

    From Europe to the Middle East and from Asia to Africa, the 
presence of U.S. forces and their contributions to regional 
peace and security reassure our allies and deter our 
adversaries. Since 2001, U.S. armed forces have been engaged in 
the global war on terrorism. Today, there are over 250,000 
uniformed personnel deployed or stationed in approximately 120 
countries. U.S. military forces are involved in overseas 
deployments at an unprecedented rate.
    Currently, the central battlegrounds in the war on 
terrorism are in Iraq and Afghanistan. For each of these 
countries, the road to peace, stability, and democracy has been 
marked by historical milestones, with elections that chose a 
permanent government, a referendum that adopted a permanent 
constitution, and progress in building security forces capable 
of protecting their nation's freedom. Behind the backdrop of 
these achievements, U.S. forces continue the difficult work of 
counterinsurgency, stabilization, and reconstruction. Beyond 
the borders of Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. armed forces are 
engaged in a broad array of missions, ranging from 
counterinsurgency and counterterrorism training to keeping the 
peace, fighting terrorists, providing humanitarian assistance 
and disaster relief, and participating in civil-military 
operations.
    The accomplishments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global 
war on terrorism are a tribute to the dedication and skills of 
our men and women in uniform who are willing to respond to the 
call to duty, and to the military leaders who lead them. The 
successes achieved have come at a great sacrifice to the 
members of the armed forces and their families and the 
countless civilians and contractors who support them. 
Tragically, many have been killed while serving in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, and many others have been wounded. A grateful 
nation remembers and honors their sacrifices.
    While addressing current threats to our nation's security 
and planning for emerging threats, the military faces a number 
of challenges, including increasing health care costs, 
operational readiness and recruiting and retention, 
modernization and transformation of the armed forces during a 
time of war, and reforming the acquisition system. The National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 addresses these 
challenges, while continuing a tradition of providing the best 
training, equipment, and protection possible for the American 
warfighter.
    In conjunction with the submission of the President's 
budget request, the Department of Defense released its 
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) Report. This QDR is the second 
conducted by this administration and the first to be conducted 
in wartime. The QDR reflects a continuing shift from the 
predominately conventional warfare of the last century toward 
the irregular warfare of today and the projected disruptive 
warfare of the future. The QDR also reflects a process of 
change that has occurred since the terrorist attacks against 
the United States on September 11, 2001, and has been 
accelerated by the lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan. The 
Department has promised to issue updates to its originally 
released report as additional assessments are completed.
    This QDR is forward-looking, including recommendations on 
initiatives for the near and long term to provide the United 
States with the capabilities it needs to secure its freedom in 
the decades ahead. Some of these recommendations will be 
implemented in fiscal year 2007 and others in future years. The 
committee carefully reviewed all the Department's proposals and 
included some of them in this bill.
    The committee believes that further explanation and 
analysis is needed on how the Department integrates threat 
assessments into its capabilities-based force structure 
planning; the assumptions and planning guidelines that informed 
the recommended capabilities necessary to meet future threats; 
and a more comprehensive risk assessment that describes the 
additional capabilities that would be needed to mitigate risks. 
The committee will undertake a careful review of the QDR in the 
months ahead, including a review of subsequent assessments 
completed by the Department.
    To date, in the second session of the 109th Congress, the 
Committee on Armed Services has conducted 36 hearings and 
received numerous policy and operational briefings on the 
President's budget request for fiscal year 2007 and related 
defense issues. During the course of these deliberations, the 
committee identified seven priorities to guide its work on the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. These 
priorities include:
          (1) providing our men and women in uniform with the 
        resources, training, technology, equipment, and 
        authorities they need to win the global war on 
        terrorism, with a particular focus on supporting 
        ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan;
          (2) enhancing the ability of the Department to 
        fulfill its homeland defense responsibilities by 
        providing the resources, authorities, and equipment 
        necessary for the Department to assist in protecting 
        our nation against current and anticipated forms of 
        attack;
          (3) providing the resources and authorities needed to 
        rapidly acquire the full range of force protection 
        capabilities for deployed forces;
          (4) continuing the committee's commitment to improve 
        the quality of life for those who serve--active, 
        Reserve, National Guard, and retired--and their 
        families; enhancing incentives to recruit and retain 
        those who volunteer to serve in the armed forces; 
        providing the best possible care and rehabilitation 
        services for those who bear the wounds of combat; and 
        ensuring generous support for the survivors of those 
        military personnel killed in the defense of our nation;
          (5) sustaining the readiness of our armed forces to 
        conduct military operations against current and 
        anticipated threats;
          (6) supporting the Department's efforts to develop 
        innovative, forward-looking capabilities necessary to 
        modernize and transform the armed forces to 
        successfully counter current and future threats, 
        particularly by enhancing our technology in areas such 
        as unmanned systems, personnel protection systems, and 
        measures to counter improvised explosive devices; and
          (7) continuing active committee oversight of 
        Department programs and operations, particularly in the 
        areas of acquisition reform and contract management, to 
        ensure proper stewardship of taxpayers' dollars.
    The President's budget for defense for fiscal year 2007 
builds on the investments made in recent years by providing 
real increases in defense spending to combat terrorism and 
secure the homeland, to enhance the quality of life of our 
military personnel and their families, and to modernize and 
transform the U.S. armed forces to meet current and future 
threats.
    In order to fund these priorities, the committee, following 
the Senate-passed budget resolution, recommended $467.7 billion 
in budget authority for defense programs for fiscal year 2007, 
an increase of $26.2 billion--or 4.1 percent in real terms--
above the amount authorized by the Congress in fiscal year 
2006. The committee authorized $85.7 billion in procurement 
funding, a $2.8 billion increase above the President's budget 
request; $74.2 billion in funding for research, development, 
test, and evaluation, a $1.0 billion increase over the 
requested level; and $112.0 billion for military personnel, a 
$1.3 billion increase over the requested level. The committee 
also recommended $50.0 billion in emergency supplemental 
funding for fiscal year 2007 for activities in support of 
operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on 
terrorism.
    To provide the Department with the resources it needs to 
win the global war on terrorism, the committee provided the 
following resources to U.S. forces:
      (1) For ground forces, the committee authorized more than 
$33.0 billion for ground and aviation equipment, an increase of 
almost $1.0 billion, and $2.1 billion for the procurement of 
equipment needed for the global war on terrorism for the Army 
and Marine Corps in the bridge supplemental.
      (2) For special operations forces, the committee added 
nearly $90.0 million, including $66.7 million to procure 
critical equipment to prosecute the global war on terrorism; 
and nearly $20.0 million for research, development, test, and 
evaluation programs.
      (3) For the Navy and Marine Corps, the committee 
authorized $3.6 billion for vertical lift assets.
      (4) For air forces, the committee set forth policy 
prohibiting the incremental funding of aircraft and provided 
full funding for the F-22A Raptor. The committee authorized an 
additional $1.4 billion for the procurement of 20 F-22A 
aircraft.
      (5) For strategic airlift, the committee authorized $2.6 
billion, including two additional C-17A aircraft, for total 
procurement of 14 C-17A aircraft.
    The committee also provided the Department with important 
resources and authorities to enhance its ability to defend the 
homeland against man-made or natural disasters or missile 
attacks.
      (1) In the areas of chemical and biological defense, and 
chemical weapons demilitarization, the committee added $71.0 
million for chemical and biological agent detection, and the 
development and fielding of technology to counter the threat of 
chemical and biological weapons.
      (2) To more effectively support local, state, and federal 
agencies in response to man-made or natural disasters, the 
committee authorized the Secretary of Defense to approve the 
deployment of Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams 
(WMD-CST) to Canada and Mexico, if requested; expanded the 
types of emergencies for which the Secretary of Defense may 
prepare or employ WMD-CST; and added $13.5 million for the 
development of a sustainable training program, and for 
equipment upgrades to ensure the standardization of equipment 
for all the teams. The committee also included a provision that 
would update the Insurrection Act to clarify the President's 
authority to use the armed forces, including the National Guard 
in federal service, to restore order and enforce federal laws 
in cases where, as a result of a terrorist attack, epidemic, or 
natural disaster, public order has broken down.
      (3) To defend the United States, its deployed forces, and 
its allies against missile attack, the committee authorized 
$10.5 billion for ballistic missile defense, but shifted funds 
from long-term developmental efforts to support near-term 
capabilities.
    As our forces undertake important missions abroad and at 
home, the committee placed high priority on force protection 
for U.S. deployed forces. The committee closely monitors force 
protection capabilities available to deployed forces, and 
remains actively engaged with the Department to ensure that all 
requirements to improve force protection are fully funded. 
Accordingly, the committee authorized over $1.0 billion for 
various programs to protect personnel, vehicles, and 
installations, including: an additional $950.5 million for 
force protection equipment, including $559.8 million for up-
armored high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles; and $100.0 
million for counter-IED engineer vehicles. The committee also 
authorized $2.1 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive 
Device Defeat Fund to facilitate the rapid development of new 
technology and tactics and the rapid deployment of equipment to 
counter improvised explosive devices (IED); and an additional 
$45.8 million for various projects to procure and develop IED 
countermeasures.
    Investing in our uniformed personnel remains among the 
committee's highest priorities. To improve the quality of life 
of our armed forces--active, Reserve, National Guard, and 
retired--and their families, the committee authorized a 2.2 
percent across-the-board pay raise for all military personnel 
and a mid-year targeted pay raise for mid-level non-
commissioned officers and warrant officers.
    Additionally, in the area of health care, the committee 
recognized that the Department faces the challenge of 
increasing health care costs, and recommended a number of 
health care reform steps. The committee remains concerned about 
the ability of the military health care system to identify and 
prevent post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health 
conditions related to deployments, and approved expansion of 
pilot programs to address these needs for both active and 
reserve component members. Among the reforms authorized, the 
committee included a provision to prohibit the payment by 
employers of financial incentives to TRICARE-eligible retirees 
to encourage them to use TRICARE instead of the health 
insurance offered to other employees. While the committee has 
acted to greatly increase use of the more economical mail order 
pharmacy program, the committee also included a provision to 
clarify that the Department's retail pharmacy program qualifies 
for federal pricing, as authorized in title 38, United States 
Code. However, the committee did not authorize requested 
increases in TRICARE enrollment fees in fiscal year 2007, and 
directed the Comptroller General to conduct a comprehensive 
analysis of the Department's health care costs and savings 
proposal.
    Benefits and services available to family members are also 
important to their quality of life. The committee recognizes 
the sacrifices and hardships endured by family members. As 
such, the committee fully funded all of the benefits for family 
members included in the President's budget request, and 
extended the telecommunications benefit for deployed and 
hospitalized soldiers.
    In addition, following the Senate-passed budget resolution, 
the committee included a provision to repeal the requirement 
for reduction of annuities received by surviving spouses under 
the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) by the amount of any dependency 
and indemnity compensation also received. Additionally, the 
committee accelerated the effective date for paid-up coverage 
under the SBP from October 1, 2008, to October 1, 2006.
    To sustain the readiness of the armed forces to perform 
critical missions, the committee added funding to address 
shortfalls in a number of key readiness accounts. Over the past 
five years, U.S. ground forces have experienced high 
operational tempo due to combat operations and sustained 
overseas missions. In response, the committee authorized 
active-duty end strengths of 512,400 for the Army, 30,000 over 
the requested level; 340,700 for the Navy; 180,000 for the 
Marine Corps, 5,000 over the requested level; and 334,200 for 
the Air Force. The committee also authorized end strength for 
the Army National Guard at 350,000, providing that, in the 
event the National Guard is unable to recruit up to the 350,000 
level, unused personnel funds may only be used to procure Army 
National Guard equipment. The committee supported a variety of 
incentives and bonuses for active duty and reserve components 
to ensure the Department can recruit and retain the highest-
quality volunteer force.
    In order to confront irregular warfare threats, the 
Department must modernize and transform the armed forces. Since 
2001, the Department has undergone significant modernization 
and transformation even during a time of war. The committee 
supported the Department's transformational activities, 
including authorizing funds for the construction of eight 
ships, for a total of $12.1 billion; including a provision to 
promote coordinated joint development, procurement, and 
operation of unmanned systems; adding funds for the continued 
development of the Joint Strike Fighter interchangeable engine 
during fiscal year 2007; authorizing the budget request of $3.7 
billion for the Army's Future Combat Systems program; and 
authorizing an increase of nearly $365.0 million over the 
President's budget request of $11.1 billion for science and 
technology programs.
    The committee remains concerned about the size of the 
Navy's fleet. As a maritime nation, the strength of our 
economy, the face of our diplomacy, the course of our foreign 
policy, and the security of our nation are built upon the 
Navy's ability to maintain global presence and to exercise 
freedom of maneuver upon the seas. However, in the last 15 
years, there has been a declining trend in shipbuilding and a 
diminishing capacity in the shipbuilding industrial base. The 
fleet has been reduced to its smallest size since before World 
War II. The committee believes that prudent decisions must be 
made to reverse the current trend in the construction of 
warships, or risk our margin of naval superiority for the next 
generation.
    To strengthen the shipbuilding program and the industrial 
base, the committee included provisions to:
          (1) fund the construction of eight warships (one more 
        than the President's request) and two new warship 
        classes;
          (2) implement a long-range plan for the procurement 
        of three ships of the future aircraft carrier class-
        CVN-21, which will improve the affordability of the 
        future aircraft carrier class by authorizing multiple 
        ship material procurements and stable funding over four 
        year increments;
          (3) lay the groundwork to increase the submarine 
        building rate to ensure continued undersea superiority; 
        and
          (4) increase investment in the National Shipbuilding 
        Research Program.
    To provide more flexible capabilities to the warfighter, 
the committee supported increased investment in unmanned 
systems. In the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2001, the committee established initial 
requirements for the use of unmanned air and ground combat 
vehicles. Five years later, the time has come to build upon the 
commitment made by this committee. Accordingly, the committee 
included a provision directing the Secretary of Defense to 
develop a department-wide policy for development and operation 
of unmanned systems.
    Increasingly, the committee has emphasized the importance 
of developing capabilities to plan and conduct coalition 
operations. Ten years ago, the committee expressed concerns 
regarding the lack of engine competition in the Joint Strike 
Fighter program. As a result, the committee included a 
provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) that directed the Secretary of 
Defense to evaluate at least two propulsion concepts from 
competing engine companies. Recently, the committee held 
hearings to review the Department's unilateral proposal, 
despite legislative direction to maintain a two-engine program, 
to eliminate the development of the F136 alternate 
interchangeable engine from the Joint Strike Fighter program. 
The committee remains concerned that relying on one engine 
provider to perform multiple missions, for multiple services 
and multiple nations presents an unnecessary operational and 
financial risk to the United States. Accordingly, the committee 
authorized provisions adding $400.8 million for the continued 
development of the interchangeable engine during fiscal year 
2007; and directing the Secretary of Defense to continue the 
development and sustainment of the Joint Strike Fighter program 
with two competitive propulsion systems throughout the life of 
the aircraft or enter into a one-time, firm-fixed-price 
contract for a single propulsion system throughout the life of 
the aircraft.
    Finally, in the areas of acquisition and contract 
management, the committee took a number of steps over the last 
decade to improve the Department's acquisition and procurement 
of services, equipment, and weapons systems. Similarly, the 
Department completed a significant review of the defense 
acquisition systems for major weapons programs, which will 
impact the Department's acquisition system. To continue the 
momentum of past efforts to improve the Department's 
acquisition system, the committee included provisions:
          (1) requiring major automated information systems 
        that breach cost, schedule, or performance goals to 
        follow similar reporting requirements to other major 
        defense acquisition programs;
          (2) authorizing the Department to conduct a pilot 
        program using time-certain development in the 
        acquisition of major weapons systems;
          (3) requiring better alignment of authority and 
        tenure of program managers with desired acquisition 
        outcomes;
          (4) ensuring evaluation of contract performance is 
        linked to acquisition outcomes and that award and 
        incentive fees are used appropriately to incentivize 
        excellent performance;
          (5) establishing a preference for fixed-price 
        contract for development programs; and
          (6) establishing a senior acquisition executive for 
        U.S. Special Operations Command.
    In addition to the above priorities, the committee 
addressed the QDR priorities of strengthening interagency 
operations and providing greater flexibility in the United 
States Government's ability to partner directly with nations in 
fighting terrorism. Increasingly, operations have become more 
interagency and coalition in nature and will be for the 
forseeable future. In this regard, the United States Government 
must employ all instruments of national power to achieve peace 
and security in the troubled regions around the world. 
Accordingly, the committee:
          (1) included a provision that would require the 
        President to develop a plan to establish interagency 
        operating procedures for federal agencies to plan and 
        conduct stabilization and reconstruction operations;
          (2) included a provision that would provide the heads 
        of all executive branch agencies the same authorities 
        the Secretary of State has with respect to providing 
        allowances, benefits, and death gratuities for Foreign 
        Service or civilian personnel serving in Iraq and 
        Afghanistan;
          (3) expanded authorities for geographic combatant 
        commanders to train and equip foreign military forces, 
        and to provide urgent humanitarian relief and 
        reconstruction assistance to foreign nations;
          (4) expanded authority to provide logistics support, 
        supplies, and services to allies and coalition 
        partners;
          (5) expanded Department authority to lease or lend 
        equipment for personnel protection and survivability to 
        allies and coalition partners participating in combined 
        military operations with U.S. forces; and
          (6) required a coordinated United States Government 
        legal opinion on whether certain, specified 
        interrogation techniques comply with the prohibition on 
        cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment 
        set out in the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005.
    As the committee considers the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, much work remains to be 
done in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations to secure hard-
won military successes and to preserve peace and freedom. To 
continue the momentum of the past five years in the global war 
on terrorism, the Congress and the executive branch must work 
together to build on the considerable strengths of our military 
and their record of success. To ensure the security of America, 
the U.S. armed forces must be sustained, modernized, and 
transformed. The committee believes that the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 sustains the advances 
made in recent years, and provides the necessary investments to 
prepare for the future.

Explanation of funding summary

    The administration's budget authorization request for the 
national defense function of the federal budget for fiscal year 
2007 was $505.4 billion, including a request for $50.0 billion 
in emergency supplemental spending for ongoing operations in 
Iraq and Afghanistan. According to the estimating procedures 
used by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the budget 
implication of the amount requested was $512.9 billion. The 
funding summary table that follows uses the budget authority as 
calculated by CBO.
    The following table summarizes both the direct 
authorizations and equivalent budget authority levels for 
fiscal year 2007 defense programs. The columns relating to the 
authorization request do not include funding for the following 
items: military construction authorizations provided in prior 
years; and other portions of the defense budget that are not 
within the jurisdiction of this committee, or that do not 
require an annual authorization.
    Funding for all programs in the national defense function 
is reflected in the columns related to the budget authority 
request and the total budget authority implication of the 
authorizations in this report.
    The committee recommends funding for national defense 
programs totaling $517.7 billion in budget authority, including 
an authorization of $50.0 billion in emergency supplemental 
spending for ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This 
funding is within the budget authority level for the national 
defense function recommended in the Senate version of the 
Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2007 (S. 
Con Res. 83), which was adopted by the Senate on March 16, 
2006.


            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Explanation of tables
    The following tables provide the program-level detailed 
guidance for the funding authorized in title I of this Act. The 
tables also display the funding requested by the administration 
in the fiscal year 2007 budget request for procurement 
programs, and indicate those programs for which the committee 
either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the 
past, the administration may not exceed the authorized amounts 
(as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the 
administration request, as set forth in budget justification 
documents of the Department of Defense), without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted in this report, funding changes to the budget 
request are made without prejudice. 


                       Subtitle B--Army Programs


Limitation on availability of funds for the Joint Network Node (sec. 
        111)
    The committee recommends a provision that would withhold 50 
percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated in section 
101(5) for the procurement of the Joint Network Node until the 
Secretary of the Army provides a report, to the congressional 
defense committees, no later than March 15, 2007, on the Army's 
strategy for the convergence of the Joint Network Node, the 
Warfighter Information Network--Tactical, and the Mounted 
Battle Command On-the-Move communications programs. The 
required report will include program requirements, funding, 
program schedule, implementation plan and acquisition strategy.
    The budget request included $7,718.6 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, including $178.0 million for the Joint 
Network Node, $79.0 million for the Mounted Battle Command on 
the Move (MBCOTM) system, but no funding for the Warfighter 
Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) programs. The budget 
request also included $69.2 million in PE 64818A for Army 
Tactical Command and Control Hardware and Software, including 
$16.6 million for MBCOTM development, and $158.2 million in PE 
63782A for WIN-T development.
    The Joint Network Node (JNN) responds to a 2004 urgent 
needs statement from U.S. Central Command to provide 
communications capabilities better than the current Mobile 
Subscriber Equipment in Army units today. The requirement was 
met with commercial-off-the-shelf-based equipment using a sole 
source contract. The committee notes that the JNN is not a 
joint program and that the Army General Counsel has stated that 
JNN must be competitively procured. Further, the Director, 
Operational Test and Evaluation's Fiscal Year 2005 Annual 
Report, states that, ``the Army continues to procure JNN as an 
interim satellite capability without conducting an Operational 
Test and Evaluation.'' The committee is concerned that the 
required operational test and evaluation has not been completed 
for the JNN.
    The committee understands that the WIN-T program meets the 
same requirements as JNN but with greater capability. Moreover, 
WIN-T will provide a communications-on-the-move capability 
while the JNN will not. In September 2004, after competitively 
awarding two contracts for the Systems Development and 
Demonstration (SDD) phase for the WIN-T communications system, 
the Army received approval to merge the winning contractors 
into a single team to accelerate WIN-T development. After 
funding the program in fiscal years 2005 and 2006, due to 
affordability concerns, the Army abruptly restructured the WIN-
T program, delaying fielding until 2010. The committee believes 
this is an ill-advised decision. JNN and WIN-T are duplicative 
programs, with WIN-T providing on-the-move capabilities to Army 
commanders, a long-standing requirement. It has been estimated 
that the Army will require an additional $1.9 billion to field 
JNN to all Army units. It is the committee's understanding that 
the Army intends to replace JNN with WIN-T sometime in the 
future. The committee is concerned that the Army cannot afford 
to field both JNN and WIN-T.
    The committee notes the conference report accompanying the 
fiscal year 2006 Department of Defense Appropriations Act 
contained a requirement that the Army submit a plan, no later 
than January 15, 2006, for procuring evolutionary capability in 
its network communications packages. The Army is still 
evaluating the program and has not yet submitted the required 
report. The committee believes that the Army plans to 
restructure the WIN-T program to field WIN-T in 2008 and 
strongly supports the initiative to accelerate the WIN-T 
program.
    The committee recommends a reduction of $100.0 million for 
JNN procurement and an increase of $100.0 million to restore 
WIN-T procurement in Other Procurement, Army. The committee 
expects the future procurement of JNN to be competitively 
awarded and that both JNN and WIN-T equipment should be 
procured using a firm fixed-price contract.
Comptroller General report on the contract for the Future Combat 
        Systems program (sec. 112)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the participation and activities of the 
lead systems integrator in the Future Combat Systems (FCS) 
program under the contract of the Army for the FCS program. The 
report would provide a description of the responsibilities of 
the lead systems integrator and the Army under the FCS 
contract; an assessment of the manner in which the Army ensures 
that the lead systems integrator meets the goals of the FCS 
program; an identification of the mechanisms in place to ensure 
the protection of the interests of the United States in the FCS 
program; and an identification of the mechanisms in place to 
mitigate organizational conflicts of interest with respect to 
competition on FCS technologies and equipment under the 
subcontracts under the FCS program.
    Section 212 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) directed the Secretary of 
the Army to procure the FCS through a contract under part 15 of 
the Federal Acquisition Regulation, rather than through a 
transaction under section 2371 of title 10, United States Code. 
The committee congratulates the Army on completing the 
definitization of the FCS contract on March 29, 2006 and 
directs the Comptroller General to review the contract to 
assist the Congress and the Department understand the 
complexities of contracting for a system-of-systems contract 
with a lead systems integrator.
Reports on Army Modularity Initiative (sec. 113)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees no later than March 15, 2007, on the manner 
in which the Army distinguishes costs under its modularity 
initiative from costs under its modernization and reset 
programs; a line item identification of the amount of 
modularity funded to date and the amount of modularity to be 
funded in future budgets; how modularity equipment will be 
allocated to the active and Reserve components; a plan for 
further testing and evaluation of modular designs; and a 
summary of any lessons learned to date from the modular 
brigades that have been established and deployed to Iraq and 
Afghanistan. The provision also requires that the Comptroller 
General conduct an annual review of the modularity initiative 
on the progress the Army is making in the equipping of the 
active and Reserve components.
    In 2004 the Army estimated modularity costs at $28.0 
billion. In a report, ``Preliminary Observations on Army Plans 
to Implement and Fund Modular Forces,'' dated March 16, 2005, 
the Government Accountability Office stated that ``the costs 
associated with modularizing the entire Army are substantial, 
continuing to evolve, and likely to grow beyond current 
estimates. As of March 2005, the Army estimated it will need 
about $48 billion to fund modularity representing an increase 
of 71 percent from its earlier estimate of $28 billion in 
2004.'' The estimate now stands at $52.5 billion. However, this 
estimate may not reflect all potential costs, such as for fully 
equipping the modular force as designed. The committee expects 
the Secretary of the Army to address in the report all costs 
required to achieve full operational capability for all modular 
units, including, but not limited to, amounts required for 
equipment, training, and permanent facilities and 
infrastructure to adequately support military personnel and 
their families. The committee believes that until the Army 
provides a better understanding of the requirements and costs 
associated with modularity, DOD will not be well positioned to 
weigh competing priorities and make informed decisions nor will 
the Congress have the information it needs to evaluate funding 
requests.
    There is some question regarding the definition of the 
modularity initiative. The Army has stated that it required 
$5.0 billion per year over the fiscal years 2005-2011 for the 
modularity initiative. In a fiscal year 2006 Program Budget 
Decision Memorandum, the Department increased the Army's top 
line by $5.0 billion in each of the fiscal years 2007-2011 for 
modularity to be included in the President's budget request. 
DOD and the Army said they would use fiscal year 2005 and 
fiscal year 2006 supplemental appropriations to cover the 
requirement for those two years. Both the fiscal year 2006 
enacted bridge supplemental and the fiscal year 2006 
supplemental budget request included $5.0 billion. However, the 
fiscal year 2006 supplemental request was also expected to 
include $3.0 billion in additional funding for Abrams tanks and 
Bradley Fighting Vehicles required for modularity, but that 
request was dropped in the final stages of formulation before 
it was sent to Congress.
    The fiscal year 2007 budget request proposed to restructure 
the Army National Guard to 28 brigade combat teams and 78 
combat support brigades and to fund the Army National Guard to 
its current manning level of 333,000 rather than to its 
currently authorized end strength of 350,000. This proposal 
resulted in opposition from Congress, governors, the National 
Guard Association and the adjutants general. As a result, the 
Army has announced that it will maintain the National Guard at 
its 350,000 authorized end strength and will fund whatever 
manning level the National Guard can recruit to in fiscal year 
2007. The Army also announced it will follow through with its 
plan to change the composition of the Army National Guard force 
structure to 28 brigade combat teams and 78 combat support 
brigades and commit $20.0 billion to National Guard equipment. 
This will put additional funding pressure on the Army as it 
modularizes the active and Reserve components. The committee 
believes that an annual progress report is required to monitor 
the Army's progress in modularizing both the active and Reserve 
components.

                           Budget Items--Army

Future Cargo Aircraft
    The budget request included $109.2 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Army (APA) for the procurement of three Future 
Cargo Aircraft (FCA). The FCA would support the intra-theater 
lift mission. However, the aircraft mix and the number of 
intra-theater aircraft assets required for this mission have 
yet to be determined and were not addressed in the recently 
completed Mobility Capabilities Study. In recent testimony, the 
Commander of the United States Transportation Command gave his 
support to the Department's Intra-Theater Lift Capability 
Study, Phases 1 and 2, to identify the right mix and number of 
intra-theater aircraft assets required. The Air Force is also 
interested in procuring a similar type of aircraft and is in 
the process of establishing a joint program office with the 
Army for a new intra-theater light cargo aircraft that will be 
known as the Joint Cargo Aircraft. The Air Force is only now 
beginning a series of functional analysis studies and an 
independent Air Force analysis of alternatives to define their 
requirement for the aircraft, and to consider which options 
will meet their requirements. Until these studies are complete, 
and have been presented to the congressional defense 
committees, the committee believes that it is premature to 
procure aircraft until the right mix and number of intra-
theater aircraft assets have been determined.
    The Committee notes that the recent Request for Proposals 
released by the Department of the Army for procurement of the 
Joint Cargo Aircraft includes maintenance and sustainment of 
this new weapon system and provides for no organic logistics 
capability. The Committee notes that 10 U.S.C. 2464 requires 
the Department to maintain a core logistics capability and that 
the department develop organic maintenance capability for most 
weapon systems not later than four years after initial 
operating capability for such weapon systems. The Army Request 
for Proposals does not address this issue. The Committee 
further notes that the Joint Cargo Aircraft is a joint Army-Air 
Force program and that Air Force Air Logistics Centers could be 
able to sustain this weapon system. The Committee expects that 
any Request for Proposals for the Joint Cargo Aircraft account 
for the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 2464. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $109.2 million in APA for the Future 
Cargo Aircraft.
Surface-launched advanced medium range air-to-air missile
    The budget request included $12.0 million in Missile 
Procurement, Army, for the Surface-Launched Advanced Medium 
Range Air-to-Air Missile (SLAMRAAM) and $10.0 million for 
advanced procurement funding for long-lead items. The committee 
understands that the SLAMRAAM Milestone C scheduled for 
September 2007 has been slipped one year to September 2008. 
Procurement funds will not be needed in fiscal year 2007. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $22.0 million in Missile 
Procurement, Army, for SLAMRAAM, for a total authorization of 
no funding.
M1A1 Abrams tank and M2A2 Bradley fighting vehicle upgrades
    The budget request included $456.1 million in Procurement 
of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army. Of this amount, 
$285.0 million is for the upgrade of various Bradley Fighting 
Vehicles (BFV) variants and $171.1 million is for the 
conversion of M1A2 Abrams tanks into the M1A2 System 
Enhancement Package (SEP) Abrams tank configuration.
    The committee notes that the fiscal year 2007 budget 
request for BFV upgrades and M1A2 SEP tanks creates production 
breaks in the BFV and M1A2 SEP production lines and reflects 
the Army's assumption that Army modularity could be funded in 
Defense supplemental requests for programs that should be 
funded in base budget requests. The Army's reliance on Defense 
supplemental requests reflects the Army's poor management of 
scarce resources and disregard for the impact the Army program 
has on the defense industrial base. Budget justification 
material submitted by the Army reflects an underfunded program 
for both BFV upgrades and M1A2 SEP conversions and causes 
breaks in production.
    Programming and budgeting based on the assumption of 
Defense supplemental requests is inefficient and wastes 
taxpayer dollars. For instance, according to Army budget 
justification documents, in fiscal year 2005, the weapon system 
procurement unit cost for the M1A2 SEP was $4.6 million based 
on 124 M1A2 SEPs. In fiscal year 2007, the weapon system 
procurement unit cost is listed as $7.4 million based on 23 
M1A2 SEPs.
    Additional funding for the BFV upgrades and M1A2 Sep 
conversions has been included on the Chief of Staff of the 
Army's fiscal year 2007 unfunded priority list. The committee 
recommends an increase of $238.8 million for BFV upgrades and 
$170.0 million for M1A2 SEP tank conversions, in Procurement of 
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, for a total 
authorization of $523.8 million for BFV upgrades and $341.1 
million for M1A2 SEPs.
    The committee's recommendation increases funding for BFV 
upgrades and M1A2 SEP conversions to cover minimum sustainment 
rates for the production of these vehicles. The committee 
strongly encourages the Army to develop funded BFV and M1A2 SEP 
programs, based on a multiyear procurement strategy, for the 
fiscal year 2008 budget request. The Army should also consider 
requesting multiyear procurement authority to introduce price 
and production stability into these programs.
M113 Armored personnel carrier family of vehicles
    The budget request included $23.0 million in Procurement of 
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army, for the conversion 
of M113A2 Armored Personnel Carrier Family of Vehicles (FOV) to 
the M113A3 FOV configuration. The committee notes that the Army 
has a requirement to convert 310 M113A2s to support the Army's 
modularity initiative. Additional funding for the conversion of 
310 M113A2s to the M113A3 configuration has been included on 
the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 unfunded 
priority list. The committee recommends an increase of $139.0 
million in Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, 
Army, for additional M113A2 conversions, for a total 
authorization of $162.0 million.
M1028 120mm tank cartridge
    The budget request included $0.9 million in Procurement of 
Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the M1028 120mm tank cartridge. The 
committee notes the utility of the M1028 in improving the M1A1 
Main Battle Tank's urban warfare capability. The committee 
recommends an increase of $9.2 million in PAA for the M1028.
M915 105mm Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munition artillery 
        cartridge
    The budget request included $45.6 million in Procurement of 
Ammunition, Army (PAA), for 105 mm artillery cartridges of all 
types, but included no funding for the M915 105 mm Dual Purpose 
Improved Conventional Munition (DPICM), Load, Assemble, and 
Pack (LAP) artillery cartridge. The committee is aware that the 
M915 is the only 105 mm DPICM cartridge, and that it is 
extremely important for light forces. The committee recommends 
an increase of $12.2 million in PAA to complete the LAP of the 
components already in the inventory.
Rapid wall breaching kit
    The budget request included no funding in Procurement 
Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the rapid wall breaching kit. The 
committee notes that rapid wall breaching kits are one-man 
portable devices capable of creating man-sized holes in triple 
brick masonry or double reinforced concrete structural walls. 
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PAA for 
rapid wall breaching kits.
Ammunition peculiar equipment outloading module
    The budget request included no funding for ammunition 
peculiar equipment outloading modules. The committee notes that 
a modern robotic-controlled strategic ammunition outloading 
module would be capable of supporting current readiness 
requirements, while increasing ammunition plant safety, 
security, and capacity. Army officials report that a design 
exists for modernizing current outloading capabilities with 
robotic-controlled technologies at ammunition plants. The 
committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in Procurement 
of Ammunition, Army, for ammunition peculiar equipment 
outloading modules.
Automated Tactical Ammunition Classification System
    The budget request included $10.3 million in Procurement 
Ammunition, Army (PAA), for ammunition peculiar equipment. The 
committee understands the logistical difficulties inherent in 
the large amounts of ammunition turned in by combat units 
leaving a combat theater, which must be inspected and reissued 
to new units. Previously, this inspection and processing 
activity has been done by hand, which is extremely manpower 
intensive. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million 
in PAA for additional development and procurement of a family 
of mobile Automated Tactical Ammunition Classification System 
units for near-term battlefield deployment.
Corrosion protective covers
    The budget request included no funding to procure and 
evaluate corrosion protective covers for configurable loaded 
ammunition. The committee is aware that corrosion in harsh 
environments can cause damage to equipment as well as 
ammunition. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in Procurement of Ammunition, Army, for corrosion 
protective covers to prevent corrosion of ammunition.

Insensitive munitions high-shear mixing system

    The budget request included no funding for any upgrades at 
the Milan Army Ammunition Plant. After many years of neglect, 
upgrade of the munitions industrial facilities is critical, 
particularly given the increased usage rates caused by current 
operations. The committee recommends an increase of $7.5 
million in Procurement of Ammunition, Army, to demonstrate, 
validate, and implement an insensitive munitions high-shear 
mixing system at the Milan Army Ammunition Plant.
Lake City Army Ammunition Plant
    The budget request included $116.2 million in Procurement 
of Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the provision of industrial 
facilities, including $35.0 million for the Small Caliber 
Ammunition Modernization Program at Lake City Army Ammunition 
Plant. The committee is aware that a significant investment in 
new equipment and facilities at Lake City Army Ammunition Plant 
is required to provide the quantities of small caliber 
ammunition necessary to support ongoing operations in the 
global war on terror. The committee recommends an increase of 
$18.2 million in PAA to continue the modernization of the Lake 
City Army Ammunition Plant.
Modernization of forge equipment at Scranton Army Ammunition Plant
    The budget request included $116.2 million in Procurement 
of Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the provision of industrial 
facilities, but included no funding for modernization at the 
Scranton Army Ammunition Plant. The committee is aware that the 
newest piece of government-owned forge equipment at Scranton is 
at least 30 years old. Much of Scranton's equipment has 
exceeded its useful life and is beginning to experience 
failures. The government has historically modernized this type 
of equipment at 10-year intervals. The committee understand the 
importance of investing in the munitions industrial base, after 
many years of deferring critical modernization. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PAA for modernization 
of forge equipment at Scranton Army Ammunition Plant.
Radford Army Ammunition Plant upgrades
    The budget request included $116.2 million in Procurement 
of Ammunition, Army (PAA), for the provision of industrial 
facilities, including $56.2 million for operations and upgrades 
to the Radford Army Ammunition Plant. The committee recognizes 
that for many years, modernization of munition industrial 
facilities has not kept pace with the requirements of modern 
weapons systems and environmental regulations. Because of the 
interrelated work of these munitions plants, a disruption in 
one facility could cause disruptions in others, and thus cause 
a critical shortfall of munitions while our service members are 
engaged in combat operations.
    The committee is aware that there is a backlog of critical 
modernization projects totaling $213.0 million at Radford Army 
Ammunition Plant, including a new steam plant, waste processing 
facilities to meet current environmental standards, and new 
explosives processing plants to improve efficiencies and reduce 
the risk of failure in a critical production area.
    The committee recommends an increase of $63.56 million in 
PAA for the modernization of industrial facilities at the 
Radford Army Ammunition Plant, including $30.0 million to 
complete the new steam plant; $11.78 million to build new waste 
processing facilities and incinerators; $10.0 million to fund 
the first two phases of a modern nitroglycerine facility; and 
$11.8 million for Phase 2B of the upgrades to the 
nitrocellulose facility. The committee further directs the Army 
to develop a plan to complete the remaining $150.0 million in 
critical modernization projects at Radford over the next 3 
years.
Defense advanced global positioning system receivers
    The budget request included $61.6 million in other 
procurement, Army (OPA) for the procurement of Defense advanced 
global positioning system receivers (DAGR). DAGR provides a 
satellite-based navigation and timing system to enable 
warfighters to confirm their own locations for all phases of 
combat. The committee notes that emerging requirements 
associated with the global war on terrorism have led to a 
greater demand for DAGR than previously anticipated, and that 
DAGR has been included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's 
unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase 
of $7.0 million in OPA to procure additional DAGRS.
Nonsystem training devices
    The budget request included $243.1 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for non-standard training devices, including 
$3.1 million for the Call for Fires Trainer (CFFT). The CFFT is 
a collective training system that provides a simulated 
battlefield for training forward observers at the institutional 
and unit level. The committee notes that the CFFT has proven to 
be a useful tool for soldiers preparing to deploy to the U.S. 
Central Command area of operations. Additional funding to 
accelerate CFFT fielding has been included on the Chief of 
Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 unfunded priority list. 
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for CFFT, for a total authorization of 
$247.1 million.

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs


CVN-21 class aircraft carrier procurement (sec. 121)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to incrementally fund procurement of 
CVN-21 class aircraft carriers over four year periods, 
commencing with CVN-78 procurement in fiscal year 2008. The 
budget request included $739.1 million in Shipbuilding and 
Conversion, Navy (SCN) for CVN-78 advance procurement and $45.1 
million in SCN for CVN-79 advance procurement. The provision 
would also authorize advance procurement for CVN-80, commencing 
in fiscal year 2007.
    In reviewing the budget request for fiscal year 2006, the 
committee received testimony from the Navy and industry that 
the low rate of shipbuilding was driving higher costs, which in 
turn further reduced shipbuilding rates, creating a downward 
spiral. The committee believes that stable ship requirements, 
increased funding in the shipbuilding budget, and increased 
flexibility for funding large capital ships are critical 
elements of any strategy to reverse this trend.
    The Secretary of the Navy's fiscal year 2007 report to 
Congress on the long-range plan for the construction of naval 
vessels identifies a requirement to procure the CVN-21 class 
aircraft carriers at 4-year intervals, commencing in fiscal 
year 2008. The Navy originally planned to procure the first 
CVN-21 class aircraft carrier, CVN-78, in fiscal year 2006. 
Since then, the Navy has delayed procurement to 2008, which has 
delayed fielding this vital capability, while significantly 
increasing the aircraft carrier's procurement cost. The 
committee believes that procuring and delivering the CVN-21 
class aircraft carriers over 4-year periods in accordance with 
the Navy's long-range plan is vital to the National Defense 
Strategy, and is vital to the affordability of these capital 
ships.
    Elsewhere in this report, the committee has expressed 
concern with cost growth on the CVN-77 program, and has urged 
the Navy and the shipbuilder to identify opportunities to 
improve affordability of future aircraft carriers. Procurement 
delays, excess inflation, and material escalation have been 
reported as significant contributors to CVN-77 cost growth. The 
shipbuilder has proposed to achieve significant CVN-21 class 
program savings through a stable procurement plan, and through 
procurement of economic order quantity material for CVN-79 and 
CVN-80 in conjunction with CVN-78 procurement.
    In view of the potential for significant program savings, 
the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million in SCN 
for CVN-21 class advance procurement, and directs the Secretary 
of the Navy to review economic order quantity and long lead 
time material procurement for the CVN-21 class. The Secretary 
is to submit a report to the congressional defense committees 
with the fiscal year 2008 budget request, outlining the advance 
procurement requirements to potentially optimize economic order 
quantity savings and escalation avoidance (to include 
offsetting factors) for the first three vessels of the CVN-21 
class. Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for advance 
procurement for CVN-79 and CVN-80, none of the funds are 
available for obligation prior to 30 days following receipt of 
the Secretary's report.
Construction of first two vessels under the next-generation destroyer 
        program (sec. 122)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract to fund the 
detail design and construction of the first two next-generation 
destroyers, DD(X), in Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN), 
with funding split over fiscal years 2007 and 2008.
    The budget request included $2,568.0 million in SCN for the 
DD(X) program, which is in addition to $1,010.1 million prior 
year advance procurement and $3,004.0 million subsequent year 
full funding for the construction of two DD(X) destroyers. The 
Navy's report on the long-range plan for the construction of 
naval vessels identified a requirement to procure a total of 
seven DD(X) destroyers commencing in fiscal year 2007. Section 
125 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2006 (Public Law 109-163) prohibited the Secretary of the Navy 
from acquiring these vessels through a winner-take-all 
competition strategy. Section 123 of that same Act established 
a cost limitation for the fifth vessel of the program.
    The Navy's procurement strategy for the next generation 
destroyer program is to allocate dual lead ships and 
competitively award follow-on ships to both of the two 
shipyards which build surface combatants. The Navy is in the 
process of determining details of the acquisition strategy for 
the follow ship contracts. The committee agrees with the Navy's 
determination that competition is an underlying benefit of dual 
sourcing, and that it is critical to meeting the fifth ship 
cost limitation established for the next generation destroyer 
program.
    The committee is equally concerned with the risk that the 
dual lead ship strategy adds to the program. The committee is 
aware that the Navy added $150.0 million to the second lead 
ship budget to account for this risk. Nevertheless, the 
Congressional Budget Office has cited a significantly higher 
cost estimate for the DD(X) lead ship(s) than currently 
included in the Navy's budget. It is therefore critical that, 
in preserving the ability to compete follow-on ships, the Navy 
does not unduly increase lead ship cost risk and total program 
cost risk.
    The committee understands that the Navy intends to award 
lead ship contracts following approval by the Defense 
Acquisition Board (DAB), currently planned for January 2008. 
The committee urges the DAB to carefully weigh affordability 
and risk mitigation considerations in arriving at a decision to 
approve award of the lead ship contracts. The committee directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees, 30 days prior to lead ship 
contract(s) award, on the Navy's competition strategy for DD(X) 
follow ship procurement. The report shall identify the range of 
possible outcomes for awarding follow-on ships, the Navy's 
estimated cost for the respective ships, the estimated cost 
benefit provided by competition, the basis for determining 
contract award, and the type of contract planned for the award. 
The report shall also address potential impact of follow-on 
ship awards on the lead ship costs or schedules, including an 
assessment of workload impacts at the respective shipyards.
Modification of limitation on total cost of procurement of CVN-77 
        aircraft carrier (sec. 123)
    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the limitation on the total cost of procurement for the CVN-77 
aircraft carrier from $5.357 billion to $6.057 billion.
    Section 122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) imposed a $4.6 billion 
procurement cost cap for the CVN-77, and authorized the 
Secretary of the Navy to adjust the cap for certain categories 
of cost. In accordance with Section 122, the Secretary reported 
authorized annual cost increases, which incrementally raised 
the CVN-77 cost cap to $5.357 billion. The February 2005 report 
on CVN-77 Program Cost identified $0.7 billion cost increase 
beyond the Secretary's authority, requiring Congress to 
increase the cost cap.
    The procurement cost increase to $6.057 billion, which 
equals the government's maximum contractual liability, is 
attributed to extraordinary escalation impacts, increased labor 
hours and overhead rates, and costs related to schedule delays. 
The fiscal year 2007 budget request included $348.4 million for 
CVN-77 cost growth, with the balance of additional funding to 
be included in future budget requests. The committee is aware 
that the Navy has taken a series of management actions to 
contain cost on CVN-77, including deferral of upgrades that are 
not required for safe system operation or certification; 
minimization of contract change orders; implementation of a 
joint Navy-shipbuilder Lean Six-Sigma program; and a schedule 
revision to enable a more efficient completion of CVN-77. The 
committee is concerned, however, that despite these management 
actions, the Navy is projecting CVN-77 cost to grow to the 
contract ceiling, in excess of 30 percent above the baseline 
cost cap.
    The committee notes that the Secretary's report to Congress 
on the long-range plan for construction of naval vessels 
establishes cost estimates for future ship construction, which 
target improved performance based on a series of management 
actions similar to ongoing efforts to control CVN-77 cost. 
Visibility into cost performance while completing CVN-77 is 
necessary in order to assess the effectiveness of these 
management actions, and will assist in determining further 
actions necessary to improve affordability of the future force. 
Improved visibility into completion cost performance will also 
afford greater opportunity to deliver CVN-77 below the contract 
ceiling. Accordingly, the Secretary of the Navy is directed to 
submit a quarterly report to the congressional defense 
committees, beginning December 1, 2006, providing the following 
information regarding the CVN-77 ship construction contract:
          (1) contract target cost;
          (2) Program Manager's Estimate at Completion;
          (3) contractor's Estimate at Completion;
          (4) contract ceiling price;
          (5) end of period actual costs; and
          (6) percent progress.

                           Budget Items--Navy

MH-60S and MH-60R helicopters
    The budget request included $458.2 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy (APN) for the procurement of 18 MH-60S Knight 
Hawk helicopters and $795.3 million for the procurement of 25 
MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopters. The committee notes that the Navy 
reduced the number of MH-60 series helicopters from the Navy's 
fiscal year 2006 program plan. The Navy requires additional 
funding to acquire additional MH-60S for critical surface 
warfare capability coverage for Carrier and Expeditionary 
Strike Groups, and one additional MH-60R helicopters, allowing 
the initial MH-60R Carrier Strike Group squadron to deploy with 
full rotary wing capability in accordance with the Navy's 
Helicopter Concept of Operations. Additional funding for MH-60S 
and MH-60R helicopters has been included on the Chief of Naval 
Operations' unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 
an increase of $112.0 million in APN for eight additional MH-
60S helicopters, for a total authorization of $570.2 million 
and an increase of $28.0 million in APN for one additional MH-
60R helicopter, for a total authorization of $823.8 million.
T-45TS Goshawk
    The budget request included $376.4 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy (APN) for the procurement of 12 T-45TS 
Goshawk training aircraft for the Navy. The future-years 
defense program indicates that the Navy intends to stop 
production with the fiscal year 2007 procurement. This would 
yield a total of 223 aircraft. The committee notes that the 
Navy's request for 12 T-45TS Goshawk training aircraft is 
nearly twice the number of aircraft requested in previous 
years. Moreover, the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded 
priorities list includes an additional six aircraft.
    The committee is concerned that a premature close out of T-
45TS production, particularly in one budget request, would be 
harmful for two reasons. First, the Navy's longstanding 
requirement was for 234 aircraft. Since that determination, 
significant changes have occurred in the annual training 
requirements for pilots, and empirical data has replaced 
planning assumptions. Training requirements have grown rather 
than diminished. Moreover, the Navy's ``T-45 Strategic Planning 
Study, 2003-2035,'' identifies 239 trainers as the minimum 
number of aircraft needed to adequately support long-term pilot 
training requirements. For budgetary reasons, the requirement 
was reduced twice even as additional PTR requirements were 
added. The committee believes that, in order for the fleet to 
adequately support training requirements, the original 
requirement of 234 aircraft should remain the inventory 
objective. Second, the committee believes that the T-45TS, with 
requisite modifications, could serve as both the next-
generation joint trainer and as a replacement for the Air Force 
T-38 trainer. The committee recommends a decrease of $64.0 
million in APN for the procurement of a total of 10 T-45TS 
Goshawk training aircraft, and encourages the Navy to continue 
procurement to achieve at least the 234-aircraft inventory 
objective.
CH-53 Integrated Mechanical Diagnostic System (IMDS)
    The budget request included $28.3 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy (APN) for the H-53 series helicopters, 
including $2.3 million for the Integrated Mechanical Diagnostic 
System (IMDS). The committee notes that IMDS enhances safety 
and reduces helicopter life cycle costs. Additional funding for 
IMDS has been included on the Chief of Naval Operations' 
unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase 
of $4.4 million in APN for IMDS, for a total authorization of 
$32.7 million.
Allegany Ballistics Laboratory facility restoration
    The budget request included $4.6 million in Weapons 
Procurement, Navy (WPN) for various activities at government-
owned, contractor operated weapons industrial facilities, but 
included no funding for facilities restoration at the Navy 
Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant, Allegany Ballistics 
Laboratory (ABL). Some of these facilities have exceeded their 
useful life and deteriorated beyond safe operations. The 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in WPN for 
the facilities restoration program at ABL.
Mk 110 57mm naval gun
    The budget request included $8.9 million in Weapons 
Procurement (WPN), Navy for gun mount mods for in-service gun 
weapon systems, but included no funding for the Mk 110 57mm 
naval gun. The Mk 110 57mm naval gun is the newest gun system 
for surface ships and is planned for installation on the next 
generation destroyer, DD(X), the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), 
the National Security Cutter, and the Offshore Patrol Cutter. A 
shore-based Mk 110 gun system for training, similar to other 
in-service gun training systems, is essential to ensure sailor 
proficiency in the safe operation and maintenance of shipboard 
Mk 110 gun systems. This is particularly true for new ship 
classes, which are designed for reduced manning and therefore 
less capable of supporting onboard training. The committee 
recommends an increase of $12.0 million in WPN for procurement 
of a Mk 110 57mm naval gun for a shore-based training system.
Mk 295/Mk 296 ammunition for Mk 110 57mm naval gun
    The budget request included no funding for Mark 295 or Mark 
296 ammunition for the Mark 110 57mm naval gun. Currently, the 
Navy and the Coast Guard borrow these rounds in very limited 
quantities from other friendly governments. The committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in Procurement 
Ammunition Navy and Marine Corps for Mk 295/Mk 296 ammunition.
M67 hand grenade
    The budget request included $3.0 million in Procurement of 
Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps (PANMC), for M67 hand 
grenades. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million 
in PANMC for M67 hand grenades.
M290 nuclear refueling facility
    The budget request included no funding for an M290 
refueling facility. The committee is aware that the Navy is 
developing a more efficient shipping system, the M290 container 
system, for spent fuel to support refueling and de-fueling U.S. 
Navy aircraft carriers at Northrop Grumman Newport News (NGNN). 
Implementation of a more efficient, secure, and improved 
process for disposal of fuel is necessary to support refueling 
of USS Nimitz (CVN-68) class aircraft carriers during their 
mid-life complex overhauls, and for defueling USS Enterprise 
(CVN-65).
    The committee believes infrastructure investment in an M290 
facility is needed to support the end-to-end process changes 
being implemented by the Navy to prepare this special material 
for ultimate packaging for long-term storage at a federal 
facility. The committee understands that a $40.0 million 
capital incentive would be required to offset the negative net 
present value for the M290 facility investment, and that the 
incentive could be funded over 2 years to align with NGNN 
capital commitments and expenditures. The remainder of the 
funding for the facility would be provided by NGNN. The 
committee further understands that having this facility will 
provide an estimated $25.0 million savings per refueling/
defueling operation.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy to provide the first 
increment of government incentive to start construction of the 
M290 refueling facility in 2008.
Procurement authority for LPD-17 class ship designated LPD-25
    The budget request included $297.5 million in Shipbuilding 
and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for LPD-25 advance procurement. The 
committee recommends an increase of $1,285.0 million in SCN for 
procurement of the LPD-17 class ship, designated as LPD-25. 
This would allow the Secretary of the Navy to enter into a 
contract for LPD-25 in fiscal year 2007, rather than fiscal 
year 2008 under the current Navy plan.
    The budget request for fiscal year 2006 included LPD-25 
procurement for fiscal year 2007 as the ninth ship of a twelve 
ship program. The budget request for fiscal year 2007 truncated 
the LPD-17 class to nine ships and delayed LPD-25 procurement 
to fiscal year 2008. The committee is aware that procurement of 
LPD-25 in fiscal year 2007 will save $113.1 million in LPD-25 
procurement cost by avoiding construction delays, escalation 
impacts, and loss of learning. Further, procurement of LPD-25 
in 2007 will result in delivering this vital warfighting 
capability to the fleet at the earliest schedule possible, 
helping to reduce existing Marine Corps lift capability 
shortfalls. Additional funding for the LPD-25 has been included 
on the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities list.
    The committee is concerned that the Secretary of the Navy's 
report to Congress on the long-range plan for construction of 
naval vessels calls for a reduction of six Expeditionary 
Warfare ships. This reduced expeditionary force size, which 
also reduces the LPD-17 class to nine ships, does not meet the 
Navy's established 2.5 Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) lift 
requirement. In testimony before the Seapower Subcommittee of 
the Committee on Armed Services in March 2006, the Marine Corps 
stated that, ``Limiting the LPD-17 production line to 9 ships 
places the Marine Corps at grave/significant risk by further 
decrementing the MEB equipment for the assault echelon.'' As 
the Navy continues to evolve future lift requirements and 
evaluates capabilities that will comprise the expeditionary 
strike and sea basing forces, the committee strongly encourages 
the Navy to include funds for LPD-26 in the fiscal year 2008 
budget request as the most cost effective near-term means to 
satisfy projected lift requirements.
Advance procurement authority for LHA replacement (LHA(R)) ship 
        designated LHA-7
    The committee recommends an increase of $175.0 million in 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for advance procurement 
of the second ship of the LHA replacement (LHA(R)) class, 
designated LHA-7. This would allow the Secretary of the Navy to 
enter into a contract for LHA-7 advance procurement in fiscal 
year 2007, rather than fiscal year 2009 under the current plan.
    The Secretary of the Navy's fiscal year 2007 report on the 
long-range plan for the construction of naval vessels 
identifies a requirement to procure the LHA replacement ships 
at a stable rate of one ship every 3 years, commencing in 2007. 
In testimony before the Committee on Armed Services, the 
Secretary of the Navy emphasized his number one priority is to 
stabilize the shipbuilding program to achieve the program's 
critical affordability objectives. The committee understands 
that material cost increases and excess inflation have been 
notable factors in cost growth of prior year ship programs. 
Conversely, savings of approximately 15 percent have 
historically been achieved through the economic order quantity 
procurement of material for multiple ships of a class.
    The Navy plans to procure significant material for LHA-6 in 
fiscal year 2007, and further plans advance procurement for 
LHA-7 in fiscal year 2009. In view of the significant potential 
material cost savings provided by combining material 
procurement for LHA-7 with LHA-6, the committee recommends an 
increase of $175.0 million in SCN for LHA-7.
Outfitting and post-delivery
    The budget request included $409.0 million in Shipbuilding 
and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for outfitting and post-delivery. 
Outfitting and post-delivery is a centrally-managed account for 
all SCN-funded ship programs, which is requested annually based 
on projected vessel delivery schedules. The committee is aware 
that delays to ship delivery schedules, related to performance 
issues and Hurricane Katrina impacts, have resulted in 
outfitting and post-delivery funding being requested in advance 
of execution requirements in the fiscal year 2007 budget 
request. Further, the committee urges the Navy to ensure that 
cost increases to the execution of outfitting and post-delivery 
attributed to Hurricane Katrina are properly financed in 
accordance with the provisions of title IX of the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 
109-148).
    The committee recommends a decrease of $30.0 million in SCN 
for outfitting and post-delivery.
Completion of prior year shipbuilding
    The budget request included $577.8 million in Shipbuilding 
and Conversion, Navy (SCN) for completion of prior year 
shipbuilding programs. The committee is aware that delays to 
ship delivery schedules, related to performance issues and 
Hurricane Katrina impacts, has resulted in completion of prior 
year shipbuilding funding being requested in advance of 
execution requirements for the LPD-17 class. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $20.0 million in SCN for completion of 
prior year shipbuilding.
Amphibious ship integrated bridge system
    The budget request included $31.0 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for other navigation equipment, but 
included no funding for amphibious ship integrated bridge 
systems. The integrated bridge system (IBS) automatically 
collects, processes, integrates, and displays vital navigation 
sensor data on electronic charts to automatically and precisely 
control a ship's movement in accordance with an approved voyage 
plan. The committee is aware that the Navy directed all ships 
in the fleet to be equipped with an electronic chart display 
information system--Navy capability by the end of fiscal year 
2009. Additional funding for IBS is necessary to accomplish 
amphibious ship installations in support of this requirement. 
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in OPN for 
amphibious ship integrated bridge system.
DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer modernization program
    The budget request included $2.2 million in the Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for the DDG-51 modernization program. 
This program upgrades the DDG-51 class with key technologies 
developed for future ships, which provide improved warfighting 
capability and reduce operating and support cost. The Secretary 
of the Navy's fiscal year 2006 report to Congress on the long-
range plan for construction of naval vessels identified the 
requirement to operate the 62-ship DDG-51 class for a full 35-
year service life in order to meet the Navy's surface combatant 
force structure requirements. The DDG-51 modernization program 
is essential to achieving this 35-year expected service life. 
Additionally, the upgrades planned for incorporation, which 
enable reduced crew size, improved maintainability, and 
improved commonality, are forecasted to provide savings of 
$712.0 million in operations and support for the 62-ship class.
    Additional fiscal year 2007 DDG-51 modernization 
procurement funding is necessary to support planning, 
engineering, and initiate procurement activities in order to 
address backfit program issues, including configuration 
differences, mission life extension alterations, and 
initiatives to further reduce manpower requirements and costs 
in DDG-51 communications and combat systems operating spaces. 
The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in OPN 
for the DDG-51 modernization program.

High performance metal fiber brushes for shipboard motors and 
        generators

    The budget request included $25.2 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for submarine support equipment, but 
included no funding for high performance metal brushes for 
shipboard motors and generators. Metal fiber brushes have 
demonstrated the capability to significantly enhance 
performance and reduce maintenance costs for motors and 
generators. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in OPN for completion of shore-based testing, 
development of ship alteration, and procurement of high 
performance metal fiber brushes.

Ship support items under $5.0 million

    The budget request included $172.8 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for ship support equipment items under 
$5.0 million, but included no funding for the advanced control 
monitoring system, CVN propeller replacement program, or LSD-
41/49 class canned lube oil pumps.
    The advance control monitoring system will update legacy, 
analog ship control systems with digital applications and 
sensors for improved ship control and ship system performance 
monitoring. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in OPN for the advanced control monitoring system.
    The Navy has designed a generation III propeller for new 
and in-service aircraft carriers to meet the operational 
endurance and readiness requirements of today's fleet. 
Replacing eroded propellers with generation III propellers 
provides improved life cycle performance and significant cost 
savings by extending propeller service life to align with 
aircraft carrier drydock schedules. The committee recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million for continued procurement and 
installation of generation III propellers.
    The current mechanical shaft seal pumps on LSD-41/49 class 
amphibious ships experience high failure rates and increasing 
maintenance costs. The committee is aware that the Navy could 
realize a return on investment within 3 years through the 
installation of canned lube oil pumps on LSD-41/49 class ships. 
The committee also recommends an increase of $2.0 million in 
OPN for the procurement and installation of canned lube oil 
pumps to replace mechanical shaft seal pumps.
    The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in OPN 
for ship support equipment items under $5.0 million, for a 
total authorization of $181.8 million.

Electronics equipment items under $5.0 million

    The budget request included $22.5 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for communications and electronics 
equipment items under $5.0 million, but included no funding for 
the Naval Expedition Combatant Command (NECC) thermal imaging 
system capability. The use of an electro-optical/infrared 
system on combatant craft reduces risk to combat personnel and 
provides a surveillance capability to special operators at 
night and in conditions of obscured or reduced visibility. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.2 million in OPN for 
communications and electronics equipment items under $5.0 
million to outfit NECC riverine squadrons with thermal imaging 
systems.

Sonobuoys

    The budget request included $66.9 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for sonobuoy procurement. The Navy's 
current sonobuoy inventory and planned procurement for fiscal 
year 2007 fall short of the Navy's Non-Nuclear Ordnance 
Requirement (NNOR), which was established to support the 
National Military Strategy plus annual training requirements. 
Additional funding for multi-static search and localization 
sonobuoys is required to meet warfighting requirements. The 
committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in OPN for 
sonobuoy procurement.

Joint service and explosive ordnance disposal improvised explosive 
        device countermeasures

    The budget request included $21.5 in Other Procurement, 
Navy (OPN), for explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) equipment and 
$24.5 million in PE 63654N for joint service and explosive 
ordnance systems development. The Navy has an immediate need to 
procure EOD electronic countermeasures (ECM) that are used to 
protect Navy EOD technicians from radio-controlled improvised 
explosive devices (RCIED) initiation and detonation. The Navy 
also has a requirement for research and development of a common 
next-generation, counter-RCIED system for joint force 
protection. Additional funding for joint service and EOD 
improvised explosive device countermeasures has been included 
on the Chief of Naval Operations' fiscal year 2007 unfunded 
priorities list. The committee recommends an increase of $7.7 
million in OPN for EOD ECM, for a total authorization of $29.2 
million and an increase of $9.1 million in PE 63654N for the 
development of joint service counter-RCIED, for a total 
authorization of $33.6 million.

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy

    The budget request included $54.1 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for the procurement of eight NULKA 
anti-ship missile decoy systems and 79 NULKA decoys. The NULKA 
decoy is a quick reaction offboard electronic countermeasure to 
defeat advanced radar homing anti-ship missiles.
    The committee is aware that the programmed procurement rate 
for NULKA decoys will not meet the Navy's inventory goal of 
filling 50 percent of available launcher tubes by fiscal year 
2008. The committee further understands that the economic order 
quantity to meet the most efficient NULKA production is 96 
decoys, and that increasing production to the most economic 
rate will save approximately $20,000 per decoy. The committee 
recommends an increase of $6.0 million in OPN for the 
procurement of 17 additional NULKA decoys.

Command support equipment

    The budget request included $58.6 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for command support equipment, but 
included no funding for the Multi-Climate Protection System 
(MCPS), or for the Man Overboard Indicator (MOBI) System.
    The MCPS is a modular ensemble that provides total 
performance by layering thermal protection and shell garments. 
The committee is aware that the MCPS was developed to support 
the Commander Naval Air System requirement for improved 
protective clothing for aircrew personnel, and that the Navy 
has outfitted approximately 25 percent of total aircrew 
personnel with this improved clothing system. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.2 million in OPN to complete 
initial MCPS outfitting.
    The MOBI system provides devices, which are worn by sailors 
aboard ship, to allow rescue forces to respond quickly in the 
event a sailor falls overboard. The committee is aware that the 
Naval Safety Center has recommended to the Naval Sea Systems 
Command that MOBI systems should be deployed throughout the 
fleet. The committee understands that 20 surface ships remain 
to be outfitted with the MOBI system, and that shipboard 
allowances limit the provision of personal transmitters to 
approximately one-third of crew members. The committee believes 
the MOBI system is an important system for shipboard safety. 
The committee recommends an increase of $4.4 million in OPN to 
complete surface ship MOBI system installations and increase 
personal transmitter shipboard allowances.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.6 million in OPN 
for command support equipment, for a total authorization of 
$66.2 million.

Combat Casualty Care Equipment Upgrade Program

    The budget request included $5.6 million in Other 
Procurement, Navy (OPN) for Medical Support Equipment, but 
included no funding for the Combat Casualty Care Upgrade 
Equipment Program. This program provides improved emergency 
medical equipment for use by the Naval Expeditionary Combat 
Command to more quickly stabilize and evacuate casualties, 
leading to greater survival rates and improved recovery times. 
The upgrade program complies with Navy authorized medical 
allowance list (AMAL) to provide lightweight NATO-standardized 
litters and litter load carriage tools, lightweight combat 
medic bags, and onboard life-saving kits for tactical vehicles. 
The committee recommends an increase of $4.1 million in OPN for 
the Combat Casualty Care Equipment Upgrade Program.

Lightweight 155-millimeter towed howitzer

    The budget request included $94.4 million in Procurement, 
Marine Corps, for the Lightweight 155-millimeter towed howitzer 
(LW-155 howitzer). The committee understands that a funding 
reduction in fiscal year 2006 reduced the number of Marine 
Corps' LW-155 howitzers below the Marine Corps' Acquisition 
Objective of 356 howitzers. Additional funding for the 
procurement of LW-155 howitzers has been included on the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2007 unfunded 
priority list. The committee recommends an increase of $12.4 
million in Procurement, Marine Corps for six additional LW-155 
howitzers, for a total authorization of $106.8 million.

Modification kits

    The budget request included no funding in Procurement, 
Marine Corps, for modification kits for the M2HB .50 Caliber 
Machinegun. These kits would allow for the gun to have a quick 
change-barrel capability without conducting headspace and 
timing adjustments. The committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in Procurement, Marine Corps for M2HB .50 Caliber 
Machinegun modification kits, for a total authorization of $5.0 
million.

Laser integrated target engagement system

    The budget request included $19.7 million in Procurement, 
Marine Corps for command post systems, but no funding for the 
Laser Integrated Target Engagement System (LITES). LITES is a 
laser based target location, tracking, identification and 
designation system. The laser designator has potential to 
significantly reduce the battery weight and deliver twice the 
designations at twice the range compared to the current 
generation of laser designators. The committee recommends an 
increase of $9.3 million in Procurement, Marine Corps for the 
LITES, for a total authorization of $29.0 million.

                     Subtitle D--Air Force Programs



Procurement of Joint Primary Aircraft Training System aircraft after 
        fiscal year 2006 (sec. 141)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require any 
Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS) aircraft 
procured after fiscal year 2006 to be procured through a 
contract under part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation 
(FAR), relating to items by negotiated contract, rather than 
through a contract under part 12 of the FAR, relating to 
acquisition of commercial items.
    The committee believes that the original decision to 
procure JPATS as a commercial item unnecessarily limited cost 
oversight by the government by denying the government access to 
certified cost or pricing data from the manufacturer. The 
committee believes that an agreement to change the terms and 
conditions of the existing JPATS contract from a commercial 
item contract to a standard defense contract is necessary to 
provide the government the oversight it needs to procure 
aircraft at a fair price. The Department of Defense Inspector 
General report, number D-2006-075, entitled ``Acquisition of 
the Joint Primary Aircraft Training System,'' dated April 12, 
2006, recommended that the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force 
for Acquisition discontinue the commercial item procurement 
strategy for the JPATS program and replace it with a strategy 
that would require the contractor to provide certified cost or 
pricing data and visibility into contractor cost and help the 
Government ensure prices negotiated and eventually paid are 
reasonable.
    The committee notes that the Air Force has announced its 
intent to renegotiate this contract to a FAR part 15 contract. 
This provision is intended to support that decision.

Prohibition on retirement of C-130E/H tactical airlift aircraft (sec. 
        142)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of the Air Force from retiring any C-130E/H 
tactical airlift aircraft in fiscal year 2007.
    The committee believes it would be premature to retire any 
C-130 aircraft until an Air Force Fleet Viability Board has 
conducted an assessment of the C-130E/H fleet of aircraft and 
the results of the Intra-Theater Lift Capability Study (ITLCS), 
Phases 1 and 2, identify the right mix and number of intra-
theater airlift assets, and that the results of the assessment 
and the ITLCS study have been provided to the congressional 
defense committees.

Limitation on retirement of KC-135E aircraft (sec. 143)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to retire up to and including 29 
KC-135E aircraft of the Air Force that do not have the Expanded 
Interim Repair and are currently removed from the flying 
schedule in fiscal year 2007. It is the intent of the committee 
to allow the Air Force to retire KC-135E aircraft in a manner 
consistent with the recommendations of the Air Force Fleet 
Viability Board, KC-135 Assessment Report, dated September 
2005, including, but not limited to, the service completing a 
business case analysis for this mission area.

Limitation on retirement of B-52H bomber aircraft (sec. 144)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to retire up to and including 18 
B-52H aircraft of the Air Force. The committee expects the 
remaining B-52H aircraft inventory to be maintained in a common 
aircraft configuration that includes the Electronic 
Countermeasure Improvement, the Avionics Mid-life Improvement, 
and the Combat Network Communication Technology modification 
efforts. The committee expects no further reduction in the B-
52H total aircraft inventory, including the current inventory 
levels for combat coded Primary Mission Aircraft Inventory and 
Primary Training Aircraft Inventory. The committee is concerned 
that any further reduction in the B-52H total aircraft 
inventory will create unacceptable risk to our national 
security and may prevent our ability to strike the required 
conventional target set during times of war.

Retirement of B-52H bomber aircraft (sec. 145)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of any funds available to the Department of Defense 
from being obligated or expended for retiring or dismantling 
any of the 93 B-52H bomber aircraft in service in the Air Force 
as of June 1, 2006, until 30 days after the Secretary of the 
Air Force submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the bomber 
force structure. The committee directs that the report shall be 
conducted by the Institute for Defense Analyses and provided to 
the Secretary of the Air Force for transmittal to Congress. The 
committee is troubled that the Air Force would reduce the B-52 
bomber fleet without a comprehensive analysis of the bomber 
force structure similar to the last comprehensive long range 
bomber study, which was conducted in 1999.

Prohibition on incremental funding and multiyear procurement of F-22A 
        aircraft (sec. 146)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of the Air Force from using incremental funding 
for the procurement of F-22A aircraft. In the past, the 
Congress has approved of incremental funding of certain space 
programs and a select number of shipbuilding programs. 
Notwithstanding assertions to the contrary, authorizing 
incremental funding for the F-22A would set a precedent for 
funding aircraft. The committee sees no justification for 
setting such a precedent in the case of the F-22A, where the 
Department of Defense has proposed incremental funding merely 
as a way of alleviating cash flow pressures on the overall 
Department.
    Additionally, the provision would prohibit the Secretary of 
the Air Force from entering into a multiyear procurement of the 
F-22A. Subsections (a)(1) through (6) of section 2306b of title 
10, United States Code establish the conditions for entering 
into a multiyear procurement contract. The statute requires 
that the use of such a contract will result in substantial 
savings of the total anticipated costs of carrying out the 
program through annual contracts. Although it would seem 
possible to achieve savings from implementing a multiyear 
procurement for the F-22A, the Air Force has not yet completed 
a thorough analysis of multiyear savings. The statute also 
requires that the estimates of both the cost of the contract 
and the anticipated cost avoidance through the use of a 
multiyear contract are realistic. The fact that the Air Force 
had budgeted 24 F-22A aircraft in fiscal year 2006, but will 
only be able to buy 22 or 23 aircraft with available funds does 
not give confidence that anticipated costs are well understood. 
Although the Department of Defense and the Air Force have asked 
for the authority to pursue a multiyear procurement program, 
the Administration has not submitted any budget exhibits 
supporting a multiyear procurement strategy.

                        Budget Items--Air Force


                          Joint Strike Fighter

    The budget request included $869.7 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) to purchase five Air Force 
aircraft in fiscal year 2007, $145.3 million in APAF to 
purchase long lead time materials for eight Air Force aircraft 
to be purchased in fiscal year 2008, and $245.0 million in 
Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN) to purchase long lead time 
materials for eight Marine Corps aircraft to be purchased in 
fiscal year 2008.
    The purpose of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program is to 
provide an affordable replacement strike fighter aircraft for 
major portions of the fleets of the Air Force, the Navy, and 
the Marine Corps. The Air Force variant will be a conventional 
takeoff and landing aircraft (CTOL), the Navy variant will be 
aircraft carrier capable (CV), and the Marine Corps variant 
will be capable of short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL). 
Central to the whole JSF program is achieving an affordable 
option for these modernization efforts. Commonality within this 
family of aircraft is crucial in keeping the overall tactical 
aviation modernization program affordable.
    The committee strongly supports, and is committed to 
achieving, the objective of developing and deploying a 
technically superior and affordable fleet of Joint Strike 
Fighters that support the warfighter in performing a wide 
variety of missions, as well as meeting the United States 
Government's stated commitments to our international partners 
and allies.
    The committee, however, is concerned that excessive 
concurrency between the development and procurement programs 
could hamper efforts to realize this objective in an effective 
and efficient manner. Recent testimony by a representative of 
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) indicated that,

          The JSF program expects to begin low-rate initial 
        procurement in 2007 with less than 1 percent of the 
        flight test program completed and no production 
        representative prototypes built for the three JSF 
        variants. Technologies and features critical to JSF's 
        operational success, such as a low observable and 
        highly common airframe, advanced mission systems, and 
        maintenance prognostics systems, will not have been 
        demonstrated in a flight test environment when 
        production begins. Other key demonstrations that will 
        have not been either started or only in the initial 
        stages before production begins include: (1) testing 
        with fully integrated aircraft-mission systems and full 
        software; (2) structural and fatigue testing of the 
        airframe; and (3) shipboard testing of Navy and Marine 
        Corps aircraft.

    The committee has also learned that first flight of the 
first aircraft, a CTOL variant, has slipped several months, and 
building of the research and development aircraft is running 
three to five months behind schedule.
    The overlap in testing and production is the result of a 
business case and acquisition strategy that has proven to be 
risky in past programs like F-22A, Comanche, and B-2A, which 
far exceeded the cost and delivery goals set at the start of 
their development programs. JSF has already increased its cost 
estimate and delayed deliveries through a lengthy replanning 
effort that added over $7.0 billion and 18 months to the 
development program. The committee believes that an 
evolutionary acquisition strategy to limit requirements for the 
aircraft's first increment of capabilities that can be achieved 
with proven technologies and available resources could 
significantly reduce the JSF program's cost and schedule risks. 
Such a strategy would allow the program to begin testing and 
low-rate production sooner and, ultimately, to deliver a useful 
product in sufficient quantities to the warfighter sooner. The 
Department of Defense's use of an evolutionary, knowledge-based 
approach is not unprecedented. The F-16 program successfully 
evolved capabilities over the span of 30 years, with an initial 
F-16 capability delivered to the warfighter about four years 
after development started.
    Although the Department has scheduled the production of JSF 
aircraft to begin replacing legacy aircraft, the committee 
believes that the development and fielding of JSF variants 
should be event-driven and that more of the technologies should 
be matured and risk reduced to the point that the government 
and the contractor team can sign a fixed-price contract for 
each production lot of aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a one-year delay in 
production and a reduction of $955.0 million from APAF for JSF 
(consisting of $869.7 million for JSF and $85.3 million from 
JSF advance procurement), and $245.0 million in APN.

                           F-22A procurement

    The budget request included $1,981.3 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) as part of an incremental funding 
strategy that would lead to a production profile of 20 aircraft 
per year for a three-year multiyear procurement of 60 aircraft, 
beginning in fiscal year 2008. No complete F-22A aircraft were 
to be procured in fiscal year 2007. The budget request also 
included $200.0 million in F-22A advance procurement for 
economic order quantity (EOQ) items required for the F-22A 
multiyear procurement program.
    The committee does not agree with the Department of Defense 
acquisition strategy to incrementally fund the F-22A. The 
committee sees no justification for setting a precedent for 
funding aircraft, as in the case of the F-22A, where the 
Department of Defense has proposed incremental funding merely 
as a way of alleviating cash flow pressures on the overall 
Department.
    Additionally, the committee sees no justification for 
entering into a multiyear procurement of the aircraft. 
Subsections (a)(1) through (6) of section 2306b of title 10, 
United States Code establish the conditions for entering into a 
multiyear procurement contract. One of these conditions is that 
such a contract will result in substantial savings as compared 
to the total anticipated costs of carrying out the program 
through annual contracts. The committee believes that 
substantial savings are not possible under the proposed 
acquisition strategy. Although the Department of Defense and 
the Air Force have asked for the authority to pursue a 
multiyear procurement program, the Administration has not 
submitted any budget exhibits supporting a multiyear 
procurement strategy. Without a multiyear procurement program, 
the $200.0 million in EOQ funds are in excess and should be 
applied to the procurement of F-22A aircraft in fiscal year 
2007.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1,400.0 
million in APAF for a total procurement of $3,381.3 million. 
The committee authorizes the Air Force to procure up to and 
including 20 F-22A aircraft in fiscal year 2007.

                           C-17A procurement

    The budget request included $2,636.2 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF), to complete the buy of 180 C-17A 
aircraft, including $433.2 million for line closure expenses. 
In addition, the fiscal year 2006 budget, as enacted, is $224.5 
million for buying additional aircraft or for line closure 
expenses. Therefore, with the Air Force planned closure of the 
production line after the delivery of 180 aircraft, there would 
be available $657.7 million for line closure expenses.
    The committee is concerned that premature closure of the C-
17A production line would leave the Department of Defense with 
inadequate lift capabilities. While the Mobility Capabilities 
Study (MCS) identified that a fleet of 180 C-17As was adequate, 
that recommendation was based on many assumptions, some of 
which, only months after its completion, no longer hold true. 
There is a clear need for additional C-17As in order to meet 
inter- and intra-theater lift requirements.
    In addition, the study assumed a standard usage rate, one 
significantly lower than what the Air Force has experienced 
over the past several years. In fact, the service is flying its 
transports in excess of 159 percent of planned usage rates, 
which is leading to premature aging of the fleet. Some of the 
older transports now fly with restrictions due to sustained 
high usage. For this reason, the committee believes that higher 
usage rates necessitate the production of additional aircraft 
to ensure the long-term adequacy of the fleet.
    In the Senate report accompanying S. 1042 (S. Rept. 109-69) 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, 
the committee requested a further determination by the 
Secretary of Defense on the adequacy of airlift capabilities 
for several reasons, including increased humanitarian usage, 
the return of 70,000 personnel to the United States due to the 
Base Relocation and Alignment Commission results, homeland 
security requirements, Special Operations Command missions, 
requirements associated with the Army's Strategic Brigade 
Airdrop goal, and lift requirements for the Army's Stryker 
Brigades. The committee has yet to receive the Secretary's 
report. However, it would be difficult to conclude that these 
changes have not led to growth in our lift requirements.
    In addition, the committee is further concerned that C-17A 
production is scheduled to cease well before the results of the 
C-5 modernization demonstration program in December 2008 are 
available. As a recent Department of Commerce analysis points 
out, the cost to restart production of the C-17A would exceed 
$5.0 billion and take 4 years before additional transports 
would become available. This conclusion is fully consistent 
with attempts in the early 1980s to restart the C-5 program, 
which was difficult, costly, and took years to restart. 
Additional funding for C-17A procurement has been included on 
the Air Force Chief of Staff's unfunded priorities list.
    For these reasons, the committee recommends redirecting the 
$657.7 million planned for line closure to procure additional 
C-17A aircraft. The committee recommends $257.7 million in 
advance procurement (using the $224.5 million of fiscal year 
2006 advance procurement with an additional $33.2 million 
transferred from the C-17A procurement line to the C-17A 
advance procurement line in fiscal year 2007), and applying the 
remaining $400.0 million to buy two additional C-17As.

                       KC-135 tanker replacement

    The budget request included $36.1 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) to purchase long, lead time 
materials to support the first aircraft delivery of a 
replacement tanker for the KC-135 aircraft in fiscal year 2010, 
and $203.9 million in PE 41221F for non-recurring engineering, 
test development, and program office expenses. The KC-135 
tanker replacement program had been under a Department of 
Defense-directed pause which has resulted in a program schedule 
slip that will cause the contract award for tanker replacement 
to occur in fiscal year 2008.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $36.1 million in 
APAF, and a decrease of $199.0 million in PE 41221F for the KC-
135 tanker replacement program to reflect the schedule slip.

A/OA-10 modifications

    The budget request included $107.5 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for modifications to the A/OA-10 
aircraft. The modifications for the A/OA-10 include, but are 
not limited to, a communications and datalink upgrade, 
precision engagement upgrades, and a missile warning 
capability. A recent urgent needs request was established for 
an A/OA-10 robust, frequency-selectable, line-of-sight and 
beyond line-of-sight secure airborne communications and 
datalink capability that can be provided by the ARC-210 radio. 
The net effect of this improvement will be highly reliable, 
responsive air support of joint, coalition, and multi-national 
ground forces, and lower maintenance provided by materiel 
improvement. The precision engagement program upgrades include 
a digital stores management system, MIL-STD-1760 munitions bus, 
SNIPER/Litening targeting pod integration, improved hands-on-
throttle-and-stick (HOTAS) control, two new multifunctional 
color cockpit displays, an improved head-up display, and 
digital datalink. The precision engagement upgrades will permit 
the A/OA-10 to employ GPS-guided munitions such as the Joint 
Direct Attack Munition and the Wind Corrected Munitions 
Dispenser. The A/OA-10 aircraft also requires an extended 
duration, covert infrared countermeasures capability to protect 
the aircraft from infrared surface-to-air missile threats that 
abound in its typical operating envelope for ground attack. 
Accelerated procurement of A/OA-10 modifications is included as 
the number three priority on the Chief of Staff of the Air 
Force's unfunded priorities list.
    The committee recommends an increase of $83.4 million in 
APAF to accelerate the A/OA-10 modification program.

C-5 aircraft avionics modernization program

    The budget request included $223.1 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force (APAF) for modifications to the C-5 
aircraft, including $50.4 million to continue the C-5 avionics 
modernization program (AMP). AMP upgrades the C-5 cockpit by 
replacing unreliable cockpit avionics, installs communication, 
navigation, surveillance/air traffic management equipment 
capabilities that will improve air traffic management by taking 
advantage of optimum air routes. AMP also installs navigation 
safety equipment such as the traffic alert and collision 
avoidance system and the terrain awareness and warning system. 
To accelerate this program, the committee recommends an 
increase of $32.0 million in APAF for C-5 AMP.

Bomb insensitive munitions upgrade

    The budget request included $41.9 million in Procurement of 
Ammunition, Air Force (PAAF), for Mk 84 bombs, but included no 
funding for facilitation of the insensitive munitions upgrade 
at the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PAAF for facilitation 
of the insensitive munitions upgrade at the McAlester Army 
Ammunition Plant for the Mk 84 bomb production line.

Propulsion replacement program

    The budget request included $294.6 million in Missile 
Procurement Air Force (MPAF), for the Minuteman III propulsion 
replacement program. This program extends the life, maintains 
the performance, and improves reliability of the Minuteman III 
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile by remanufacturing all three 
solid rocket motor stages. Refurbishment of the motors is 
necessary to sustain the Minuteman III force through 2020.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in 
MPAF, line 11, for the propulsion replacement program to offset 
increased costs of ammonium perchlorate and attrition hardware.

Expanded intelligence support for reach-back operations

    The demand for intelligence exploitation from Air Force 
high mission aircraft, such as Predator, Global Hawk, and U-2, 
is increasing. Advances in technology allow for this imagery 
and signals intelligence exploitation to be conducted by Air 
Force intelligence organizations at home stationed in the 
United States rather than being forward deployed. Air National 
Guard (ANG) squadrons have successfully assumed portions of 
this mission set.
    The committee recommends that this capability be expanded 
in the ANG. The committee also recommends an increase of $7.5 
million in Other Procurement, Air Force, Intelligence 
Communications, to provide necessary communications equipment 
and unique intelligence workstations to enhance the mission 
capabilities of ANG intelligence squadrons and to expand the 
intelligence reach-back capabilities of the Department of 
Defense.

Self-deploying infrared streamer

    The budget request included no funding in Other 
Procurement, Air Force (OPAF) for personal safety and rescue 
equipment items less than $4.0 million. The self-deploying 
infrared streamer (SDIRS) system aids in the rescue of downed 
aircrew at sea. The SDIRS system is attached to an ejection 
seat and automatically deploys and activates upon submergence 
in the water, making the wearer highly visible to search and 
rescue teams using the naked eye during daylight and night 
vision equipment during hours of darkness. The SDIRS 
installation requires only minimal modification to the existing 
system without affecting other components of the pilot's 
survival kit.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in 
OPAF for the procurement of the self-deploying infrared 
streamer.


                       Budget Items--Defense-wide


Army high performance computing research center

    The budget request included $84.9 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide for major equipment, including $51.2 million for 
the High Performance Computing (HPC) Modernization Program 
(HPCMP). Department of Defense (DOD) supercomputing 
requirements for support of the research, development, test and 
evaluation community are collected and validated annually. 
Current projections show that the deployed capability in fiscal 
year 2007 will meet less than half of the validated 
requirement. The addition of supercomputers at the Army HPC 
research center will help the Department meet a high percentage 
of the requirement. The committee recommends an increase of 
$22.3 million in Procurement, Defense-wide, for a total 
authorization of $73.5 million for the Army HPC research 
center.

Mini gun

    The budget request included $86.8 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Rotary 
Wing Upgrades and Sustainment, but included no funding for the 
procurement of the M134 mini gun.
    The M134 mini gun is a six barrel Gatling gun that has 
proven itself as a workhorse for the 160th Special Operations 
Aviation Regiment (160th SOAR) due to its long service life and 
reliable rate of fire. The M134 mini gun is one of the highest 
priorities of the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, 
for additional funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $13.9 million in 
PDW, for SOF Rotary Wing Upgrades and Sustainment, to support 
the procurement of 279 additional mini guns to ensure the 160th 
SOAR has a common weapon system capable of operating on direct-
current power, while also offering a weight savings and 
improved reliability.

Time delayed firing device/sympathetic detonators

    The budget request included $13.6 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), 
Ordnance Acquisition, including $2.7 million for time delayed 
firing device/sympathetic detonators (TDFD/SYDET), but included 
insufficient funding to fully replenish the inventory or 
provide sufficient munitions to train new operators as directed 
by the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review Report.
    TDFD/SYDET is a time delayed detonating device that greatly 
enhances the capabilities and efficiency of SOF operators 
conducting offensive military operations. Sufficient supplies 
are required to ensure operators have the best possible 
detonators for actual missions and that the detonator is 
available to instructors training new SOF operators. TDFD/SYDET 
is one of the highest priorities of the Commander, U.S. Special 
Operations Command, for additional funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.5 million in 
PDW, for SOF Ordnance Acquisition, to procure an additional 
5,500 TDFD/SYDET units for SOF operators and trainers.

Persistent Predator operations and intelligence

    The budget request included $32.7 million for Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), 
Intelligence Systems, but included no funding for Persistent 
Predator operations and intelligence.
    The U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) requires the 
capability to find, fix, and finish time-sensitive, high-value 
targets. These targets can often only be developed with 
patient, persistent collection, and require rapid, decisive 
action during the brief periods in which they present 
themselves. Persistent Predator operations and intelligence is 
the highest priority for the Commander, USSOCOM, for additional 
funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $13.4 million in 
PDW, for SOF Intelligence Systems, to procure a mobile Predator 
operations center and distributed common ground system to 
conduct dynamic retasking of Predator assets to support SOF 
ground forces.

Advanced lightweight grenade launcher

    The budget request included no funding in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Small 
Arms and Weapons, for continued procurement of the Advanced 
Lightweight Grenade Launcher (ALGL).
    The ALGL system provides a much improved capability over 
the Mark 19 grenade launcher it replaced. The ALGL is a 
lightweight 40MM grenade launching system with day and night 
fire control and air bursting 40MM ammunition. This capability 
provides SOF elements the ability to address targets in 
defilade position, and enables first burst hit capability on 
point targets up to 1,500 meters. ALGL is one of the highest 
priorities for the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, 
for additional funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.9 million in 
PDW, for SOF Small Arms and Weapons, to procure an additional 
86 ALGL systems with fire control capability.

Special Operations Forces laser acquisition marker

    The budget request included $105.8 million for Procurement, 
Defense-wide, for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Small Arms 
Weapons, and $1.4 million for the night vision sight 
subcomponent of the Special Operations Forces Laser Acquisition 
Marker (SOFLAM).
    The use of an invisible, coded laser that can only be 
detected by a targeted missile provides SOF elements with a 
stand off capability to engage targets, and ensures friendly 
delivery aircraft spend minimal time in enemy airspace. SOFLAM 
is one of the highest priorities for the Commander, U.S. 
Special Operations Command, for additional funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.3 million in 
PDW, for Small Arms Weapons, to procure twelve SOFLAM for 
tactical air controllers to mark and laze targets for the 
delivery of laser guided munitions.

Special Operations Command craft modifications

    The budget request included $20.2 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), 
Combatant Craft Systems, including $2.5 million for craft 
modifications, but included insufficient funding to fully 
upgrade the high speed assault craft inventory.
    The committee notes that the craft modifications will 
accelerate technology insertion, including the high performance 
diesel engine propulsion system, the integrated onboard ground 
operating system, and the integrated bridge system. The craft 
modifications are one of the highest priorities of the 
Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command, for additional 
funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.2 million in 
PDW, for SOF Combatant Craft Systems, to fully upgrade the high 
speed assault craft currently used by Naval Special Warfare 
Command in the execution of their mission to conduct 
interdiction at sea, as well as insertion and extraction of 
combat force to or from shore based targets.

Joint threat warning system

    The budget request included $4.5 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for Special Operations Forces (SOF), 
Intelligence Systems Development, for continued procurement of 
the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS), but the amount 
requested will only equip a small portion of special operations 
forces with this much-improved threat warning capability for 
ground, air, and maritime forces.
    JTWS is a modular, lightweight, ground signals intelligence 
system that can be mounted on a variety of SOF delivery 
platforms to provide threat warning, situational awareness, and 
enhanced force protection for SOF elements. JTWS is an 
evolutionary acquisition program that builds upon previous 
efforts to separately acquire similar systems for air, ground, 
and maritime applications. Accelerating the procurement of this 
capability to provide a network-centric family of systems is 
one of the highest priorities of the Commander, U.S. Special 
Operations Command, for additional funding.
    The committee recommends am increase of $5.5 million in 
PDW, for SOF Intelligence Systems Development, to procure 
additional JTWS variants that will allow operators increased 
situational awareness.

Automatic Chemical Agent Detector and Alarm

    The budget request included $236.1 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for contamination avoidance equipment to 
support the procurement of chemical and biological detection, 
warning and reporting, and reconnaissance systems, such as the 
Automatic Chemical Agent Detector and Alarm (ACADA). The 
committee notes that a number of Army National Guard units are 
deployed in support of military operations. These units must 
have the best possible defense against chemical threats. The 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PDW to 
meet procurement shortfalls in fielding ACADA systems.

Improved chemical agent monitor

    The budget request included $236.1 million in Procurement, 
Defense-wide (PDW), for contamination avoidance equipment, but 
included no funding for the Improved Chemical Agent Monitor 
(ICAM). ICAM is a hand-held, soldier operated, post-attack 
device that provides a means of quickly detecting the presence 
of nerve and blister agent contamination on personnel and 
equipment.
    The committee notes that Army National Guard units do not 
all possess the capability to rapidly and effectively detect 
the presence of chemical agents. These units must have the best 
available equipment to detect the presence of chemical threats.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in 
PDW, for ICAM, to increase the Army National Guard's 
contamination avoidance capabilities.

                       Items of Special Interest


Cost control for certain helicopter acquisition programs

    The Department of Defense, including the Army, Navy, Air 
Force, and Marine Corps are all buying helicopters for filling 
various missions. Two of these programs have generated concern 
because of recent developments. The Marine Corps has been 
developing upgrades and replacements for its existing fleet of 
attack (AH-1) and utility (UH-1) helicopters. These programs, 
which are being conducted by the same manufacturer, have 
experienced delayed deliveries and increasing costs. These 
problems appear, at least in part, to have been caused by 
deficient cost control and cost accounting procedures by which 
the contractor manages the programs and through which 
Department of Defense acquisition officials can manage the 
government's equities in the programs.
    This raises concerns with the committee, since these same 
procedures have been used on other existing programs and could 
be used on future programs as well. Since the Marine Corps' MV-
22, Special Operations Command's CV-22, the Air Force's VH-71, 
and the Army's Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) programs 
will all be acquired in whole or in part from the same 
contractor, the committee believes that Department-wide 
attention should be focused on the corrective actions that are 
being proposed for restructuring the AH-1 and UH-1 programs.
    Therefore, the committee strongly urges the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD 
(AT&L)) to conduct a thorough review of the cost control and 
cost accounting procedures for helicopter acquisition programs 
of the various helicopter prime contractors, not just the 
contractor involved in the AH-1 and UH-1 programs. We need to 
be sure that we are getting fair value for the billions of 
dollars that the taxpayer will be investing in the various 
helicopter acquisition programs in the current plan.
    The committee will reserve judgment on the plan to 
restructure the UH-1 and AH-1 programs until the Department 
completes its review.

Deployable/mobile command and control programs

    The committee notes that there are many efforts underway in 
the Department of Defense and military services to develop and 
field battle management command and control systems. While the 
committee supports ongoing efforts to improve command and 
control (C2) capabilities, we are nonetheless concerned that 
many of these systems are being developed as service-centric 
solutions rather than as joint solutions. As a result, there is 
likely to be unnecessary duplication of effort and cost 
inefficiencies and, more importantly, there is the potential 
that systems will lack the necessary interoperability to 
operate effectively in a joint military operation.
    The committee also notes that Joint Forces Command (JFCOM), 
in coordination with the Department of the Navy, is developing 
and fielding the first increment of the Deployable Joint 
Command and Control (DJC2) system with some success. However, 
with efforts underway to pursue further increments of DJC2 
capability, it has become apparent that a number of service-
specific solutions to the problem of deployable C2 have 
recently begun that may duplicate DJC2. In addition, the 
services have several efforts underway to develop various 
mobile C2 systems. These systems are intended to provide 
commanders with battle management and situational awareness 
capabilities while on the move. For example, the Army is 
developing the Mounted Battle Command On-The-Move (MBCOTM) 
system and the Marine Corps is developing the Command and 
Control On-The-Move Network Digital Over-the-Horizon Relay 
(CONDOR) system. Additionally, JFCOM is designing a Command and 
Control on the Move (C2OTM) system under limited acquisition 
authority. While each service will argue that they need a 
service-unique deployable C2 solution to meet service-specific 
requirements, a common solution set of equipment that could 
meet the needs of multiple services may be preferable, 
especially given the funding pressures the Department is 
experiencing. The committee believes that there are 
efficiencies to be gained from merging the services' deployable 
and mobile C2 initiatives.
    As a first step in identifying the extent to which there is 
a problem with the military services continuing to pursue 
service-specific C2 solutions at the expense of joint 
solutions, the committee directs the Comptroller General to 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees, no 
later than March 15, 2007, reviewing current and planned 
programs within the Department to develop deployable and mobile 
C2 systems. The report will include an assessment of the 
requirements, costs, and schedules of these programs and 
whether joint development approaches are warranted.

F-18 Hornet to Joint Strike Fighter transition

    The committee is concerned that the Navy will confront a 
sizeable gap in aircraft inventory as older F/A-18A-D Hornets 
retire before the aircraft carrier variant of the Joint Strike 
Fighter (JSF) is available. F/A-18A-D aircraft were originally 
designed for a service life of 6,000 flight hours, and after an 
initial engineering study, that limit was raised to 8,000 
flight hours. It would take additional service life extensions 
to reach 12,000 flight hours to ensure a smooth transition to 
JSF with no inventory shortfall.
    The magnitude of the problem, and the procurement cost to 
avoid a shortfall in the carrier air wing force structure, is 
entirely dependent on when the Navy determines that its F/A-
18A/Cs are at the end of their service life. An ongoing Service 
Life Assessment Program (SLAP) II study, to be completed in 
December 2007, will determine the maximum service life of the 
aircraft. Early projections from the SLAP II study indicate 
that aircraft service life may be approved beyond 8,000 flight 
hours. However, the Navy has acknowledged that, even if 10,000 
flight hours were achievable, the inventory shortfall would be 
50 aircraft. If any of the assumptions used in the Navy's 
analysis change or prove to be overly optimistic, the inventory 
gap will grow dramatically.
    The committee understands that an acquisition decision is 
not required this fiscal year. However, small steps taken now 
could prevent the requirement for major and expensive program 
changes in 2010. Accordingly, the committee recommends that the 
Navy consider buying additional F/A-18E/Fs to mitigate the 
known shortfall, while allowing the Navy to transition to the 
JSF as soon as feasible. In addition, the committee directs the 
Navy to report the preliminary findings of the SLAP II study to 
the congressional defense committees no later than June 15, 
2007.

Fully funded bomber roadmap

    The Secretary of the Air Force shall provide a bomber 
roadmap to the congressional defense committees within 120 days 
of enactment of this Act. The roadmap will outline a plan for 
long-range strike bombers with specific details of upgrade 
plans for legacy bombers and a schedule for development of the 
new long-range strike bomber. The roadmap shall include the 
amount of funding that would be needed to implement the roadmap 
through fiscal year 2020.

Littoral Combat Ship

    The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is a small, fast Navy 
surface combatant with modular weapon systems, designed to fill 
critical capability gaps for warfighting in the littorals. The 
Navy plans to procure a total of 55 LCS vessels, plus 
approximately 90 mission modules for mine warfare, anti-
submarine warfare, and anti-surface warfare capability. The 
Navy has emphasized the criticality of littoral capability, 
modularity, and low acquisition cost as the compelling 
attributes for procuring this new class of small combatants. 
The Navy's estimate for LCS procurement was $220.0 million, 
with average unit cost for mission modules estimated at $70.0 
million. The Navy's acquisition strategy was to procure 4 
flight 0 ships, pause procurement in fiscal year 2008 while 
evaluating system performance, and then proceed with 
introduction of a flight 1 design for follow-on ship 
competition.
    The Navy awarded two LCS flight 0 prime contracts, with 
research and development (R&D) funding in fiscal years 2005 and 
2006. Congress appropriated two additional flight 0 ships in 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) in fiscal year 2006, 
budgeted at the Navy's estimated $220.0 million unit cost. 
Additionally, in view of concerns with cost growth on 
shipbuilding programs, the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) established a $220.0 
million cost cap for the fifth and sixth ships of the LCS 
program. That cost cap is subject to authorized adjustments for 
inflation, outfitting, statutory changes, and technology 
insertion approved by the Secretary of the Navy.
    The fiscal year 2007 budget request included $521.0 million 
for the fifth and sixth ships of the LCS class, and identified 
that the Navy's $220.0 million estimate for LCS unit cost was 
exclusive of contract change orders, planning and engineering 
services, program management support, and other costs not 
included in the ship construction contract. In total, the 
Congressional Research Service estimates that these adjustments 
would increase the average unit procurement cost of follow-on 
LCS ships about 33 percent, to approximately $298.0 million. 
With lead ship construction less than 50 percent complete, it 
is premature to refine these estimates based on actual 
construction cost return data. The Navy has also advised that 
it has revised its acquisition strategy and intends to continue 
procurement of the two flight 0 versions at least through the 
planned procurement of the fifteenth LCS in fiscal year 2009.
    The construction of lead LCS vessels at two shipyards 
inherently adds cost risk, which will persist until these ships 
near completion in 2007 and 2008. The emphasis on cost control 
would dictate that the Navy pursue competition, commonality, 
and the results of learning curves to the extent practical in 
the procurement of this 55 ship class.
    The committee views LCS as an important component of the 
Navy's strategy for conducting the global war on terror, and 
has supported the Navy's approach to rapidly field this 
capability. The design and construction of LCS in parallel with 
development of the mission modules requires heightened 
management of program risk to ensure affordable, full mission 
capability of the LCS program. However, the committee is 
concerned that the affordability appeal of the LCS program is 
being overtaken by apparent cost growth, and that the rapid 
ramp up in LCS procurement will compound the issue. The stated 
emphasis on affordability is obscured by the absence of a clear 
acquisition strategy to guide strategic program decisions. 
Additionally, it is unclear that the Navy has assessed the 
added cost for training, maintenance, configuration management, 
planning and engineering, and supply support for the two flight 
0 ship classes. Further, by virtue of budgeting the costs for 
procuring the flight 0 LCS vessels in three different 
appropriations, total costs for the program's start are 
difficult to discern.
    In view of these concerns, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Navy to submit a report on the LCS program, no 
later than December 1, 2006 to the congressional defense 
committees. The report shall outline the Navy's acquisition 
strategy for the program, including the competition plan, the 
flight strategy, and the cost containment strategy for the 
program; contain a clear representation of all R&D and 
procurement costs for the total program; and assess the added 
life cycle costs associated with operation and support for two 
dissimilar flight 0 LCS designs.

Maritime Prepositioning Force, Future

    The Navy's long-range plan for future force structure 
includes $14.5 billion for the development and construction of 
Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future) (MPF(F)) ships and 
related enabling technologies in support of sea basing. The 
budget request included $127.7 million in PE 63236N and PE 
48042N for the purpose of developing concepts of operation and 
enabling technologies for the Sea Base. The first MPF(F) ships 
are planned for procurement in fiscal year 2009, with the Sea 
Base initial operating capability in 2016.
    The Senate report accompanying S. 1042 (S. Rept. 109-69) of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
identified concerns regarding whether the future concept of sea 
basing is technically feasible and fiscally prudent. The 
committee understands that sea basing fundamentally comprises a 
range of capabilities stretching across prepositioning, 
sealift, expeditionary force, and aircraft carrier operations 
all of which are employed by the fleet today when called to put 
forces ashore. The future Sea Base envisioned by the Navy would 
include MPF(F) squadrons capable of supporting brigade-size 
assault forces, with automated warehousing and selective 
offload capability, heavy seas ship-to-ship cargo transfer 
capability, mobile landing platforms, and ship-to-shore 
connectors. Further, the MPF(F) squadron could sustain the 
force ashore for extended periods without reliance on access to 
other nations' ports or bases.
    The large investment required by the MPF(F) sea basing 
capabilities requires careful assessment regarding the concept 
of operations for the MPF(F) squadrons. Specific access-denial 
scenarios, which would dictate employing the MPF(F) ships, need 
to be understood against the backdrop of the full spectrum of 
inter-service and inter-agency alternatives for establishing a 
point of departure for ground forces. To the extent that MPF(F) 
ships are maintained in a ready status, similar to their 
prepositioning counterparts, the timeline for deploying the 
MPF(F) ships and the crewing concept for their operations 
become important factors in scenario planning for the Sea Base. 
Similarly, an understanding of capstone requirements for 
probability of raid annihilation and other force defense 
requirements for the Sea Base is critical, since the MPF(F) 
ships will potentially embark a brigade-size force, yet they 
lack the self-defense features of expeditionary warships.
    Technical challenges confronting the development of the 
critical enabling technologies for sea basing need to be 
assessed, and the risks need to be sufficiently understood to 
be able to warrant near-term decisions regarding further 
investment in MPF(F) ship procurement. The committee believes 
it is important to ensure that these technologies can reliably 
support the movement of supplies and equipment in heavy seas, 
at a rate that will sustain a ground force engaged in combat, 
before large investments are made in MPF(F) ships.
    The Navy faces significant financial challenges as it 
proceeds to build the 313-ship fleet defined by the future 
force structure plan. In weighing the investment in MPF(F) 
capability, the committee needs to have clear insight to the 
full benefit the Navy intends to derive from this concept, an 
appreciation that the sea basing mission is not better achieved 
by other measures, and full confidence that the development 
efforts in question are achievable in the timeframe planned and 
budgeted. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees with the fiscal year 2008 budget request, 
addressing: (1) the Sea Base concept of operations for the 
MPF(F) ships, including timelines that detail force deployment 
and underway operations in defense planning scenarios; (2) Sea 
Base capstone requirements that address defense of the MPF(F) 
ships against swarming boats, diesel submarine threats, or high 
density anti-ship cruise missile raids; (3) MPF(F) key 
performance parameters; (4) MPF(F) crewing concepts, and 
assessment of related cost and operational considerations; (5) 
refined ship cost estimates and total program costs, including 
development and procurement for connectors and other 
capabilities required by the Sea Base; (6) the management plan, 
including consideration for assignment as a Major Defense 
Acquisition Program, for overseeing end-to-end development and 
integration of this joint system-of-systems; and (7) a program 
roadmap that outlines the development, test, and integration 
plan for the enabling technologies with the MPF(F) platforms.

Ship systems commonality

    Navy vessels require common capabilities such as 
communications, surveillance, self-defense, damage control, 
combat systems, weapon deployment, propulsion, computing 
capability, and electrical power generation and distribution. 
In some cases, ship programs have developed their own solutions 
for some of these common capabilities. This approach has 
resulted in a number of different systems performing similar 
functions. The concept of a family of ships, which applies 
investments made on one ship class to other ship classes, could 
avoid redundant research and development while reducing supply 
and training pipelines. The direct cost savings associated with 
this approach are readily apparent. The effect of the absence 
on competitive pressure on the incumbent vendor in terms of 
cost and technology innovations is less clear.
    The modular and open architecture approach to designing and 
integrating subsystems, which can be assembled as required to 
meet the specific missions, could reduce design and integration 
costs for Navy ships. The Navy might be in a position to apply 
this concept to a number of currently planned ship classes. The 
committee believes that the Navy should explicitly consider 
whether having such an approach for the design, integration, 
installation, and life cycle support for common systems for 
future ships would provide better value for the government.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees, 
with the fiscal year 2008 budget request, on the analysis of 
costs and benefits of implementing a plan to maximize 
commonality in the design, integration, and installation of 
systems into new ships and existing ships.

Submarine force structure

    The Secretary of the Navy submitted a report to Congress on 
the long-range plan for construction of naval vessels with the 
fiscal year 2007 budget request. This plan reflects the 
determination by the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) that the 
National Defense Strategy requires a fleet of 313 ships, 
including 48 attack submarines, to meet the threat in future 
years. In testimony before the Subcommittee on Seapower of the 
Committee on Armed Services, the Navy witnesses described the 
level of 48 attack submarines as the minimum level necessary to 
support both wartime and peacetime requirements.
    The Navy also indicated that, with currently planned 
construction, attack submarine forces drop below 48 submarines 
for 15 years. The future-years defense program (FYDP) supports 
building only one attack submarine per year through fiscal year 
2011, with sufficient advance procurement during the FYDP to 
support increasing the production rate to two boats per year in 
fiscal year 2012. The Navy's leadership has stated that they 
need to get the price of Virginia-class attack submarines to a 
level of $2.0 billion per boat before increasing the build 
rate. The committee completely agrees with the Navy's 
affordability focus, but simultaneously views the most 
important step to improve affordability is to increase the 
production rate of the Virginia-class to more than one boat per 
year.
    The committee understands that the Navy is trying to 
modernize in a constrained fiscal environment. However, the 
committee does not understand the continuing delays in 
increasing the construction rate. By the Navy's own assessment: 
(1) submarines perform a uniquely Navy mission; (2) the minimum 
requirement is to have 48 attack submarines; (3) submarine 
force levels will fall below 48 during the next decade and 
remain there for 15 years; (4) the Navy needs to achieve cost 
reductions in attack submarine construction in order to 
increase production rates without impinging on other priority 
shipbuilding programs; and (5) there are potential technology 
insertion opportunities that might help reduce costs and permit 
the Navy to increase the production rate.
    Having said that, the Navy's and industry's plan for 
achieving the $2.0 billion per boat cost goal requires greater 
definition. The Navy has referred to efforts to develop a 
number of improvements for the Virginia-class that target cost 
reductions. The committee is concerned, however, that without 
more specific plans with defined goals and benchmarks, the Navy 
will get to the end of the FYDP and not necessarily be any 
closer to achieving real cost reductions in this program. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
submit with the fiscal year 2008 budget request a detailed plan 
for developing cost reduction measures with defined goals and 
benchmarks for the Virginia-class production program.

T-38 replacement aircraft

    The committee believes that the T-45, with requisite 
modifications, could serve as both the next-generation joint 
trainer and as a replacement for the Air Force T-38 trainer. 
The committee notes that the service plans to spend $1.5 
billion over the future-years defense program to maintain the 
T-38 fleet at a cost per flying hour that is double that of the 
T-45, and that the cost of developing a different replacement 
trainer and training system for the T-38 would cost an 
estimated $2.0 billion.
    In addition, the 2005 RAND study, entitled ``Assessing the 
Impact of Future Operations on Trainer Aircraft Requirements,'' 
states that the ``current T-38 fleet averages almost 14,000 
flying hours per airframe, which is almost twice the original 
design service life,'' and that if no replacement aircraft is 
programmed and the T-38 is operated as late as 2040, the Air 
Force could be training a sizable portion of its new pilots in 
airframes that are almost 80 years old.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air 
Force to conduct a study that would determine the suitability 
of the T-45 and Korean built KT-50 training aircraft to replace 
the T-38. Given that all three trainers possess excellent 
capabilities, the study should focus on cost of procurement, 
operating costs, the availability of a complete training 
system, and developmental costs. In addition, if the Secretary 
determines that sustainment of the current trainer is the most 
cost-effective course of action, the study should explain how 
large, long-term sustainment expenditures are justified when 
readily available replacements are immediately available, and 
funds to develop a joint follow-on trainer will not become 
available for the foreseeable future. The Secretary of the Air 
Force should submit a report on the results of the study to the 
congressional defense committees by March 15, 2007.
         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Explanation of tables
    The following tables provide the program-level detailed 
guidance for the funding authorized in title II of this Act. 
The tables also display the funding requested by the 
administration in the fiscal year 2007 budget request for 
research, development, test and evaluation programs, and 
indicate those programs for which the committee either 
increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the past, 
the administration may not exceed the authorized amounts (as 
set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the 
administration request, as set forth in budget justification 
documents of the Department of Defense), without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted in this report, funding changes to the budget 
request are made without prejudice.


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Independent estimate of costs of the Future Combat Systems (sec. 211)
    The committee recommends a provision that would withhold 
$500.0 million from the amount of funds authorized to be 
appropriated for the development of the Future Combat Systems 
(FCS) until the Secretary of Defense submits a report of an 
independent cost estimate for FCS. The provision requires that 
the independent cost estimate be conducted by a federally 
funded research and development center and include the 
research, development, test and evaluation, and procurement 
costs for the system development and demonstration phase of the 
core FCS program; the FCS technologies to be incorporated into 
the equipment of the current force of the Army; the 
installation kits for the incorporation of the FCS technologies 
into the current force equipment; the systems treated as the 
complementary systems for the FCS program; science and 
technology programs that support the FCS program and any pass-
through charges anticipated to be assessed by the lead systems 
integrator of the FCS and its major sub-contractors.
    Section 211 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) 
required the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics (USD (AT&L)) to submit a program cost 
estimate to the Congress prior to the FCS Milestone B update 
required by the acquisition decision memorandum that approved 
the FCS program entry into Milestone B. This report requirement 
was in response to the restructure of the FCS program to 
include costs of transferring FCS technology to the current 
force programs of the Army, and to restore several FCS 
platforms into the program. However, the report was never 
delivered because the Milestone B update was postponed.
    Section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) required the USD (AT&L) 
to submit the results of an independent cost estimate, prepared 
by the cost analysis improvement group (CAIG) of the Office of 
the Secretary of Defense, with respect to the Future Combat 
Systems program. While the CAIG independent cost estimate may 
provide insights into the cost of the FCS program, the 
committee believes that the Army may be underestimating FCS 
costs.
    The Government Accountability Office highlighted in 
testimony before the Subcommittee on AirLand of the Committee 
on Armed Services,

          The total cost for the FCS program, now estimated at 
        $160.7 billion (then year dollars), has climbed 76 
        percent from the Army's first estimate. Because 
        uncertainties remain regarding FCS's requirements and 
        the Army faces significant challenges in technology and 
        design maturity, we believe the Army's latest cost 
        estimate still lacks a firm knowledge base. 
        Furthermore, this latest estimate does not include 
        complementary programs that are essential for FCS to 
        perform as intended, or all of the necessary funding 
        for FCS spin-outs.

    The committee believes that an independent cost estimate 
will provide the committee additional assurance as to the 
fidelity of the Army's own cost estimate and a better 
understanding of the factors that have driven up the costs of 
the FCS program.
Funding of defense science and technology program (sec. 212)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
funding objective for science and technology (S&T) programs, as 
required by section 212 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), to fiscal year 
2012, and require the submission of two reports if the 
Department of Defense fails to meet the outlined funding 
objective in any single fiscal year budget request. The first 
required report would be submitted with the budget request in 
the following year and would provide a detailed, prioritized 
list of high-quality, military relevant, unfunded opportunities 
in defense science and technology. The second report would be 
submitted within 6 months of the current budget request and 
would contain a classified and unclassified analysis and 
evaluation of international research and technology 
capabilities that threaten U.S. global leadership in key areas 
described by the Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan, 
the Defense Technology Area Plan, and the Basic Research Plan.
    The committee continues to support stable funding for 
Department S&T programs, which have a demonstrated history of 
supporting the warfighter and exploring innovative solutions to 
current challenges and to emerging and projected threats. 
Section 212 provided a modest funding objective for S&T of 2 
percent growth over inflation from budget request to budget 
request. The committee commends the Department for supporting 
long-term research efforts, which have grown in rough parallel 
to the defense budget, but believes strict adherence to simple 
investment targets is necessary to ensure consistent and stable 
funding over time. The reports required by this section, if 
funding objectives are not reached, would inform the Department 
and Congress on the potential consequences of such decisions 
and would provide valuable information to Congress on priority 
areas that would benefit from additional resources.
Hypersonics development (sec. 213)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a joint technology office 
(JTO) to coordinate, integrate, and manage hypersonics 
research, development, and demonstration programs and budgets. 
Under the provision, the JTO would: provide for integration of 
all department hypersonics programs; coordinate Department of 
Defense hypersonics programs with the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration (NASA); and maintain approval and 
certification authority for hypersonics system demonstration 
programs. The provision would further require the JTO to work 
with the joint staff and NASA to develop a roadmap for a joint 
hypersonics research program to meet short-, mid-, and long-
term goals consistent with Department missions and requirements 
and with clear acquisition transition plans. The roadmap would 
be submitted to Congress with the fiscal year 2008 budget 
request.
    The committee has followed with great interest the 
development of hypersonic technologies over the past several 
years and believes that successful development of the 
capability holds tremendous potential for high-speed strike, 
global reach and space access missions. However, significant 
challenges remain.
    The committee is concerned that Department hypersonics 
research programs are not integrated or even coordinated, 
either internally or with NASA efforts, especially since the 
cancellation of the X-43A project. The committee notes that 
some Navy hypersonics research programs, conducted with the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), will be 
completed in fiscal year 2007, yet a transition path has not 
been identified. Further, it is not clear how the Navy RATTLRS 
program complements parallel approaches to high-speed strike 
missions. DARPA planned to initiate a new hypersonics effort in 
fiscal year 2007 for a ``transatmospheric'' vehicle to 
``further mature, integrate and flight-demonstrate propulsion 
technologies developed by the high speed reusable demonstration 
and Falcon programs.'' DARPA programs also lack a clear 
transition path or tangible service transition support. 
Finally, the Air Force plans to conduct a first-flight 
demonstration of the X-51A Scramjet in fiscal year 2009, yet 
the Office of the Air Force Director of Test and Evaluation 
(T&E), which conducts annual surveys on future T&E 
requirements, indicates that no program office has reported a 
need for hypersonics testing facilities. The Army has indicated 
similar concern with insufficient links between hypersonics 
research efforts and service requirements. The committee also 
recognizes that the operational community views maturity of the 
technology and prospects for near-term transition with some 
skepticism.
    The activities required by the recommended provision are 
designed to ensure the Department pursues a joint, integrated 
hypersonics program to achieve the long-term vision of a 
reconfigurable, combined-cycle aircraft that would provide the 
nation with meaningful operational capabilities, including 
strategic reconnaissance, global strike, and rapid access to 
space.
Trident sea-launched ballistic missiles (sec. 214)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
$95.0 million of the funds authorized to be appropriated for 
the Conventional Trident Modification (CTM) program from being 
obligated or expended in support of the program until the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
State, submits a report to the congressional defense 
committees.
    The report would address a wide range of issues associated 
with the Navy proposal to modify twenty-four Trident D-5 
ballistic missiles, which currently carry nuclear warheads, to 
each carry four conventional kinetic warheads. Under the 
proposal, two modified D-5 missiles with conventional kinetic 
warheads would be deployed on each of the Ohio Class Trident 
ballistic missile submarines.
    The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
and the Secretary of State to include in the report a joint 
statement on how to ensure that the use of a conventional D-5 
missile will not result in an intentional, inadvertent, 
mistaken or accidental reciprocal or responsive launch of a 
nuclear strike by another country.
    The provision would permit the Navy to use up to $32.0 
million of the funds authorized in PE 0604327N, for Advanced 
Conventional Strike Capability. The committee further directs 
the Navy to use the $32.0 million only for research and 
development on technologies in support of the conventional D-5 
modification, but not to support procurement or deployment 
activities in support of the conventional Trident modification 
program. In addition, up to $20.0 million of the funds 
authorized for the CTM program may be used to conduct the 
required study.

                  Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs

Availability of research, development, test, and evaluation funds for 
        fielding ballistic missile defense capabilities (sec. 231)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the use of funds, authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
2008, for research, development, test, and evaluation for the 
Missile Defense Agency, for the development and fielding of 
ballistic missile defense capabilities.
Policy of the United States on priorities in the development, testing, 
        and fielding of missile defense capabilities (sec. 232)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make it the 
policy of the United States to accord a priority within the 
missile defense program to the development, testing, fielding, 
and improvement of effective near-term missile defense 
capabilities, including ground-based interceptors, sea-based 
interceptors, additional Patriot PAC-3 units, the Terminal High 
Altitude Area Defense system, and sensors based on land, sea, 
and in space that support these interceptor systems.
    Over the last two years, Congress has advised the Missile 
Defense Agency (MDA) to focus its efforts on those missile 
defense systems in which heavy investments already have been 
made and which are now just starting to provide a measure of 
protection for the United States and its deployed forces. 
Accordingly, the committee believes that rigorous and 
successful development, testing, and fielding of operational 
systems in sufficient numbers to counter the threat must take 
priority over the development of the next generation of missile 
defense systems.
    The committee notes that in its fiscal year 2007 Budget 
Estimate Overview, the MDA states that it ``worked within its 
fiscal controls across the future years defense program to 
weigh alternatives and balance the approaches to a layered 
defense.'' The committee believes the MDA, in pursuing a 
balanced investment approach, has funded longer-term efforts to 
the detriment of the successful development, testing, and 
fielding of the current generation of missile defense systems. 
For example, the MDA is requesting funds for only a single 
intercept test of the ground-based midcourse defense (GMD) 
system in 2007. This would appear to be a high-risk approach 
given the importance of this program for the defense of the 
United States against long-range ballistic missile attack. The 
MDA also reduced the number of ground- and sea-based 
interceptor missile deliveries over the future-years defense 
program in order to invest more in development upgrades to 
these and other systems. While evolutionary improvements to the 
current systems are prudent and should continue, the committee 
believes additional funding is necessary to restore missile 
inventory to levels previously thought necessary by the 
Department of Defense to counter the threat.
    While reducing the funding necessary both for critical 
near-term testing and for increasing the inventory of 
interceptor missiles, the Missile Defense Agency plans to spend 
approximately $9.0 billion between fiscal years 2006 and 2015 
to develop the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI). In a prepared 
statement to the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the 
Committee on Armed Services, the Director of the MDA stated 
that the KEI is a boost-phase effort that ``could be used as 
part of an affordable, competitive next-generation upgrade for 
our mid-course or even terminal interceptors.''
    The committee does not believe the Department of Defense 
should make such a large investment in ``a next generation 
upgrade'' until the current generation of missile defense 
systems has been successfully tested and fielded in numbers 
sufficient to address the near-term threat. Continued research 
and development of the critical technologies related to KEI is 
warranted, but at a much lower level, and as a hedge against 
the failure of the lead boost-phase missile defense candidate, 
the Airborne Laser.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends the following 
adjustments to the budget request for missile defense programs.
Ground-based Midcourse Ballistic Missile Defense
    The budget request included $2.4 billion in PE 63882C for 
the Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Midcourse Defense Segment 
to cover continued development, ground and flight testing, 
fielding, and support for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense 
(GMD) system. The committee recommends an increase of $200.0 
million in PE 63882C, specifically to enhance the GMD testing 
program and to enable the GMD system to perform concurrent test 
and operations (i.e., permit testing, maintenance, and training 
activities to continue, while simultaneously allowing the 
combatant commander to maintain readiness to execute missile 
defense operations in an emergency). The committee directs that 
$115.0 million be used for an additional integrated intercept 
test of the GMD system in 2007; $60.0 million be used to 
accelerate capabilities that would enable concurrent test and 
operations of the GMD system; and $25.0 million be allocated 
for long-lead purchases for six ground-based interceptor test 
missiles in fiscal years 2008 and 2009. The committee expects 
the MDA to adjust its spending over fiscal years 2008-2011 to 
complete the tasks directed above.
    The committee directs the Director of the MDA to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees no later than 
March 1, 2007. The report should detail the efforts that would 
need to be taken and funding required to maintain continued 
production of the Boost Vehicle Plus (BV+) interceptor, and 
make an assessment of the risk of inadequate GBI availability 
using the Orbital Boost Vehicle (OBV).
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense
    The budget request included $1.0 billion in PE 63892C, for 
the sea-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system. The 
Aegis BMD is intended to provide protection against short- and 
medium-range ballistic missiles. The committee recommends an 
increase of $100.0 million in PE 63892C to restore the delivery 
of SM-3 interceptors to 120 by the end of fiscal year 2011, and 
to increase the overall effectiveness of the Aegis BMD system 
capability against longer-range threats. Of the increased 
amount, the committee directs $70.0 million be applied toward 
procuring 24 additional SM-3 block 1B missiles over fiscal 
years 2008 to 2011, and $30.0 million be used to accelerate SM-
3 and Aegis weapon system integration to take full advantage of 
missile and weapons systems capabilities, including the BMD 
signal processor and two-color seeker. MDA is expected to 
budget for the completion of these tasks over fiscal years 2008 
to 2011.
Patriot missile defense system
    The budget request included $489.1 million in Missile 
Procurement, Army (MPA), for 108 Patriot PAC-3 missiles; and 
$70.0 million for Patriot modifications. The Patriot ballistic 
missile defense system demonstrated its worth during Operation 
Iraqi Freedom by intercepting all nine Iraqi short-range 
ballistic missiles that were engaged by Patriot. The committee 
notes that the predominant foreign ballistic missile threat to 
United States forces is from short-range ballistic missiles, 
and that the Patriot is designed to defend against such 
ballistic missile threats. The committee recommends an increase 
of $75.0 million in MPA to support the upgrade of Patriot 
battalions to the configuration-3 capability. This upgrade 
would significantly extend the defensive range and capability 
of over 2,000 Patriot PAC-2 missiles now in the inventory. 
Additional funding for these Patriot PAC-3 upgrades has been 
included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's unfunded 
priorities list. The committee also recommends an increase of 
$25.0 million in MPA for purchases of 8 additional PAC-3 
missiles in fiscal year 2007, in response to calls from 
combatant commanders for more Patriot missiles to counter the 
threat.
Kinetic Energy Interceptor
    The budget request included $405.5 million in PE 63886C, 
for Ballistic Missile Defense System Interceptors, for 
continued development of the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI). 
The request is almost double the amount appropriated for KEI in 
fiscal year 2006, and begins a sharp rise in projected KEI 
spending that amounts to $4.6 billion between fiscal years 2007 
and 2011. As noted above, the committee believes this level of 
effort is too high for a boost phase risk-reduction effort and 
next generation missile defense system. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $200.0 million in PE 63886C for the 
KEI program. The committee believes these funds are more 
urgently required for an additional flight intercept test of 
the GMD system in fiscal year 2007 and to help increase the 
number of SM-3 missile deliveries starting in fiscal year 2008. 
The committee directs that remaining funds be used to mature 
those critical technologies necessary to demonstrate the 
viability of the KEI design.
Ballistic missile defense reductions
    The budget request included $506.8 million in PE 63889C, 
for Ballistic Missile Defense Products; 473.0 million in PE 
63890C, for Ballistic Missile Defense System Core; and $374.5 
million in PE 63891C, for MDA Special Programs. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $40.0 million in PE 63889C, for 
Ballistic Missile Defense Products; a decrease of $40.0 million 
in PE 63890C, for Ballistic Missile Defense System Core; and a 
decrease of $20.0 million in PE 63891C, for MDA Special 
Programs, to offset the additional funding necessary for the 
GMD and Aegis BMD programs. The Director of the MDA may take 
these reductions in funding from among the program elements 
mentioned above, at his discretion.
One-year extension of Comptroller General assessments of ballistic 
        missile defense programs (sec. 233)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
until fiscal year 2008 the requirement for the Comptroller 
General to provide an assessment of the extent to which the 
Missile Defense Agency achieved the goals established for that 
fiscal year for each ballistic missile defense program of the 
Department of Defense.
Submittal of plans for test and evaluation of the operational 
        capability of the ballistic missile defense system (sec. 234)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
each plan approved by the Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation to test and evaluate the operational capability of 
the ballistic missile defense system, as required by section 
234(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note), to be 
submitted to the congressional defense committees within 30 
days of such approval.
Annual reports on transition of ballistic missile defense programs to 
        the military departments (sec. 235)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees, not later than March 1 of 2007, and annually 
thereafter through 2013, on the plans of the Department of 
Defense for the transition of missile defense programs from the 
Missile Defense Agency to the military departments. Each report 
required would cover the period of the future-years defense 
program for the year in which the report is submitted. Each 
report would include: which missile defense programs are, or 
are not, planned for transition; the schedule for each 
transition; a description of the status of the transition plans 
and agreements; an identification of the entity responsible for 
funding each program to be transitioned; a description of the 
funds that will be used for each such program; and an 
explanation of the number of systems planned to be procured for 
each program to be transitioned, and a procurement schedule.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Extension of requirement for Global Research Watch Program (sec. 251)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
requirement for the development of a Global Research Watch 
database until September 30, 2011. The committee commends the 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDRE) for 
development of the Global Technology Knowledge Base program as 
a response to the Global Research Watch mandate under section 
241 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2004 (Public Law 108-136). The pilot database informs 
Department of Defense decision makers on the capabilities of 
the international community in areas of defense science and 
technology. The committee directs the DDRE to aggressively work 
to include international capabilities analyses from the 
military departments and defense agencies in the program as 
directed in the original statute, section 2365 of title 10, 
United States Code.
    The committee also notes that coordinating the efforts of 
the Global Research Watch program with the Militarily Critical 
Technologies Program would provide the Department with an 
additional source of data on international research 
capabilities and their relationships to critical defense 
technologies and systems. Elsewhere in this report, the 
committee recommends a transfer of $2.0 million from Operation 
and Maintenance, Defense-Wide to PE 65110D8Z for critical 
technology support to provide for more timely updates to the 
Militarily Critical Technologies List and the Defense Science 
and Technology List. The committee urges the DDRE to consider 
establishing a domestic version of the technology knowledge 
base to inform industrial base policy decisions. The committee 
notes that this knowledge base should be developed through a 
collaboration of the Department technology development and 
industrial policy communities and should utilize input from 
defense industry.
    Finally, the committee notes that the international 
community may have capabilities, research, and technologies 
that could be useful in the Department's efforts to combat 
improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The committee directs the 
Director of the Joint IED Defeat Office (JIEDDO) to work with 
the DDRE to undertake an international survey of research and 
technology that would be supportive of the combating IED 
mission. The committee directs the Director of JIEDDO and the 
DDRE to report to Congress on the results of the survey to 
include a description of any current or planned international 
cooperative technology development programs in this area and an 
accounting of funding available for such activities. This 
report should be transmitted to Congress not later than January 
31, 2007.
Expansion and extension of authority to award prizes for advanced 
        technology achievements (sec. 252)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority to award prizes for advanced technology achievements 
to September 30, 2011. The provision would also elevate the 
authority to the Director of Defense Research and Engineering 
(DDRE), which would allow for its use by the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency or other components under the DDRE. 
The provision would further expand the authority to include the 
military departments, and would update reporting requirements 
under section 257 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) on the use of the 
authority to include information relevant to the military 
departments and to ensure proper oversight of the program. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to budget for 
anticipated costs to execute the prize competitions and to 
clearly identify those funds in annual budget justification 
materials.
Policies and practices on test and evaluation to address emerging 
        acquisition approaches (sec. 253)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, in coordination with the Director, Operational Test 
and Evaluation (OTE) and the Director of the Defense Test 
Resource Management Center, to review and revise policies and 
practices on test and evaluation in light of emerging 
approaches to acquisition. The provision would require 
consideration of rapid, time-certain and traditional 
acquisition timeframes in review of current test and evaluation 
regulations to ensure adequate and timely testing is conducted.
    The committee notes that robust analysis of technology 
maturity levels combined with early planning for developmental 
and operational testing contribute to successful acquisition 
programs. The committee further notes that rapid fielding 
initiatives, which have proven successful in providing 
critically needed equipment and capabilities to the warfighter, 
may contain lessons learned for the test and evaluation 
process. The committee believes it is necessary to update 
policies to ensure adequate test and evaluation in the 
development of acquisition programs, in planning for testing 
facility requirements, and in defining test and evaluation 
processes for the growing variety of acquisition and deployment 
strategies.
    Finally, the committee strongly encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to nominate a permanent Director of Operational Test 
and Evaluation as soon as possible. The committee notes that 
this position has been vacant since February 15, 2005. This 
congressionally-mandated, presidentially-nominated, and Senate-
confirmed position plays a key role in ensuring the operational 
effectiveness of our weapons systems in combat. The Director 
supports efforts to reform acquisition processes and 
effectively and efficiently develop and deploy major, complex 
systems like the Future Combat Systems, Advanced Seal Delivery 
System, and Joint Strike Fighter, in a manner that is 
operationally effective, on budget, and within planned 
schedules.
Development of the propulsion system for the Joint Strike Fighter (sec. 
        254)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to continue the development and 
sustainment of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program with two 
competitive propulsion systems throughout the life cycle of the 
aircraft, or enter into a one-time firm-fixed-price contract 
for a selected propulsion system for the life cycle of the 
aircraft following the initial service release of the JSF F135 
propulsion system in fiscal year 2008.
    During the 1970's and early 1980's, Pratt & Whitney was the 
sole source provider of engines for the F-14, F-15, and F-16 
aircraft. Because of persistent engine problems that resulted 
in the loss of aircraft and degraded readiness, Congress 
directed the Department of Defense to develop and produce an 
engine to compete with Pratt & Whitney engines on these 
aircraft. The benefits that resulted from this competition 
included improved performance, reduced risk, increased 
readiness, lower cost of ownership, improved contractor 
responsiveness to customer needs, and over $4.0 billion of cost 
savings. Congress once again directed the Department to provide 
for an engine competition for the JSF in 1996 out of concerns 
for a lack of competition expressed in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (P.L. 104-106). Congress 
has consistently supported a competitive engine program for the 
Joint Strike Fighter for the past 10 years.
    The JSF program is the largest acquisition program, in 
terms of funding, in Department of Defense history. Total JSF 
deliveries may well exceed 4,000 aircraft worldwide, with a 
resultant level of propulsion business in the tens of billions 
of dollars. The committee is concerned that relying on a sole 
engine supplier for a single-engine aircraft to do multiple 
missions for multiple services and multiple nations presents an 
unnecessary operational and financial risk to our nation.
    The committee is also concerned that the Department's 
analysis provided to the committee, as justification for the 
termination of the F136 interchangeable engine, accounted for 
only 30 percent of the engine costs over the life cycle of the 
aircraft and failed to comply with the Department's policy on 
economic analysis that would have required the inclusion of the 
total life cycle cost. If the Department had conducted a full 
life cycle analysis, the committee believes that the results of 
the analysis would show significant cost savings that could be 
achieved through a competitive engine strategy. The committee 
believes that through the enduring value of competition, 
sufficient savings will be generated from a series of 
competitive engine procurements over the life cycle of the 
aircraft that will more than offset the cost of completing the 
F136 engine development. In order to ensure that the Congress 
has the complete picture of the full life cycle costs, the 
committee has recommended another provision described elsewhere 
in this report that would require the Secretary of Defense and 
the Comptroller General to conduct independent life cycle cost 
analyses addressing this issue.
Independent cost analyses for Joint Strike Fighter engine program (sec. 
        255)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense, a federally-funded research and 
development center (FFRDC) chosen by the Secretary, and the 
Comptroller General to conduct independent life cycle cost 
analyses of the development and sustainment of the Joint Strike 
Fighter (JSF) program with two competitive propulsion systems 
throughout the life cycle of the aircraft, versus terminating 
the alternate engine development and proceeding with only one 
engine.
    The provision would also require that the Comptroller and 
the FFRDC certify that they had access to sufficient 
information upon which to make informed judgments on the life 
cycle costs of the two alternatives.
    As noted elsewhere in this report, the committee is 
concerned that the Department of Defense analysis provided as 
justification for the termination of the F136 interchangeable 
engine did not account for all of the costs over the life cycle 
of the aircraft.
Sense of the Senate on technology sharing of Joint Strike Fighter 
        technology (sec. 256)
    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense should share 
technology with respect to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) 
between the United States Government and the Government of the 
United Kingdom.
    The committee recognizes the importance of the strong 
political and military alliance between the United States and 
the United Kingdom. The committee places a high premium on 
ensuring that U.S. and U.K. armed forces can operate together 
seamlessly in ongoing and future combined operations.
    The committee is concerned that existing U.S. regulations 
and procedures governing U.S.-U.K. technology sharing may 
unnecessarily impede information-sharing and military 
interoperability to the detriment of achieving our common 
security interests in ongoing and future operations. With the 
increasing complexity of technology and its growing importance 
to combat power, the ability to share information and 
technology in general between the United States and the United 
Kingdom is increasingly important. Anecdotal evidence suggests 
that existing impediments are unnecessarily complicating the 
planning, coordination, and execution of combined military 
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    The committee notes that technology sharing is a two-way 
street. The United Kingdom has made important contributions to 
a variety of U.S. military capabilities ranging from improvised 
explosive device (IED) detection technology to aircraft 
propulsion system technology. The committee believes such 
contributions from allies could become increasingly important 
given the many demands on the U.S. defense budget and the 
technological challenges we can expect to face on the 
battlefield of the future.
    The committee is concerned that, until the issue of 
technology sharing between the United States and the United 
Kingdom is resolved, the potential for full cooperation could 
be undermined, to the detriment of both countries. It is 
reasonable for the United States and the United Kingdom to seek 
a degree of operational sovereignty to ensure successful 
operation of the JSF by its military services, including the 
ability to maintain, repair, and upgrade the fleet to meet the 
future needs of U.S. and U.K. armed forces. It is also 
reasonable for both nations to protect the most sensitive 
technologies. Resolving the tensions between these two 
reasonable ten-ets is the dilemma.
    With these considerations in mind, the committee strongly 
recommends that the President enter into a bilateral agreement 
with the United Kingdom to provide for the sharing of defense 
technology between our two governments in order to facilitate 
closer defense cooperation between the United States and the 
United Kingdom. Such an agreement should: (1) promote greater 
interoperability in the conduct of current and future military 
operations; (2) establish a vehicle and set policy for greater 
and easier sharing between the Governments of the United States 
and the United Kingdom of both classified and unclassified 
goods, technologies, and services; (3) drive greater bilateral, 
interagency, and industry coordination at the strategic, 
planning, resource, and execution levels; and (4) be consistent 
with the national security interests of both nations.

                           Budget Items--Army


Army basic research
    The budget request included $137.6 million in PE 61102A, 
for defense research sciences; $68.5 million in PE 61103A, for 
university research initiatives; and $86.4 million in PE 
61104A, for university and industry research centers. Through 
these basic research accounts, the Army supports fundamental 
military science at universities and innovative partnerships 
between academia and industry through Collaborative Technology 
Alliances.
    Ongoing work in the areas of modeling and simulation, 
materials and composites, nanotechnology, biotechnology, energy 
and power, and dynamic terrain analysis complement a new focus 
on network and information sciences. The committee recommends 
an increase of $9.1 million in PE 61102A for expansion of work 
in key areas, including $1.0 million for advanced ground 
reliability research; $2.1 for organic semiconductor modeling 
and simulation research; $2.0 million for a dynamic landscape 
support program; $1.0 million for integrated nanosensor 
technologies for nuclear, chemical, and biological detection 
applications; and $3.0 million for the development of 
nanotechnologies to enhance intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance capabilities to tag, track, and locate enemy 
forces or weapons. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 61103A for low temperature vehicle performance 
research.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.25 million in PE 
61104A for acceleration of defense university research, 
including $1.0 million for information assurance research; $1.0 
million for integrated systems sensing, imaging, and 
communications research; $2.0 million for nanotubes composite 
materials research; $2.0 million for development of slow rotor 
concepts; $1.0 million for analyses of regional, political, 
social and economic issues affecting U.S. Southern Command's 
area of responsibility; and $250,000 for transparent 
nanocomposite armor.
    The committee is aware of the Department of Defense's 
requirement to triage large quantities of documents in foreign 
languages to provide prompt support to analytical and targeting 
efforts in support of the global war on terrorism. This 
capability is required at all echelons from tactical to 
strategic. The quantity and quality of document exploitation 
(DOCEX) can be enhanced by continued technological development 
in the Harmony DOCEX Suite, which is currently fielded. 
Technologies to improve the exploitation of paper documents as 
well as electronic media, to include live web sites, have been 
identified. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in PE 61102A for the continued development, 
integration, and fielding of enhanced document exploitation 
systems.
PACE early career awards
    The budget request included $137.6 million in PE 61102A, 
$366.6 million in PE 61153N, and $250.2 million in PE 61102F 
for Army, Navy, and Air Force defense research sciences 
activities. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 
million in each of the three program elements: PE 61102A, PE 
61153N, and PE 61102F for the establishment of additional early 
career awards under the Protecting America's Competitive Edge 
(PACE) program to support service research efforts.
    The committee notes that the recent National Research 
Council (NRC) report, entitled ``Assessment of Department of 
Defense Basic Research,'' recommended that ``the Department of 
Defense should, through its funding and policies for university 
research, encourage increased participation by younger 
researchers as principal investigators.'' The NRC endorsed this 
idea in their report, entitled ``Rising Above the Gathering 
Storm,'' which recommended that ``the Federal Government should 
establish a program to provide 200 new research grants each 
year at $500,000 each, payable over 5 years, to support the 
work of outstanding early-career researchers.'' The committee 
notes that it is essential to replenish the research community 
with young, innovative scientists and engineers working in 
defense research areas in order to support the development of 
future military capabilities. The committee further notes that 
the Department established a number of activities to support 
early career researchers, including the Navy's Young 
Investigator Program and the Presidential Early Career Awards 
for Science and Engineering. The Department estimates it will 
support 130 early career awards with funding available in the 
current budget request.
    Although the details of the execution shall be established 
by the Secretary of Defense, the committee recommends that 
these awards be available for researchers not more than 5 years 
removed from their doctorate or other terminal degree or 
professional qualification, and that they should be structured 
to provide for stable funding support for individuals for a 
period of 5 years. The committee directs the Secretary to 
report to the congressional defense committees on the execution 
of these funds, including their coordination with other 
Department activities in supporting early career scientists and 
engineers, no later than May 1, 2007.
Army materials technology
    The budget request included $18.8 million in PE 62105A, for 
materials technology. Army programs under this account aim to 
provide lightweight and affordable materials and structures to 
enable revolutionary survivability and lethality technologies 
along with improved performance and durability for Army systems 
and cost-effective manufacturing processes. To accelerate work 
in selected areas of particular relevance to current threats, 
the committee recommends an increase of $5.4 million in PE 
62105A, including $1.0 million for flexible, lightweight 
thermoplastic composite body armor; $1.6 million for future 
affordable multi-utility materials; $500,000 for simulations of 
improvised explosive devices; $300,000 for a control system for 
the laser powder deposition manufacturing process; and $2.0 
million for munition shape charge control research.
Advanced microelectronics manufacturing
    The budget request included $38.4 million in PE 62120A, for 
sensors and electronic survivability. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62120A for the development of 
advanced capabilities for low-volume manufacturing of flexible 
electronics, whose defense applications could include flexible 
displays, lightweight, miniaturized sensors, and portable power 
systems. The committee notes that this type of effort is 
consistent with the Defense Science Board's recommendation in 
its recent report, entitled ``High Performance Microchip 
Supply,'' to develop technology and equipment for production of 
low-volume microelectronics to meet unique Department of 
Defense needs.
Unmanned payload concepts
    The budget request included $38.4 million in PE 62120A, for 
sensors and electronic survivability. Asymmetric threats and 
unpredictable battlefields increase the importance of flexible 
response and logistics options. The committee recommends an 
increase of $1.5 million in PE 62120A for acceleration of 
concept demonstration on a remote-operated, lighter-than-air 
unmanned vehicle with scalable payload capabilities.

Army missile technology

    The budget request included $59.4 million in PE 62303A, for 
applied research on missile technology. The committee endorses 
the Army's efforts to develop unmanned air systems as an 
integral part of Future Combat Systems (FCS). The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62303A for the 
development and demonstration of unmanned air systems 
technologies as part of FCS. The committee notes that such 
programs should be consistent with the Department's unmanned 
systems policy as required elsewhere in this report.

Hypervelocity ground testing

    The budget request included $59.4 million in PE 62303A, for 
missile technology. As the Department of Defense develops 
hypersonic systems for global and rapid strike missions, 
availability of domestic, full-scale ground test facilities 
would mitigate costs and risks associated with these complex 
systems. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million 
in PE 62303A for hypervelocity ground testing.

Multifunctional robot platform

    The budget request included $16.2 million in PE 62308A, for 
advanced concepts and simulations. Robotic platforms continue 
to excel in the performance of dangerous missions. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62308A 
for rapid integration of optical technology and advanced 
acoustic detection and direction finding hardware into the 
Robot Enhanced Detection Outpost With Lasers platform.

Combat vehicle and automotive technology

    The budget request included $59.3 million in PE 62601A, for 
combat vehicle and automotive technology. Component 
technologies explored under this account support the Army's 
current and future combat and tactical vehicle fleets. To 
promote more fuel efficient engines, the committee recommends 
an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62601A for development of 
advanced electric drives designed to result in easily 
replaceable, quiet, robust engines with greater power density 
and torque.

Weapons and munitions technology

    The budget request included $35.3 million in PE 62624A, for 
weapons and munitions technology. Army applied research efforts 
under this account improve the lethality, survivability, and 
affordability of current and future force equipment and 
weapons. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million 
in PE 62624A, including $2.0 million to transition the active 
coatings technology program for use on Army helicopters; $2.5 
million for continued rarefaction wave gun research; $3.0 
million for expansion of the domestic capability to produce a 
wider variety of parts-on-demand for unmanned systems; and $2.5 
million for integration of Army remote weapons systems 
armaments on the dual track, Ripsaw, unmanned ground vehicle.

Human factors engineering

    The budget request included $18.9 million in PE 62716A, for 
applied research on human factors engineering technology. As 
noted elsewhere in this report, the committee supports 
development of integrated and interoperable unmanned systems 
that can work seamlessly with manned systems. Army applied 
research on autonomous robots that work together to solve 
problems holds promise for missions that do not require a man 
in the loop as well as for improved manned-unmanned 
collaborations. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million in PE 62716A for team performance and optimization 
research and expanded complex research, modeling, and 
simulation of cognition and team dynamics.

Mapping and detection of unexploded ordnance

    The budget request included $17.9 million in PE 62720A, for 
environmental quality technology, but included no funding for 
mapping and detection of unexploded ordnance. The committee 
notes that the problem of detecting and removing unexploded 
ordnance from Department of Defense facilities closed or 
realigned under rounds of base closure and realignment (BRAC), 
former used defense sites, and at active installations, 
including operational ranges, is an enormous and technically 
complex task. The current estimate of the cost to complete the 
clean up of unexploded ordnance at all of the Department's 
installations, formerly used defense sites, and BRAC sites is 
$20.1 billion.
    Development of the technology to more rapidly and 
efficiently detect and discriminate unexploded ordnance from 
other waste is ongoing and has the potential to significantly 
reduce the overall cost of unexploded ordnance detection and 
clean up. This project would continue work begun in fiscal year 
2005 to improve the ability of ground penetrating radar to 
detect unexploded ordnance at greater depths in highly magnetic 
soil, while reducing the number of false alarms. While the 
focus of the effort would be on ground penetrating radar 
systems, all detection technologies, which may have an 
application, would be investigated. Due to the geological 
characteristics of highly magnetic soil, the committee believes 
that application of multiple technologies and fusion of their 
outputs may be needed to improve detection and reduce the 
number of false alarms. The committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in PE 62720A for mapping and detection of 
unexploded ordnance.

Warfighter technology

    The budget request included $25.4 million in PE 62786A, for 
warfighter technology. Army applied research under this account 
concentrates on soldier survivability and performance, 
including improved deployable, temporary housing, and food 
safety. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in 
PE 62786A for advances in both of these soldier safety areas, 
including $2.0 million for advanced materials research on 
ballistic tent inserts and $1.5 million for biosecurity 
research for soldier food safety.

Army medical technology

    The budget request included $75.4 million in PE 62787A, for 
medical technology and $50.8 million in PE 63002A, for medical 
advanced technology. Research under these two accounts has 
yielded numerous advances in combat casualty care and 
battlefield trauma medicine. The committee continues to place a 
priority on advances in military-specific medical treatments, 
wound characterization, and understanding of weapons impacts. 
The committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million, in PE 
62787A, including $2.0 million for advanced bioengineering for 
enhancement of solider survivability; $1.0 million for blast 
protection research; and $2.5 million for acceleration of pilot 
clinical studies on protein hydrogel treatments. The committee 
further recommends an increase of $23.5 million in PE 63002A, 
including $2.0 million for rapid development of advanced, 
neurally-controlled lower limb prostheses; $3.0 million for 
applied emergency hypothermia; $3.0 million for fibrinogen 
bandage improvements; $2.0 million for integrated clinical 
information systems in support of the Armed-forces Health 
Longitudinal Technology Application; $1.0 million to promote 
interoperability standards for medical imaging; $3.0 million 
for robotic tele-surgery research; $2.0 million for tissue 
engineering research; $2.0 million for early diagnosis and 
treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder; $3.5 million for 
soldier treatment and regeneration research; and $2.0 million 
for surgical safety systems designed to improve remote patient 
care in hostile environments.

Advanced aviation technology

    The budget request included $64.7 million in PE 63003A, for 
aviation advanced technology. Army aviation technology programs 
focus on maturing and demonstrating manned and unmanned rotary 
wing vehicle technologies in support of the current and future 
force. To explore expanded capabilities in the areas of 
unmanned systems, specifically designed for logistics and 
supply support, the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million in PE 63003A for a quick materiel express delivery 
system.

Unmanned tactical combat vehicles

    The budget request included $64.7 million in PE 63003A, for 
aviation advanced technology, but included no funding for a 
tactical unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) designed 
specifically for flexible launch and rapid response. The 
committee believes that the development of a survivable 
turbine-electric hybrid, vertical take-off and landing tactical 
class UCAV could introduce a self-contained, rapid response, 
precision strike capability for use by the tactical commander. 
The committee recommends an increase of $14.0 million in PE 
63003A for design and fabrication of the first Excalibur 
tactical UCAV system.

Nanotechnology manufacturing

    The budget request included $74.7 million in PE 63004A, for 
weapons and munitions advanced technology. Research efforts on 
manufacturing processes for composite structures and new 
materials developed at the nano-scale for weapons, munitions, 
and fire control applications will ensure these multifunctional 
materials are also produced efficiently. The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63004A for 
nanotechnology manufacturing.

Combat vehicle research

    The budget request included $110.0 million in PE 63005A, 
for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology. Under 
this account, the Army pursues survivability and mobility, 
communications, energy and power, and autonomous technology 
improvements for manned and unmanned ground systems. The 
committee recommends an increase of $35.0 million in PE 63005A 
for acceleration of research in all of these areas, including 
$2.0 million for advanced thermal management controls; $3.0 
million for further testing and refinement of anti-ballistic 
windshield armor; $3.0 million for the composite armored cab 
program; $1.0 million for application of compressible magneto-
rheological fluids for shock absorbers and suspension systems 
to increase tactical vehicle off-road mobility; $1.5 million 
for development of logistical fuel processors; $3.0 million for 
a phase III pilot demonstration of fuel cell powered ground 
support equipment; $3.0 million for next generation non-
tactical vehicle propulsion; $1.5 million for maturation of a 
domestic production source for the segmented band track; $2.0 
million for solid oxide fuel cell materials and manufacturing; 
$2.0 million for tactical vehicle design tools; $3.0 million 
for power electronics systems research; and $10.0 million for 
unmanned ground vehicle prototype research to promote near-term 
transition of robotic ground vehicle technologies.

Command and control team training

    The budget request included $6.8 million in PE 63007A, for 
manpower, personnel, and training advanced technology. 
Realistic training repeatedly receives credit for saving the 
lives of warfighters who face current and evolving threats. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63007A 
for expansion of the successful advanced command and control 
team training program to division staffs.

Advanced simulated training

    The budget request included $18.3 million in PE 63015A, for 
next generation training and simulation systems. The committee 
commends the Army for its innovative approach to providing up-
to-date and realistic training environments. The committee 
recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 63015A for 
completion of the initial joint fires and effects training 
module.

Missile recycling capability

    The budget request included $10.4 million in PE 63103A, for 
explosives demilitarization technology. The Army estimates that 
600,000 outdated missiles at ammunition storage sites and 
plants across the country and overseas need to be recycled over 
the next 10 to 15 years. The committee recommends an increase 
of $2.0 million in PE 63103A for the continued development of 
technologies to disassemble missiles, and process and recover 
energetic materials for potential reuse.

Advanced electronic integration

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for advanced electronic integration.
    The committee believes it is necessary to advance the 
state-of-the-art in space and missile defense system 
electronics by reducing the size, weight, and cost of 
electronic circuit cards and components, wire harnesses, and 
electronic cabling. The committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in PE 63305A to be used to procure the special 
test-bed equipment and pay research personnel to conduct 
advanced electronic integration.

Advanced fuel cell research

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for advanced fuel cell research.
    The committee notes that alternative sources of power for 
space and missile defense propulsion is an ongoing high 
priority requirement for the Department of Defense. Fuel cells 
and the associated hydrogen production capability may provide 
more efficient and long endurance propulsion and energy systems 
for space and air breathing platforms. The committee recommends 
an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63305A for continued 
research, design, and testing for advanced fuel cells.

Advanced Hypersonic Weapon modeling and simulation

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for modeling and simulation efforts in support of the 
Advanced Hypersonic weapon (AHW).
    The committee is aware that the AHW is a candidate for the 
Department of Defense requirement for high-volume prompt global 
strike. Flight testing is necessary to validate the design and 
development of AHW. The committee believes a risk reduction 
effort to provide pre-flight verification through hardware-in-
the-loop simulations would benefit this and other hypersonic 
development programs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million in PE 
63305A for AHW modeling and simulation.

Army missile and space modeling and simulation technology

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army system integration (non space), but included no funding 
for interactive modeling and simulation management 
capabilities.
    The committee notes that effective modeling and simulation 
is necessary for the development of missile defense and other 
military capabilities. Next generation architectural solutions 
for command and control and situational awareness are now being 
developed. The committee recognizes that funding could be used 
to mature technology and continue to combine government 
furnished components and commercial, off-the-shelf products to 
support the warfighter from the classroom to the field.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63305A to support continued development of interactive modeling 
and simulation management capabilities of the Army Space and 
Missile Defense Command.

Distributed operational control center

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for the distributed operational control center (DOCC).
    The DOCC is envisioned to be a large network operations 
center for sensor research and development. The DOCC will 
provide fiber-optic connectivity with the Reagan Test Site, 
permitting remote operations for sensor and flight tests as 
well as other research and development efforts currently 
centered at the Army's Space and Missile Defense Command.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63305A for DOCC hardware procurement, network integration, and 
operations control software development to support the 
consolidation of range and space surveillance functions.

HighSentinel airship

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for the HighSentinel airship.
    The committee understands that there is an operational 
requirement and mission need statement for multi-theater target 
tracking capabilities. The HighSentinel airship is intended to 
meet this requirement by carrying a communications or 
surveillance payload for up to 2 weeks of operations in support 
of the warfighter throughout the theater of operations. The 
airship would have a limited logistics support infrastructure 
and could be launched in-theater without the use of a hangar. 
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63305A to be used to design a high altitude airship to carry 
tactical communications or surveillance payloads for the 
warfighter.

Low cost avionics

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for the development of low cost avionics. The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63305A to support 
the research, design, and testing of avionics subsystems 
interfaces that incorporate standards utilizing a commercial, 
open architecture, as is done in the commercial marketplace. 
This would permit more timely upgrade of existing systems and 
lower operating costs caused by obsolete systems and 
subcomponents.

Protected test link

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for the protected test link.
    The Army Space and Missile Defense Center and Missile 
Defense Agency Modeling and Simulation Center of Excellence 
requires the capability for hardware-in-the-loop testing for 
ballistic missile defense system-level ground tests. A 
protected test link would enable each of the numerous missile 
defense system elements to participate in a systems-level test 
by providing physical as well as electronic protection measures 
for all test linkages. The committee recommends an increase of 
$2.0 million in PE 63305A for the development of a protected 
test link.

Standoff sensor for radionuclides and explosives

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for standoff sensors to detect radionuclides or other 
explosive devices.
    The committee is aware that the defeat of improvised 
explosive devices is the number one priority of the entire 
Department of Defense. Likewise, detecting explosive devices 
containing nuclear materials remains a top priority. The 
committee supports a robust multidisciplinary research effort 
to solve the problems posed by the remote detection of 
radiological and explosive agents. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63305A to continue and broaden 
the research effort to develop standoff, real-time sensors for 
radiological and explosive devices.

Tactical operations center hardware and software integration

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A, for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for future tactical operations center (TOC) hardware 
and software integration.
    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense 
must continue to build upon ongoing activities to fully 
integrate space capabilities into airborne, land, and maritime 
assets to form a full force integrated battle management, 
communications, and surveillance architecture to synchronize 
planning and control of assets within the joint battlefield and 
provide situational awareness of the battlefield for the 
warfighters. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 63305A for TOC hardware and software activities 
to integrate space, air, ground, and maritime situational 
awareness for the warfighter.

Thermal protection system technology risk reduction

    The budget request included $11.2 million in PE 63305A for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for thermal protection system (TPS) risk reduction 
efforts.
    Thermal protection is a key enabling technology to permit 
hypersonic vehicles to travel great distances within the 
earth's atmosphere without overheating due to friction. Solving 
the TPS problem is essential for the development of hypersonic 
flight in support of many mission areas, including prompt 
global strike.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63305A for developmental, test, and manufacturing design risk 
reduction efforts in the area of thermal protection.

Translation devices

    The budget request included $64.6 million in PE 63772A, for 
advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology and 
$90.0 million in PE 62236N, for warfighter sustainment applied 
research. The committee notes that the Army and Marine Corps 
are currently considering a variety of approaches to the 
development of handheld translation technologies. This 
technology has been successfully used in Iraq and Afghanistan 
by assisting soldiers, marines, and special operators in their 
daily interactions with native populations. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63772A for the 
continued development of more capable, handheld translation 
technology and $2.0 million in PE 62236N for the development of 
translation devices that can support bi-directional 
translations of speech, text, and other information in multiple 
languages.

Advanced Hypersonic Weapon development

    The budget request included $11.8 million in PE 63308A, for 
Army Missile Defense Systems Integration, but included no 
funding for Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (AHW) risk reduction 
efforts.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
Quadrennial Defense Review Report of 2006 highlights the need 
for ``prompt and high-volume global strike'' capability to 
deter aggression and provide a broader range of conventional 
options to the President, if deterrence fails. In March 2006, 
the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM), testified 
before the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on 
Armed Services that in situations where U.S. general purpose 
forces are not in a position to respond rapidly to dangerous 
threats to the United States, the President may require 
USSTRATCOM to interdict such fleeting targets at global range. 
The Department of Defense is conducting an analysis of 
alternatives for prompt global strike capabilities in the near, 
mid, and long term. One alternative option for prompt, 
conventional long-range strike is to employ advanced 
technologies such as hypersonic vehicles that can travel 
thousands of miles in the upper atmosphere in under 60 minutes.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 
63308A to support a flight test demonstration program for the 
AHW. The committee is aware that hypersonic research is being 
conducted throughout the Department for efforts that go beyond 
prompt global strike. Elsewhere in this report, the committee 
recommends that the Secretary of Defense establish a joint 
technology office to coordinate, integrate, and manage 
hypersonic research. Activities related to the development of 
the AHW should be consistent with the approach adopted by this 
new joint technology office for hypersonic development so that 
the AHW could be considered by the Department as a candidate 
for a joint technology capability demonstration.

Architecture Analysis Program

    The budget request included $143.4 million in PE 63327A, 
for Air and missile defense system engineering, but included no 
funding for the Air, Space, and Missile Defense Architecture 
Analysis Program (A3P).
    A3P is a modeling and simulation effort to assist in the 
systems analysis of air, space, and missile defense 
capabilities to provide an effective defense against cruise 
missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, aircraft, rockets, 
artillery, and ballistic missiles of all ranges. The committee 
recognizes that these simulation capabilities are necessary to 
support air, space, and missile defense efforts across a broad 
spectrum of military operations from major theater wars to 
homeland security.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63327A for A3P to support air, space, and missile defense 
modeling and simulation.

Environmental quality technology demonstration and validation at the 
        Defense Ammunition Center

    The budget request included $5.2 million in PE 63779A for 
environmental quality technology demonstration and validation, 
but included no funding for the Defense Ammunition Center to 
provide dedicated oversight for critical environmental, 
explosives safety, and munitions surveillance research and 
development for the Department of Defense's conventional 
ammunition stocks, tactical missiles, and explosives. The 
committee notes that the Department has a stockpile of over 3.5 
million tons of conventional ammunition, over one million 
tactical missiles, and strategic missiles with over 100 million 
pounds of energetic materials. The committee believes a focused 
program to identify challenges in managing this rapidly aging 
stockpile and respond to emerging explosives is needed.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63779A to establish a separate project for the Defense 
Ammunition Center to provide the Department with dedicated 
oversight and response for the stockpile of conventional 
ammunition, tactical missiles, and explosives to support 
readiness.

Counter rocket, artillery, and mortar

    The budget request included $21.8 million in PE 64741A, for 
the Air Defense Command, Control and Intelligence--engineering 
development, but no funding for the Counter Rocket, Artillery, 
and Mortar (C-RAM) system. The committee understands that the 
Commander, Multinational Forces-Iraq, submitted an operational 
needs statement for the C-RAM system in June 2005. Congress 
approved $13.1 million in the Defense Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 for C-RAM development. The committee believes 
the C-RAM development should be accelerated to support MNF-I 
requirements. Additional funding for C-RAM development has been 
included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 
unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an increase of 
$25.5 million in PE 64741A for C-RAM development, for a total 
authorization of $47.3 million.

Unmanned aerial vehicle anti-icing technology

    The budget request included $10.9 million in PE 64258A, for 
target systems development. The Department of Defense 
consistently lists all weather capability as a priority for 
operation of unmanned systems. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.0 million in PE 64258A for icing and wind tunnel 
testing of the prototype electro-expulsive ice protection 
system.

RAND Arroyo Center

    The budget request included $20.2 million in PE 65103A, for 
the RAND Arroyo Center. The committee notes that RAND studies 
and analyses have supported Army missions by conducting 
analytic research on major policy concerns, attempting to 
assist the Army in improving effectiveness and efficiency, and 
providing short-term assistance on urgent problems. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 65103A 
to sustain RAND analytical support to the Army.

Automated communications support

    The budget request included $21.6 million in PE 65326A, for 
Concept Experimentation Program, but included no funding for 
further development of an automated communications recognition 
and translation capability.
    Intelligence support to time-sensitive targeting is a 
critical component in the global war on terrorism. The 
Department of Defense requires the capability to quickly and 
efficiently process volumes of foreign language communications 
audio traffic and then exploit the intelligence content. The 
ability to separate and prioritize audio messages is crucial. 
Currently, it is neither economically feasible nor possible to 
recruit, train, and field sufficient linguists to meet this 
demand. The development of an automated system to assist in the 
exploitation of the intelligence value of foreign language 
audio messages could mitigate this shortfall in the war against 
terrorism, as well as more conventional threats, and threats to 
uniformed personnel. This capability could also have 
applicablity to the Department of Homeland Defense and law 
enforcement agencies.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.2 million in PE 
65326A for the development of the capability to search, 
translate, and mine foreign language audio messages.

Biometric identification device

    The budget included $21.6 million in PE 65326A, for Concept 
Experimentation Program, but included no funding for further 
development of a rugged, portable, and easy-to-operate 10-print 
fingerprint scanner device.
    The requirement for biometric tools at the tactical level 
to support the war on terrorism is increasing.
    Such a device would have applicability across the 
Department of Defense. The committee recommends an increase of 
$4.0 million in PE 65326A for the development of a biometric 
identification device for use with tactical forces.

Portable iris enrollment and recognition device

    The budget request included $3.2 million in PE 33028A, for 
security and intelligence activities, but included no funding 
for the continued research of the portable iris enrollment and 
recognition (PIER) technology development.
    The committee notes the need for the continued enhancement 
of biometric capabilities and the development of items such as 
the PIER device. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 
million in PE 33028A for the continued development of a multi-
modal portable biometric platform consistent with the 
development and integration goals of the Department of Defense 
for biometric identification systems.

Biometrics technology

    The budget request included $23.8 million in PE 33140A, for 
the Information Systems Security Program, including $14.5 
million for Army biometrics research and development. The 
committee believes that deployment of biometrics technologies 
is critical for successful operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, 
as well as in support of homeland defense missions. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 33140A 
for the continued development of retinal/iris multimodal 
biometrics technology which is consistent with the development, 
deployment, and integration goals of the Department of Defense 
for biometric identification systems.

Army manufacturing technology

    The budget request included $68.1 million in PE 78045A, for 
Army end-item industrial preparedness. The committee notes that 
the recent Defense Science Board study on the manufacturing 
technology program recommended that the Department of Defense 
increase investment in the program to a level equal to 1 
percent of the total Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation budget. Consistent with this recommendation, the 
committee is authorizing a number of funding increases to 
manufacturing technology programs of the services and the 
Defense Logistics Agency. The committee recommends an increase 
of $8.5 million in PE 78045A, including $3.0 million for 
manufacturing systems demonstrations to develop efficient, 
agile manufacturing cells to better support warfighter needs 
for critical machined parts; $2.0 million for large structure 
titanium machining processes; and $3.5 million for super pulse 
laser system development.
    The committee also notes that the recent report by the 
National Research Council, entitled ``Linkages: Manufacturing 
Trends in Electronic Interconnection Technology,'' found that 
the Department of Defense will have increasing difficulty in 
acquiring the printed circuit boards it requires to produce 
future weapons systems and to sustain legacy systems. The 
Council recommended that the Department expand its role in 
fostering new printed circuit board design and manufacturing 
technology. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million in PE 78045A for the development of novel packaging and 
interconnect technologies to advance printed circuit board 
technology.

                           Budget Items--Navy



Navy university research

    The budget request included $73.3 million in PE 61103N, for 
university research initiatives and $366.6 million in PE 
61153N, for defense research sciences. Navy basic research 
programs explore innovation and discovery in areas that pose 
challenges in the maritime battlefield such as corrosion; fire-
retardant, impact resistant materials and structures; 
neuroscience and biorobotics; electronic sensors and energy 
sciences; and information assurance. The committee recommends 
an increase of $5.5 million in PE 61103N for university basic 
defense research, including $1.5 million for multifunctional 
materials for Navy structures; $2.0 million for neurotechnology 
research; and $2.0 million for smart, remote sensing systems 
using nanotechnology. The committee also recommends an increase 
of $2.0 million in PE 61153N, for software reliability.

Thermal management systems

    The budget request included $84.9 million in PE 62114N, for 
applied research on power projection technologies. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62114N 
for the development of new thermal management systems with the 
capability to cool high power density electronics. Electronics 
in future military systems with highly, complex 
microelectronics, high processing speeds, and higher power 
operation require advanced thermal management systems to 
optimize their performance. The development of thermal 
management technologies are highlighted in a number of Defense 
Technology Objectives, including those related to the 
development of advanced radio frequency electronics 
technologies to support naval missions such as surveillance, 
weapons control, electronic warfare, communications, and 
identification of ``friend or foe.''

Force protection applied research

    The budget request included $123.4 million in PE 62123N, 
for force protection applied research. Naval warfighting 
capabilities supported by this program include maintaining 
platform and force mobility through stealth, area and self-
defense, structural toughness, and reconfigurability. The 
committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in PE 62123N 
for targeted development and transition activities, including 
$2.0 million for advanced simulation tools for aircraft 
structures; $2.5 million for development of a real-time 
wideband acoustic processor for fiber sensors; $5.0 million for 
final outfitting and completion of the Mark V technology 
demonstrator; $2.5 million for nano-magnetic materials for 
propulsion and energy systems; $4.0 million for thermal design, 
system qualification, and power integration on the small 
watercraft propulsion demonstrator; and $2.0 million for the 
undersea perimeter security integrated defense environment.

High power, lightweight battery research

    The budget request included $37.7 million in PE 62131M, for 
Marine Corps landing force technology. Growing energy and power 
needs of the dismounted warrior must be met with advanced, 
reliable, high-power, batteries that are significantly lighter 
and smaller. The committee notes that the Department of 
Defense's research enterprise explores various approaches to 
solving energy and power challenges for the dismounted soldier, 
including solid oxide fuel cell systems pursued by Special 
Operations Command.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.9 million in PE 
62131M for prototype research on a high power, small, 
lightweight zinc-air battery specifically to scale down larger 
batteries for operation of smaller devices without losing power 
density.

Human factors and organizational design

    The budget request included $68.4 million in PE 62235N, for 
common picture applied research. The committee recommends a 
decrease of $2.0 million in PE 62235N for programs in social 
science based-computational models and human performance 
research that are duplicative of efforts in other services and 
agencies.

Sea basing technologies

    The budget request included $90.0 million in PE 62236N, for 
applied research on warfighter sustainment technologies. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $7.0 million in PE 62236N to 
limit the number of demonstrators developed under the sea 
basing concept until it is better defined and has established 
transition paths to acquisition programs.

Information sharing technologies

    The budget request included $76.8 million in PE 63114N, for 
power projection advanced technology. Recent operations in Iraq 
and Afghanistan have highlighted the importance of time 
critical strikes on high-value mobile targets in complex 
environments. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 63114N for the development of communications and 
information processing technologies that assist in the 
surveillance, targeting, and engagement of mobile targets.

Power projection advanced technology

    The budget request included $76.8 million in PE 63114N, for 
power projection advanced technology research programs. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in PE 63114N 
to limit growth of programs with no defined transition pathway 
to Navy acquisition programs. The committee recommends limiting 
funding of hypersonics programs until completion and 
implementation of a Department-wide strategy for hypersonics 
technology development and demonstration.

Force protection advanced technology

    The budget request included $61.5 million in PE 63123N for 
force protection advanced technology. This program addresses 
applied research associated with providing force protection 
capability for all naval platforms.
    The budget request included no funding for development of a 
transportable manufacturing and repair cell. This cell would 
reduce operating and support costs, while maintaining equipment 
readiness in theater. The cell would be deployable by ships and 
large ground vehicles, and would provide precision, on-demand 
manufacturing of critical parts for the Navy and Marine Corps. 
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63123N for the development of a transportable manufacturing and 
repair cell.
    The budget request included no funding for completion of 
advanced ship service fuel cell (SSFC) power plant design. The 
Navy has invested over $30.0 million in design and development 
of advanced prototype fuel cell demonstration systems for 
shipboard application. Additional funding will enable 
performance characterization, including endurance and latent 
defect testing at the DD(X) land-based engineering site to 
demonstrate compatibility with DD(X) integrated power system 
architecture. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in PE 63123N for the continued development of a SSFC.
    The budget included no funding for the continued 
development of wide band gap semiconductor substrate materials. 
These materials offer capability for higher power and higher 
frequency operation in high temperature environments across a 
broad spectrum of applications. The committee recommends an 
increase of $8.0 million in PE 63123N for the continued 
development of wide band gap semiconductor substrate material.
    The committee recommends a total authorization of $78.5 
million in PE 63123N for force protection advanced technology.

Common picture advanced technology

    The budget request included $61.7 million in PE 63235N, for 
common picture advanced technology. Processing large quantities 
of information from a variety of sensors and assets into 
actionable information requires assistance and some degree of 
automation. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 63235N to promote transition of research in 
processing of sensor data, including $3.0 million for near-term 
development of an improved shipboard command information 
center; and $2.0 million for the rail sensor testbed.

Warfighter sustainment technology

    The budget request included $82.0 million in PE 63236N for 
the development of warfighter sustainment advanced technology, 
but included no funding for advanced composites material 
research, the Defense Systems Modernization and Sustainment 
Initiative, or the Vertical Lift Center of Excellence.
    The Marine Corps has a need for a new generation of 
armored, light-weight, long-life ground vehicles for use in a 
variety of adverse conditions. The Advanced Composite Materials 
Research project would apply the structural benefits of 
composites, including bio-mimetics, to develop increased 
survivability, improved safety design, and self-diagnostic 
structural features for military ground vehicles. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63236N for 
advanced composite materials research.
    The Defense Systems Modernization and Sustainment 
Initiative is a research program focused on improving the 
modernization, readiness, and sustainment of defense systems by 
developing processes and tools to track the status and future 
health of defense systems; to detect, diagnose and repair 
material aging failures; and to provide decision systems for 
use in determining when and how to upgrade these systems. The 
committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million for the 
Defense Systems Modernization and Sustainment Initiative.
    The Vertical Lift Center of Excellence at Naval Aviation 
Depot, Cherry Point, provides for science and technology 
insertion into a dedicated activity to identify, demonstrate, 
validate, and assist in implementing improved maintenance 
products, procedures, and processes into depot operations. The 
result of these efforts is increased readiness by improving 
maintenance operations and decreasing maintenance cycle times 
for rotary wing aircraft. The committee recommends an increase 
of $4.0 million for the Vertical Lift Center of Excellence.
    The committee recommends a total authorization of $99.0 
million in PE 63236N.

APY-6 real-time precision targeting radar

    The budget request included $45.3 million in PE 63271N, for 
radio frequency systems advanced technology. The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63271N for 
continued demonstrations and development of the APY, real-time 
precision targeting radar to support unmanned air vehicle 
mission requirements.

Marine Corps advanced technology

    The budget request included $59.2 million in PE 63640M, for 
Marine Corps advanced technology demonstrations. The committee 
recognizes the work and dedication of the Office of Naval 
Research and the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab in meeting the 
short and long term needs of expeditionary force, particularly 
in the areas of body armor; information, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance; and chemical, biological, and radiological 
detection and warning. The committee recommends an increase of 
$15.0 million in PE 63640M for Marine Corps technology 
demonstrations, including $12.0 million for the core advanced 
technology program to focus on the areas noted above; and $3.0 
million for expeditionary water purification.
    The committee further recommends an increase of $6.0 
million in PE 63640M for design and development of advanced 
combat tactical vehicle prototypes that optimize system 
mobility, survivability, and lethality.

Visual integrated bridge system

    The budget request included $21.3 million in PE 63782N, for 
mine and expeditionary warfare advanced development. Navy 
evaluations of the Augmented Reality Visualization of the 
Common Operational Picture (ARVCOP) on numerous platforms 
demonstrated utility of the system for improved safety, 
navigation, and battlespace awareness. The committee recommends 
an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63782N to promote transition 
of the system to the fleet.

Electro-optic Passive ASW System

    The budget request included $9.9 million in PE 63254N for 
the Electro-optic Passive ASW System (EPAS). EPAS is a 15-inch 
turret-based suite of electro-optic and magnetic anomaly 
detection sensors with the potential to provide a 24-hour air 
ASW capability for fixed wing, helicopter, and unmanned 
aircraft system ASW platforms. Additional EPAS turret systems 
and real-time detection, classification, and false alarm 
mitigation capabilities are required for realistic system 
operational assessment in a multi-platform fleet environment 
before transitioning to a follow-on acquisition program. The 
committee recommends an increase of $6.7 million in PE 63254N 
for development of the Electro-optic Passive ASW System.

Surface Navy Integrated Undersea Tactical Technology

    The budget request included $130.3 million in PE 63502N for 
surface and shallow water mine countermeasures, but included no 
funding for the Surface Navy Integrated Undersea Tactical 
Technology (SNIUTT) program. SNIUTT would provide surface ship 
mine countermeasures sonar operators with the simulated 
training necessary to recognize mine-like contacts. SNIUTT 
would expand the mine recognition training technologies and 
scenario generation capabilities successfully demonstrated in 
airborne mine countermeasure to all Navy mine-hunting sonars. 
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63502N for SNIUTT.

Shipboard system component development

    The budget request included $14.1 million in PE 63513N for 
shipboard system component development, including $7.1 million 
for the development of integrated power systems, but included 
no funding for the high temperature superconductor alternating 
current (HTS-AC) synchronous marine propulsion motor 
development, Smart Valve development, or for gas turbine 
electric start system technology upgrade.
    A 36.5 megawatt prototype HTS-AC synchronous propulsion 
motor will be delivered to the Navy in fiscal year 2006. Design 
of a fully militarized motor, specifically for DD(X), will 
commence in 2006. Additional funding is required in fiscal year 
2007 to support full power testing of the prototype motor, and 
to complete the preliminary design for militarization of the 
HTS-AC motor for potential application to a future surface 
combatant. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million 
in PE 63513N for the continued development of the HTS-AC 
synchronous marine propulsion motor.
    Smart Valve is an advancement in control system technology 
applied to the design for bleed air regulating, control and 
relief valves on existing and future gas turbine naval vessels. 
Existing bleed air valves for gas turbine ships are subject to 
high maintenance costs and reliability concerns. Smart Valve 
provides an advanced linear electro-mechanical actuator design 
for accurate, quick response; and includes self-diagnostic 
capability for preventive, condition-based maintenance. 
Increased service life and improved functional design with 
Smart Valves result in reduced maintenance and reduced life 
cycle cost. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 
million in PE 63513N to complete development of a prototype 
Smart Valve.
    The gas turbine electric start system technology upgrade 
would expand the application of electric starters to naval gas 
turbine engines for potential use on the Navy's CG-47 class, 
DDG-51 class, and future naval ships. Electric start technology 
would greatly simplify gas turbine start system design, 
resulting in increased reliability and reduced procurement and 
support costs. The committee recommends an increase of $5.5 
million in PE 63513N to develop and qualify an electric start 
system for naval gas turbine engines.
    The committee recommends a total authorization of $28.1 
million in PE 63513N for shipboard system component 
development.

Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms systems

    The budget request included $503,000 in PE 63635M, for the 
development of Marine Corps ground combat and supporting arms 
systems, but no funding for moldable fabric armor or the Unit 
Operations Laboratory.
    Moldable fabric armor is made from a highly engineered 
polypropylene tape yarn which exhibits high impact resistence 
at a very light weight. The committee believes that moldable 
fabric armor has the potential to provide an alternative to the 
current integrated body armor worn by Marines and soldiers, who 
often carry almost 100 pounds of equipment when deployed in 
combat situations.
    Nonlethal weapon development initiatives aim to minimize 
collateral damage to infrastructure and personnel, while 
neutralizing facilities and the threats that might be posed to 
these facilities and the personnel that occupy them. An urban 
operations laboratory will provide assessment and analysis of 
the affects of non-lethal technologies to ensure minimum 
environmental and collateral damage when used in urban 
activities. The committee believes that the Marine Corps must 
have a broad range of responses to contain and manage emerging 
threats before, during, and after conflict, and with minimum 
collateral damage.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million for 
moldable fabric armor development and $2.0 million for an urban 
operations laboratory in PE 62635M, for a total authorization 
of $4.5 million.

Project Athena

    The budget request included $2.5 million in PE 63889N, for 
Project Athena. Project Athena is a situational awareness 
system that provides a common operational picture (COP) to 
national, regional, and local users. It fuses real-time 
downlinks from surveillance sensors, multiple data bases, and 
other sources of intelligence reporting into a COP that can be 
tailored to multiple security levels, including unclassified. 
Project Athena is capable of providing a COP to the Department 
of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Coast 
Guard, first responders, and allied nations in a more timely 
and simultaneous manner. The Department of Defense 
Counternarcotics Technology Program Office is responsible for 
the project and has successfully tested Project Athena in 
maritime tracking in the United States. In fiscal year 2006, 
Project Athena is being used at the Joint Interagency Task 
Force South in Florida and jointly with the Colombian Navy.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million to PE 
63889N for the further integration of databases and sensors, 
and additional operational tests with interagency, first 
responders, and allied nations.

Directed energy and electric weapon systems

    The budget request included $41.7 million funding in PE 
61153N, PE 62114N, and PE 63114N, for directed energy 
technology and continued development of an electromagnetic rail 
gun (EMRG). Progress with these developments, in conjunction 
with the Navy's programmed introduction of ship integrated 
power systems, has established a foundation for fielding 
shipboard directed energy and electric weapon systems.
    The Chief of Naval Operations has noted that the EMRG would 
provide an extremely long range and persistent volume of fire, 
significantly improving naval gunfire support for forces 
ashore. In view of research by other, non-allied nations 
involving similar technology, it is vital that the Navy 
maintains its edge in this critical area. The committee is 
aware that the Navy has moved forward with the establishment of 
the Directed Energy Technology Office and the Directed Energy 
Weapons Program Office to manage directed energy weapons 
research, development, integration, and acquisition for the 
Navy. The committee agrees with the Navy's increased emphasis 
on this critical future capability, including the construction 
of the Electromagnetic Research and Engineering Facility and 
the new 64 megajoule railgun facility at the Naval Surface 
Warfare Center (NSWC), Dahlgren. The committee recommends an 
increase of $50.0 million in PE 63925N to accelerate 
development of directed energy and electric weapon systems, 
including:
          (1) an increase of $13.4 million to outfit the 
        Electromagnetic Research and Engineering Facility to 
        conduct high lethality laser and high power Radio 
        Frequency (RF)/microwave research;
          (2) an increase of $8.6 million for electromagnetic 
        railgun research in advanced material development for 
        bore life engineering, projectile design, and power 
        system requirements;
          (3) an increase of $15.0 million for RF energy 
        application to counter Improvised Explosive Devices, 
        including Terahertz system development, solid state 
        heat capacity laser analysis and test, and high power 
        microwave technology application; and
          (4) an increase of $13.0 million for high energy 
        laser development in conjunction with ship self-
        protection and laser guided energy development and 
        application to lethal and non-lethal ship weapon 
        systems.

Towed array improvements

    The budget request included $94.8 million in PE 64503N for 
Submarine Systems Equipment Development, including $5.7 million 
for affordable towed array technology development. Twin line, 
thinline towed array capability is a key technology for long-
range passive detection against quiet diesel submarines in the 
littorals. Leveraging current TB-33 array baseline technology 
development by adding twin line, thinline capability would 
enhance performance and affordability. Advance processor 
technologies are required to solve the need for greater 
processing capability, while decreasing internal heat load on 
the submarine. Array/array handling system design improvements 
are necessary to increase component reliability. Additional 
funding to accelerate investment in twin line, thinline towed 
array capability has been included on the Chief of Naval 
Operations' unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends 
an increase of $10.0 million in PE 64503N for the development 
of affordable towed array construction, improved towed array/
array handler reliability, and for the development and testing 
of advance processing technologies, including the field 
programmable gate arrays for application to the twin line, 
thinline towed array system.

Submarine design

    The budget request included $169.6 million in PE 64558N for 
the continuing development of the Virginia-class submarine, and 
$140.4 million in PE 63561N for advanced submarine systems 
development. The design and development efforts in these 
programs are to evaluate a broad range of system and technology 
alternatives to directly support and enhance the mission 
capability of the Virginia-class and future submarine concepts.
    The budget request included $20.0 million for affordability 
design, but included no funding for concept formulation for the 
next generation strategic submarine platform. Similarly, the 
budget request included no funding to continue development of a 
family of systems and capabilities, the focus of which is to 
spirally incorporate capabilities needed to enhance undersea 
superiority of the Virginia-class. The committee believes that 
continued investment in these capabilities is needed to meet 
the future threat. However, the most important measure to 
increase operational capability of the Virginia-class is to 
increase the program's building rate as soon as practical. The 
committee is concerned that the Navy's proposed shipbuilding 
program is insufficient to meet the submarine force structure 
requirements outlined in the Secretary of the Navy's report on 
the long-range plan for the construction of naval vessels. The 
committee urges the Navy to mitigate this shortfall by moving 
toward a production goal of two submarines per year beginning 
in 2010. The committee is aware that the Chief of Naval 
Operations has established an affordability threshhold as a 
criterion for increasing the submarine procurement rate, and 
recognizes that initiatives to add critical capabilities to the 
Virginia-class need to be accomplished in a manner that 
supports the established affordability objectives.
    The committee recommends an increase of $65.0 million in PE 
64558N to support cost reduction initiatives for the Virginia-
class design and construction. This additional funding is to 
include the design and development, leading to affordable 
integration of the following capabilities into the Virginia-
class:
          (1) Multi-Mission Module;
          (2) Large Aperture Bow Array;
          (3) spiral Alpha for the Virginia-class Warfare 
        Management System;
          (4) Common Open Architecture Weapon System 
        Components;
          (5) Submarine Network-centric Capability Technology 
        Insertion; and
          (6) Submarine Command & Control Systems Advanced 
        Technology Insertion.
    The committee is further concerned that, for the first time 
in more than 50 years, the United States is not actively 
engaged in the design of a new class of nuclear submarine. The 
current Navy schedule to initiate the next generation submarine 
platform design causes a significant gap in the design and 
engineering industrial workload such that the industrial base 
will not likely be able to preserve the critical skills and 
capabilities needed for this effort. Testimony by industry and 
Navy experts before the Subcommittee on Seapower of the 
Committee on Armed Services emphasized the criticality of 
maintaining a viable submarine design industrial base to avoid 
the severe delays and cost overruns experienced by other 
navies, whose design base atrophied during lengthy periods 
between new design efforts. The committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million in PE 63561N to initiate concept 
formulation on the next generation submarine platform, 
including alternate design approaches, integration of future 
weapons systems, and mission capabilities.

Ship self-defense

    The budget request included $10.1 million in PE 64755N for 
ship self-defense, but included no funding for continued 
development of the autonomous unmanned surface vehicle (AUSV). 
The AUSV is being developed as a concept demonstrator for 
hydrographic survey, and for potential antiterrorism force 
protection missions in defense of harbors and coastal 
facilities. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in PE 64755N for the continued development of the AUSV.

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy development

    The budget request included $11.5 million in PE 64757N for 
development of soft kill technologies for ship self-defense, 
and $1.0 million for the continuing development of the NULKA 
decoy. NULKA is an offboard, active decoy designed to counter a 
wide variety of present and future radar-guided anti-ship 
missiles. Continued development of NULKA is necessary to 
counter anti-ship missiles, which may migrate to other 
frequency bands or use dual mode seekers. The committee 
recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 64757N for the 
continued development of the NULKA decoy.

Chiropractic treatment outcomes study

    The budget request included $7.7 million in PE 64771N, for 
medical development. Section 702 of the Floyd D. Spence 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public 
Law 106-398) directed the Department of Defense to develop a 
plan to provide chiropractic health care services and benefits 
to active-duty personnel as a permanent part of the Defense 
Health Program. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy 
to commission a study by a federally-funded research and 
development center to assess progress of the program and the 
efficacy and application of chiropractic health care services 
in reducing musculoskeletal disabilities among active-duty 
personnel. The study should include: an evaluation of the 
effectiveness of the care provided to military personnel 
including pilots and infantrymen; development of metrics for 
measurement of appropriate chiropractic treatment outcomes; and 
identification of any additional requirements for research. The 
committee recommends an increase of $500,000 in PE 64771N to 
conduct the required study. The results of the study should be 
reviewed by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health 
Affairs, and submitted to the congressional defense committees 
with any comments not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of this Act.

Navy medical research

    The budget request included $7.7 million in PE 64771N, for 
medical development. Navy medical research programs focus on 
vaccines and treatments specific to the needs of the sailor and 
support efforts to address the threat posed by biological 
weapons and naturally occurring illnesses in areas of military 
operation. Enhanced vaccine distribution techniques and more 
efficient delivery of treatments would further reduce 
logistical and personnel requirements, while increasing 
protection. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 64771N for non-invasive vectored vaccine research 
to produce a consistent, highly immunogenic, and easily 
manufactured and administered vaccine.

F136 Interchangeable Engine

    The budget request included $1,999.0 million in PE 64800F 
and $2,031.0 million in PE 64800N for the continued development 
of the Joint Strike Fighter, but included no funding for the 
development of the F136 interchangeable engine. The committee 
believes supporting competitive propulsion systems would help 
reduce operational risk and lead to higher confidence of 
achieving more affordable life cycle costs. The committee 
expects that the Secretary of Defense, along with the 
Department of the Navy and the Department of the Air Force, 
will remain committed to the development and sustainment of 
competitive propulsion systems for the Joint Strike Fighter.
    The committee recommends an increase of $200.4 million in 
PE 64800F and an increase of $200.4 million in PE 64800N for 
the continued development of the F136 interchangeable engine.

Marine Corps communications systems

    The budget request included $218.5 million in PE 26313M, 
for the development of Marine Corps communications systems, 
including $8.6 million for AN/TPS-59(V)3 Radar System 
sustainment but no funding for the battlefield management 
system (BMS) or counter remote controlled improvised explosives 
device (RCIED) electronic warfare countermeasure systems.
    The AN/TPS-59(V)3 Radar System provides the only long-
range, three dimensional surveillance radar in the Marine Corps 
inventory. Since September 2001, TPS-59 radars have been 
deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation 
Enduring Freedom. The committee believes that capability 
improvement efforts need to be undertaken to accelerate the 
development of the Low Earth Orbit Satellite (LEOS) capability. 
Additional funding for LEOS development has been included on 
the Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2007 unfunded 
priority list.
    The committee understands that the Marine Corps' tank and 
track vehicles do not have an on-board situational awareness 
capability. The BMS is an off-the-shelf situational awareness 
capability that can be integrated into the Joint Battle Command 
Platform. Additional funding for the development of software 
interfaces for the BMS has been included on the Commandant of 
the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2007 unfunded priority list.
    The committee supports initiatives that address the 
development of remote controlled improvised explosives device 
(RCIED) electronic warfare countermeasures. The committee 
understands that additional funding is required to develop and 
test the next generation of High Powered Vehicle Mounted 
Countermeasure Systems, single antenna development and testing, 
as well as, platform integration and testing. Additional 
funding for the development RCIED countermeasures has been 
included on the Commandant of the Marine Corps's fiscal year 
2007 unfunded priority list.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 for LEOS 
development, $2.0 million for BMS interface software 
development, and $25.0 million for counter-RCIED development in 
PE 26313M, for a total authorization of $250.5 million.

Polymer-based improvised explosive device detection tools

    The budget request included $47.6 million in PE 26623M, for 
the development of Marine Corps ground combat and supporting 
arms systems, but no funding for amplifying fluorescent 
polymer-based improvised explosive device detection tools (FIDO 
XT) or the Sense and Respond Support System.
    The committee understands that the FIDO XT has been under 
development over the last three years and has made significant 
progress in the development of a system which mimics the action 
of dogs trained to detect explosive materials. This technology 
has proven to be successful in laboratory and field 
environments but requires additional work for integration into 
robotic vehicles.
    The committee understands that the Marine Corps is entering 
the third year of a four-year study to determine whether 
ultrasonic consolidation technology can be embedded in a 
variety of components of the Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) as 
part of a Sense and Respond system for vehicle health 
monitoring.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for 
FIDO XT development and integration and $4.5 million for the 
LAV Sense and Respond System, for a total authorization of 
$56.1 million in PE 26623M.

Expeditionary assault bridge

    The budget request included $16.3 million in PE 26624M, for 
the development of Marine Corps service support equipment, 
including $750,000 for the development of the Expeditionary 
Assault Bridge. Lessons learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom 
(OIF) proved the current Armored Vehicle Launched Bridge (AVLB) 
system, based on a M-60 tank chassis, cannot keep pace with 
maneuver forces and is difficult to maintain, with further 
degradation anticipated due to a shortage of M-60 spare parts. 
The committee believes that development of the EAB, based on a 
modern M-1 chassis, should be accelerated to provide Marine 
forces with a dependable assault gap-crossing capability that 
is able to keep pace with current forces. Additional funding 
for EAB development has been included on the Commandant of the 
Marine Corps' fiscal year 2007 unfunded priority list. The 
committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE 26624M 
for EAB development, for a total authorization of $25.3 
million.

Environmental intelligence for riverine operations

    The budget request included funding in PE 31303N, for 
Maritime Intelligence to support continued analysis, tool kit 
development, and the environmental intelligence necessary to 
support naval riverine capabilities.
    The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review Report identified a 
requirement to provide a Navy riverine capability for river 
patrol, interdiction, and tactical troop movement on inland 
waterways. The demand for intelligence on inland waterways in 
the ``long war'' against terrorists worldwide is increasing. 
The committee is aware that Naval Oceanographic Office and 
Naval Research Lab at Stennis Space Center, Mississippi have a 
proven capability in the field of environmental intelligence.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 
31303N, Maritime Intelligence, to improve and broaden the 
capability to fuse, store, and share meterological, 
oceanographic, and environmental intelligence in support of 
special operations, counterproliferation, counterterrorism, 
force protection, drug interdiction, and expeditionary 
operations in coastal and riverine areas.

Vessel integrity system

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 
31303N, Maritime Intelligence, for the acquisition of a vessel 
integrity system (VIS) to complement and enhance current 
capabilities to monitor and track ocean going vessels 
worldwide, provide cargo information, provide data on cargo and 
port history, and estimate future tracks and possible port 
calls. The committee believes that VIS could enhance security 
of U.S. maritime borders and increase the capability of other 
U.S. maritime intelligence programs.

National Shipbuilding Research Program--Advanced Shipbuilding 
        Enterprise

    The budget request included no funding in PE 78730N for 
maritime technology. The National Shipbuilding Research 
Program--Advanced Shipbuilding Enterprise (NSRP-ASE) is a 
collaborative effort between the Navy and industry, which has 
yielded new processes and techniques that reduce the cost of 
building and repairing ships. Annual Navy funding, which is 
matched and exceeded by industry investment, has achieved 
savings and cost avoidance for the Navy, a positive return on 
investment, and a high research-to-implementation transition 
rate. The committee believes that continuation of the NSRP-ASE 
provides a vital contribution towards achieving the overarching 
objective of improving the affordability of naval warship 
construction and maintaining a healthy, innovative shipbuilding 
industrial base. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in PE 78730N to support NSRP-ASE efforts, including:
          (1) establishing a comprehensive national program for 
        development and training of a skilled shipbuilding 
        production and engineering workforce;
          (2) establishing a concept for a national supply 
        chain that will enable leveraging buying power across 
        product lines in an effort to reduce the high cost of 
        material in ship construction;
          (3) exploring secondary and commercial markets for 
        private shipbuilders to broaden the business base and 
        share the overhead applied to naval shipbuilding; and
          (4) developing and deploying an industry-wide 
        architecture for computer interoperability.

Detection and recovery of unexploded ordnance, Browns Island, Camp 
        Lejeune, North Carolina

    The budget request included $25.3 million in PE 65873M for 
Marine Corps Program-wide Support, but included no funding for 
the detection and recovery of unexploded ordnance at Browns 
Island, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. The committee notes that 
developing and testing technologies that focus on wide area 
detection and discrimination of unexploded ordnance followed by 
precise removal efforts from environmentally-sensitive areas 
would provide benefits to long-term unexploded ordnance removal 
efforts throughout the Department of Defense. The committee 
believes that effective detection and discrimination of 
unexploded ordnance over a wide area would help identify where 
recovery efforts should be focused and would significantly 
reduce the cost of unexploded ordnance removal and 
environmental remediation.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
65873M to complete the recovery of unexploded ordnance begun in 
fiscal year 2006 in the vicinity of Browns Island, a former 
bombing range at Camp Lejeune.

                        Budget Items--Air Force



Air Force basic research

    The budget request included $250.2 million in PE 61102F, 
for defense research sciences and $107.6 million in PE 61103F, 
for university research initiatives. Air Force fundamental and 
university research focuses on defense-related technical 
challenges in a wide range of scientific and engineering 
disciplines are important to maintaining U.S. military 
technology superiority. The committee recommends an increase of 
$2.0 million in PE 61102F for improved measurements and 
simulation of hypersonic air flows.
    As noted elsewhere in this report, the committee is 
concerned with deficiencies in cyber and national security 
information assurance capabilities. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.5 million in PE 61103F for information 
assurance-focused research, including $2.0 million for high 
assurance software engineering; $1.5 million for secure grid 
research; and $2.0 million for secure grids for network-centric 
operations.

Air Force materials research

    The budget request included $111.1 million in PE 62102F, 
for materials research. The committee recommends an increase of 
$6.5 million in PE 62102F for research and development on 
materials, composites, and structural designs to protect 
personnel and equipment from threats such as explosives and 
fires, including $3.0 million for blast resistant barrier 
research; $2.0 million for expansion of advanced materials 
development and corresponding manufacturing trials; and $1.5 
million for development of a domestic source for production of 
high modulus carbon fibers.
    The committee continues to monitor with great interest 
developments in materials and composites with space and 
unmanned systems applications. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.5 million in PE 62102F for acceleration of 
research on complex composites and structures for manned and 
unmanned air vehicles and expects these efforts to meet 
objectives for joint unmanned systems outlined elsewhere in 
this report.

Applied aerospace propulsion

    The budget request included $170.9 million in PE 62203F, 
for applied research in aerospace propulsion. The committee 
notes that hypersonic technologies have the potential to enable 
the development of new military capabilities in time of a 
critical strike, as demonstrated by the Air Force X-51 program. 
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62203F to pursue alternate propulsion flow path efforts on the 
X-51 flight test bed.
    The committee further recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 62203F for high energy laser research to 
demonstrate a capability to inspect the internal condition of 
military hardware with significant potential savings in 
maintenance of critical components.

Space technology

    The budget request included $85.6 million in PE 62601F, for 
space technology. Programs supported under this account focus 
on improving satellite payload capabilities and developing 
technologies for protection of U.S. space assets. The committee 
recommends an increase of $290,000 in PE 62601F for a project 
to shield rocket payloads with particular emphasis on solving 
low frequency noise insulation challenges.

MASINT visualization tool

    The budget request included $119.3 million in PE 62702F, 
for command, control, and communications. Measurement and 
signals intelligence (MASINT) enables identification of 
obscured and hidden targets, but must be integrated into user 
friendly information processors and architectures. The 
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62702F 
to accelerate development of MASINT visualization tools.

Air Force materials technologies

    The budget request included $48.9 million in PE 63112F, for 
advanced materials for weapon systems. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63112F to continue the 
development of inspection techniques to detect fatigue related 
damage on aircraft components. These techniques can support the 
extension of aircraft service life and improve operational 
readiness of assets and are consistent with the Defense 
Technology Objective of developing systems for nondestructive 
evaluation for system health management.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63112F for research on specialty aerospace metals as part of 
the Metals Affordability Initiative. This type of research 
could lead to cheaper and higher performance aerospace metals 
and alloys, which will contribute significantly to future 
military capabilities.

Aerospace propulsion and power technology

    The budget request included $115.5 million in PE 63216F, 
for aerospace propulsion and power technology. The committee 
recommends an increase of $12.5 million in PE 63216F to 
accelerate development and transition of engine and fuel 
conversion technologies and to scale battery technology for 
system level charges and low temperature reliability. Of this 
amount, the committee recommends $2.0 million for certification 
of the flexible JP8 military fuel; $6.0 million for the turbine 
engine supersonic cruise missile; $2.5 million for the 
versatile affordable advanced turbine engine; and $2.0 million 
for bipolar wafer-cell, nickel-metal hydride aircraft battery 
research.

Radically Segmented Launch Vehicle

    The budget request included $68.0 million in PE 63401F, for 
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funding for the 
Radically Segmented Launch Vehicle (RSLV).
    The RSLV program addresses a broad range of Department of 
Defense mission requirements for low-cost, routine, and 
responsive space launch. Currently, the program development and 
risk reduction for responsive space launch is jointly performed 
by the Air Force, the National Air and Space Administration, 
and the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency. The committee 
is supportive of efforts to acquire an operationally responsive 
space capability to support the warfighter.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63401F to perform engineering development, prototype hardware 
fabrication, and ground testing of the RSLV.

Thin film amorphous solar arrays

    The budget request included $68.0 million in PE 63401F, for 
Advanced Spacecraft Technology, but included no funding for 
thin film amorphous solar arrays.
    The committee is aware of the need to reduce the cost of 
satellite launches, which is driven to a large extent by the 
weight of satellite payloads. The committee believes research 
on thin film amorphous solar arrays has the potential to 
produce solar arrays that are significantly less expensive, 
lighter, and more efficient than current solar arrays.
    The committee recommends an increase of $16.0 million in PE 
63401F for thin film amorphous solar array research and 
development.

Massively parallel optical interconnects for battlespace information 
        exchange

    The budget request included $35.8 million in PE 63789F, 
Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence Advanced 
Development, but included no funding for development of 
massively parallel optical interconnects (MPOI) for avionic 
systems. Recent advances in this technology offer potential to 
significantly enhance sensor and signals processing of unmanned 
and manned aircraft. This technology can significantly increase 
the communications capacity of the air fleet by replacing 
electronic technology with optical networking technology.
    The two major aspects to the on-board networking 
infrastructure of unmanned air vehicles include: (1) command 
and control; and (2) payload-related data exchange. The MPOI 
technology offers a unified and efficient solution to both 
demands by reducing space, weight, and power consumption, while 
increasing data rates to the multi-gigabit level.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.8 million in PE 
63789F to develop the MPOI primarily for insertion into manned 
and unmanned aircraft.

Transformational Satellite Communications

    The budget request included $867.0 million in PE 63845F, 
for the Transformational Satellite Communications (TSAT) 
program. While supporting the TSAT satellite program as a key 
enabler of the Department of Defense's future communication 
architecture, Congress has, for the past 4 years, reduced 
funding for TSAT due to concerns over technological maturity 
and an overly aggressive development schedule. The committee is 
therefore gratified that Air Force leadership has restructured 
the TSAT program to follow an incremental development approach, 
supported by realistic cost estimates, that may serve to lower 
program risk and provide the first block of capability to the 
warfighter as soon as possible. The committee notes that both 
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the independent 
TSAT Program Review Group have acknowledged that the 
restructured TSAT program incorporates many of the lessons 
learned from the troubled history of space acquisition efforts.
    While remaining fully supportive of the TSAT program, the 
committee notes that the budget request for fiscal year 2007 
represents a 100 percent increase over last year's appropriated 
amount of $429.0 million. The GAO does not believe the 
contractors associated with the space segment of the TSAT 
program will be able to increase development activities to the 
requested fiscal year 2007 budget level. The committee 
therefore recommends a decrease of $70.0 million, or 8 percent, 
in PE 63845F, for TSAT, due to unexecutable growth in the 
program budget.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
February 15, 2007, explaining what actions the Air Force has 
taken to address the remaining concerns of the TSAT Program 
Review Group and GAO, including: (1) the need to significantly 
refine requirements so that program content can be matched to 
budget constraints, and how the Department plans to control 
requirements to prevent problems associated with ``requirements 
creep''; (2) the need to adequately staff the TSAT program 
office with experienced space acquisition professionals; (3) 
the status of refining key performance parameters so they 
provide specificity and validation metrics; (4) the 
implications for other programs, such as Space Radar and Future 
Combat System, of a less capable initial block of TSAT 
satellites; and (5) the last date by which the fourth Advanced 
Extremely High Frequency satellite could be put on contract 
without a production break.

Satellite command and control consolidation

    The budget request included $37.7 million in PE 63854F, for 
Wideband gap filler system, but included no funding for 
satellite command and control consolidation. The committee is 
aware that all military satellite communications systems need 
to be connected into a single consolidated command and control 
system to provide standardized operations. While the current 
generation of satellites have transitioned to Command and 
Control System-Consolidated, the Advanced Extremely High 
Frequency and Wideband gapfiller satellites have yet to do so. 
The committee recommends an increase of $8.5 million in PE 
63854F to complete the development and integration of the 
satellite control system with the new satellites to ensure the 
warfighter receives increased communications capabilities as 
soon as possible.

Space Radar

    The budget request includes $266.4 million in PE 63858F for 
Space Radar (SR).
    SR is a constellation of surveillance and reconnaissance 
satellites being developed by the Air Force to find, identify, 
track, and monitor moving or stationary targets under all 
weather conditions and in darkness. Although the committee 
supports the development of this important military and 
intelligence capability, it remains concerned about the wisdom 
and affordability of starting a new, expensive space 
acquisition program when so many current space programs remain 
in difficulty. This concern is compounded by the inability of 
the Air Force to identify the scope of the SR architecture, or 
provide a reasonable range of cost estimates for the objective 
system. The committee is aware that the SR program is 
undergoing restructure, and may benefit from the incremental, 
block approach chosen for the Transformational Satellite 
Communications (TSAT) program. While the committee would 
welcome such an approach, it does not believe it is prudent to 
move beyond technology development and concept definition 
activities until the Air Force provides the committee further 
definition of the progam.
    In the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Act for Fiscal 
Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), the Congress expressed the view 
that the affordability of a space-based radar program would be 
dependent on the development of a single radar satellite system 
to meet both military and intelligence community needs and the 
integration of a space radar into an architecture consisting of 
other intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
capabilities. The committee is aware that in 2005 the then-
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Secretary 
of Defense signed a letter to the Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget stating their intent to pursue joint 
development of a single space radar capability for the nation, 
and to develop an approach for sharing costs starting in fiscal 
year 2008. The committee, however, has not yet seen a solid 
cost-share agreement between the Department of Defense and the 
Office of the Director of National Intelligence to jointly fund 
the SR program, nor has the committee identified funding for 
such activities in the intelligence community budget. The 
committee remains concerned about the inability to resolve this 
impasse and believes two systems are not affordable.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $66.4 million in PE 
63858F for the SR program, and recommends that remaining funds 
be directed toward technology development, system engineering, 
and concept definition that assumes a single SR system that 
will meet joint requirements and employ a joint concept of 
operations with the intelligence community.
    The committee directs the Secretary, in coordination with 
the Director of National Intelligence, to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees by January 30, 2007, 
containing the following elements: (1) a description of the 
respective roles and missions of the intelligence community and 
the Department with respect to the development of the SR 
program; (2) the process by which the intelligence community 
and the Department coordinate joint development efforts and 
requirements definition; (3) the plans for achieving a cost-
share agreement between the intelligence community and the 
Department for the development and acquisition of a space radar 
capability; and (4) a commitment from the Secretary and the 
Director of National Intelligence that the SR program will be a 
single system responsive to the requirements of each 
organization.
    The committee further directs the Secretary to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees by March 15, 
2007, addressing the following: (1) the scope of the SR 
architecture, including the system's interactions with other 
ground and air-based platforms providing similar capability as 
well as interactions with TSAT or alternative systems for 
processing and transmitting SR data to other military 
applications; (2) the block, or incremental approach, that will 
be pursued by the SR acquisition program, including key 
technologies that will be included in blocks 1 and 2 as well as 
their corresponding levels of sophistication and maturity at 
the time of program initiation; (3) the extent to which blocks 
1 and 2 will meet objective requirements for the SR program and 
which requirements will need to be delayed as a result; and (4) 
the schedule for meeting a realistic launch date and potential 
risks to that schedule.

Increased funding for O2 diesel particulate emission reduction research

    The budget request included $2.9 million in PE 63859F for 
pollution prevention, but included no funding for O2 diesel 
particulate emission reduction research. The committee notes 
that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 strengthens the requirement 
that federal vehicle fleets use alternative fuels in those 
vehicles capable of using such fuels and requires ongoing 
assessment of renewable energy resources. The committee 
believes that research on O2 diesel to date shows demonstrated 
emissions benefits with regards to carbon monoxide, nitrogen 
oxides, particulate matter, and visible smoke that meets or 
exceeds the levels achieved by the 20 percent biodiesel blend 
currently used in Department of Defense vehicles. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 63859F to continue 
O2 diesel particulate emission reduction research.

Space control test capabilities

    The budget request included $47.3 million in PE 64421F, for 
Air Force counterspace systems.
    The ``National Space Policy'' of September 1996 specifies 
that the United States will develop, operate, and maintain 
space control capabilities to ensure freedom of action in space 
and, if directed, deny such freedom of action to adversaries. 
The committee recognizes that continuing development by the 
Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering 
Center of software applications used to integrate offensive and 
defensive space control systems into a single system-of-systems 
simulated testbed could contribute to near-term capabilities 
for space control and situational awareness.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
64421F for the ground-based simulated testbed for space control 
assets.

Joint space intelligent decision support

    The budget request included $121.2 million in PE 64425F, 
for space situational awareness systems, but included no 
funding for joint space intelligent decision support.
    The committee is aware that timely space situational 
awareness and decision support to Air Force and joint operators 
is essential for successful space operations. The Army 
currently has an effort underway to develop this technology for 
space support. The Air Force effort would complete research 
conducted by the Army and provide production software code to 
support global users who are connected via the secure Internet. 
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
64425F for completion of joint space intelligent decision 
support software development to provide space operators 
situational awareness.

Global awareness presentation system

    The budget request included $0.2 million in PE 64740F, for 
integrated command and control applications. Information 
integration and exchange among the tactical, operational, and 
strategic levels of U.S. Strategic Command is essential to 
successful mission assignments in information operations; 
global intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR); 
integrated missile defense; and space and global strike. Global 
Battlespace View (GBV) supports operations centers and fielded 
units with a seamless information exchange environment. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 64740F 
for the global awareness presentation system, which provides a 
visually fused ISR situational awareness and collection 
capability for the GBV.

RAND Project Air Force

    The budget request included $25.2 million in PE 65101F, for 
RAND Project Air Force. The committee notes that RAND studies 
and analyses have supported Air Force planning and operations, 
particularly in acquisition planning and analyses, tanker 
recapitalization, and assessments of international threats and 
capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 
million in PE 65101F to sustain RAND analytical support for the 
Air Force.

Ballistic missile range safety technology

    The budget request included $14.7 million in PE 65860F, for 
the rocket systems launch program, but included no funding for 
ballistic missile range safety technology (BMRST).
    The committee is aware that BMRST is a global positioning 
system based launch range safety system that has the potential 
to provide significant technical and reliability advantages and 
cost savings over current radar systems. The committee notes 
that several launch ranges have requested BMRST systems for 
local range certification as well as down-range reentry 
support.
    The committee recommends an increase of $13.0 million in PE 
65860F to support expanded BMRST system capability, critical 
certification, and testing requirements.

Global command and control development center

    The budget request included $27.3 million in PE 11313F, for 
Strategic War Planning System, but included no funding for the 
global command and control development center.
    The U.S. Strategic Command is assigned multiple global 
missions, including space and global strike; integrated missile 
defense; integrated information operations, intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance; global command and control; 
and combatting weapons of mass destruction. Command and control 
for these missions requires a robust global Internet-like 
capability to provide the right information to the right people 
at the right time. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 
million in PE 11313F for the establishment of a global command 
and control development center.

Single integrated space picture

    The budget request included $51.0 million in PE 35906F for 
threat warning and attack assessment, but included no funding 
for the single integrated space picture.
    In March 2006, the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command 
testified before the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the 
Committee on Armed Services that ``we must improve space 
situational awareness and protection.'' Accordingly, the 
committee supports efforts to enable military commanders to 
understand the status of adversary and friendly space forces. 
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
35906F for the combatant commanders command and control system 
integrated space picture.

National Security Space Office

    The budget request included $13.4 million in PE 35924F, for 
the National Security Space Office (NSSO). The ``National Space 
Policy'' signed in 1996 directs the Secretary of Defense and 
the then-Director of Central Intelligence to ``ensure that 
defense and intelligence space activities are closely 
coordinated,'' and ``that space architectures are integrated to 
the maximum extent feasible.'' The committee strongly endorses 
this direction and believes that a coherent, effective, and 
efficient national security space enterprise is in the best 
interests of the United States. The committee is aware that the 
Director of National Intelligence has decided not to provide 
intelligence community funding and support for the 
collaborative, enterprise-level activities of the NSSO. The 
committee believes this position is short-sighted and will have 
serious implications for the nation's future space 
capabilities.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
35924F for enterprise-level system engineering, architecture 
work, and strategy and planning efforts for national security 
space capabilities. The committee also urges the Director of 
National Intelligence to reconsider his decision to withdraw 
support for these important collaborative efforts.

Air Force industrial preparedness activities

    The budget request included $36.7 million in PE 78011F, for 
Air Force industrial preparedness activities and $10.6 million 
in PE 78611F, for support systems development. The committee 
notes that the Defense Science Board highlighted the role that 
the Department of Defense manufacturing technology programs 
play in reducing the cost of weapons systems and improving the 
acquisition process. Air Force manufacturing technology 
programs in propulsion, electronics, and munitions systems have 
enabled billions of dollars in cost avoidance. The committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 78011F, including 
$8.0 million for the development of advanced prototyping of 
nanomaterials and $2.0 million for rapid manufacturing and 
repair of composite components for high temperature 
applications. The committee also recommends an increase of $3.0 
million in PE 78611F for aircraft sustainment and availability 
tools to improve readiness through automated tracking of 
aircraft maintenance and mission records.
    The committee commends Air Force efforts to develop and 
utilize Manufacturing Readiness Levels as a tool to accelerate 
technology transition and the acquisition process through the 
analysis and reduction of manufacturing risk in weapon systems 
and other programs.

                       Budget Items--Defense-wide



Force protection basic research

    The budget request included $150.7 million in PE 61101E, 
for defense research sciences and $99.2 million in PE 61328BP, 
for the chemical and biological defense basic research program. 
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
61101E and $3.0 million in PE 61384BP to expand research 
programs focused on development of next generation protective 
gear to counter small-arms threats and chemical-biological 
threats to service members, respectively.

National Defense Education Program

    The budget request included $19.5 million in PE 61102D8Z, 
for the National Defense Education Program (NDEP). The 
committee commends the Department of Defense for supporting 
this targeted and timely program, but notes that the request 
includes funds for activities that are not authorized including 
institutional scholarships, fellowships, and traineeships. Of 
the amount requested in PE 61102D8Z, the committee authorizes 
$17.0 million specifically for Science, Mathematics, and 
Research for Transformation scholarships and $2.5 million for 
other NDEP activities; but authorizes no funding for 
institutional scholarships, fellowships, and traineeships. The 
committee recommends that the Department provide information on 
the need for this activity along with a request for legislative 
authority to conduct it.

Detection of biological agents in water

    The budget request included $99.1 million in PE 61384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense basic research. The 
committee notes that the ability to detect the introduction of 
manmade or natural toxins into inland or coastal waterways is 
an important component of the overall force protection of U.S. 
forces. The committee commends the Department of Defense for 
supporting the advanced technology development of data fusion 
technologies and mathematical modeling to predict and counter 
the detection of biological agents in water. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 61384BP to support 
the demonstration of selected near real-time sensors on buoys, 
submerged fixtures, and potable water pump stations.

Organic light emitting receptor-based nanosensors

    The budget request included $99.2 million in PE 61384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense basic research, but 
included no funding for the research and development of organic 
light emitting receptor-based nanosensors.
    The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts 
to develop low-cost and lightweight nanosensors for the rapid 
detection of toxins and the rapid display of alerts for the 
presence of toxins.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
61384BP for the development of nanosensors that are capable of 
simultaneously generating optical and photo acoustic signals 
upon interaction with target toxins.

Superstructural particle evaluation

    The budget request included $99.2 million in PE 61384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense basic research. Basic 
science challenges continue to plague efforts to develop 
comprehensive methods for countering threats posed by chemical 
and biological warfare agents. The committee commends the 
Department of Defense for supporting basic research to address 
both the chemical and biological threat. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.2 million in PE 61384BP to 
accelerate promising work in superstructural particle 
evaluation and characterization with targeted reaction 
analysis. This program will allow investigations of real-time, 
micro-scale responses of cells and microbes to the influence of 
a variety of chemical species, including chemical warfare 
agents, toxins, or potential protective or therapeutic 
substances.

Medical free electron laser

    The budget request included $10.3 million in PE 62227D8Z, 
for the medical free electron laser program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 62227D8Z to 
continue research efforts that utilize free electron lasers to 
address critical military medical requirements.

Alternative delivery of recombinant protein vaccines

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research. The 
committee commends the Department of Defense for supporting 
research to address the need for new vaccine delivery devices 
and powder vaccine technologies to improve the performance of 
biodefense vaccines and reduce the logistical challenges in 
delivering those vaccines. The committee recommends an increase 
of $5.1 million in PE 62384BP to accelerate promising work on 
vaccine-device combinations. This program will facilitate the 
rapid deployment in minimally invasive delivery formats, 
provide superior protection, and in some cases, improve the 
stability for stockpiled vaccines.

Chemical and biological smart materials

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but 
included no funding for the research and development of 
chemical and biological smart materials to enhance individual 
and collective protection.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
identified warfighter protection capability shortfalls in 
several research areas to include individual and collective 
protection. The committee recognizes the importance of the 
development of technologies for the improvement of chemical and 
biological agent individual protection ensembles. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62384BP for the 
research and development of chemical and biological smart 
materials to address this shortfall.

Escape mask

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but 
included no funding for the research and development of escape 
masks or hoods. The committee notes the importance of the 
development of escape masks and respirators with a capability 
to protect individuals from carbon monoxide. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62384BP for the 
development of escape mask capability shortfalls.

Multipurpose biodefense immunoarray

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but 
included no funding for the research and development of 
multipurpose biodefense immunoarray technology.
    The committee notes that protein microarrays have the 
potential to screen hundreds of proteins simultaneously for 
reactivity with serum antibodies.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
62384BP, for the continued development of microarray 
diagnostics, which could determine previous exposure to 
biological agents; assess the effectiveness of vaccine 
immunizations; and determine the potential of new vaccines to 
elicit an immune response.

Mustard gas antidote

    The budget request included $30.7 million in PE 62384BP, 
for medical chemical defense applied research. This program 
emphasizes the prevention of chemical casualties and addresses 
capability gaps in the area of prophylaxes for chemical warfare 
agents. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in 
PE 62384BP for mustard gas antidote research. The committee 
commends the Department of Defense for current research focused 
on a mustard gas antidote using signal transduction inhibition 
antioxidant liposomes (STIMAL), and notes that STIMAL research 
has demonstrated the potential to substantially reduce the 
effects of a range of chemical agents.

Next-generation chemical biological protective suit

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but 
included no funding for the research and development of the 
next-generation chemical and biological protective suit.
    The committee notes the importance of the development of a 
next-generation, self-decontaminating chemical and biological 
protective suit for U.S forces to reduce the physiological and 
logistical burden of protective clothing. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62384BP for the 
development of self-decontaminating materials to address this 
shortfall.

Personal protection against infectious agents

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but 
included no funding for collaborative research and development 
related to personal protective masks and anti-microbial filters 
that protect against exposure to infectious agents and 
diseases. The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million 
in PE 62384BP for research and development to improve the 
respiratory protection for individual protection ensembles from 
emerging infectious agents and diseases.

Rapid identification of biological warfare agents

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research. The 
committee commends the efforts of the Department of Defense to 
develop the Joint Biological Standoff Detection System (JBSDS) 
as the first stand-off early warning biological detection 
system capable of providing near real time, early warning 
detection of biological warfare agents.
    The committee notes the importance of the development of 
technologies for the rapid detection of biological agents such 
as anthrax and ricin that could be weaponized and employed 
against U.S. forces. The committee recommends an increase of 
$1.0 million in PE 62384BP for the research and development of 
an early warning, biological detection system capable of 
providing near real time detection of the biological agents 
most likely to be weaponized and employed against U.S. forces.

Verification and validation of chemical agent persistence models

    The budget request included $280.4 million in PE 62384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense applied research, but 
included no funding for the verification and validation of 
chemical agent persistence models.
    The committee notes the agent fate program is a joint 
service program that focuses on the acquisition of chemical 
warfare agent data and the development of models from that 
data. The continuation of the agent fate effort to validate and 
verify chemical agent persistent models will help protect U.S. 
military forces and equipment, and permit those forces to 
operate effectively in a chemically contaminated environment.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62384BP, for verification and validation of chemical agent 
persistence models to ensure U.S. forces are capable of 
operating effectively in a chemically contaminated environment.

Tactical technology

    The budget request included $383.7 million in PE 62702E, 
for applied research on tactical technology. The committee 
notes that the request represents an increase of nearly $40.0 
million over current funding levels. The committee recommends a 
decrease of $10.0 million in PE 62702E, including: $2.0 million 
for the HEDLight program, which is not currently a high 
priority for the Navy; $2.0 million to delay the Tethered Urban 
Airborne Node new start program; and $6.0 million for research 
on automated battle management systems. It is unclear how this 
effort is coordinated with the major, Department-wide effort to 
develop a Joint Battle Management Command and Control roadmap.

Biochemical materials

    The budget request included $297.3 million in PE 62715E, 
for materials and biological technology. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $5.0 million in PE 62715E to limit 
growth in biochemical materials research programs. The 
committee notes that some of these activities are more 
appropriately performed at civilian agencies.

Modeling and simulation

    The budget request included $105.0 million in PE 62717BR, 
for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) defense technologies. 
Detailed and comprehensive characterization of catastrophic 
attacks and disasters is critical to crisis and logistical 
planning. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million 
in PE 62717BR for development of a comprehensive national 
incident characterization and management system.

Wearable hyperspectral imaging system

    The budget request included $12.7 million in PE 116401BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Technology Development. 
The committee notes the need to integrate technologies 
currently under development into a low cost, wearable, 
hyperspectral imaging system to assist SOF elements with the 
detection of improvised explosive devices, target location, and 
target identification. The committee recommends an increase of 
$3.6 million in PE 116401BB, for the development of wearable 
hyperspectral imaging technology for SOF elements.

Radiation detection technology

    The budget request included $8.7 million in PE 63160BR, for 
proliferation prevention and defeat radiation detection 
technology. The committee notes the importance of developing 
higher quality, more cost-effective nuclear radiation detectors 
to enhance the ability to detect and identify hazardous 
materials that pose a proliferation threat. The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63160BR for 
procuring glass scintillation fiber radiation detectors and 
developing new portable applications, including backpack 
detectors, panels for aircraft, and detectors included in 
clothing systems. The committee further recommends an increase 
of $2.0 million in PE 63160BR for the development of a state-
of-the-art radiation portal monitor using High Purity Germanium 
technology, which will enable the Defense Threat Reduction 
Agency to replace lower resolution technology at defense 
installations with better performing nuclear detection 
equipment with greater sensitivity.

Advanced aerospace systems

    The budget request included $115.8 million in PE 63286E, 
for advanced aerospace systems research. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $16.3 million in PE 63286E, including: 
$5.3 million for efforts to develop a global range 
transatmospheric vehicle that is not consistent with current 
service acquisition plans or goals; $4.0 million for the 
development of a heavy fuel engine for the A160, which lacks a 
transition pathway to Army Future Combat Systems; $4.0 million 
for the Cormorant air vehicle program; and a general decrease 
of $3.0 million to new start efforts in the account.

Next Generation Gas Chromatographic Mass Spectrometer

    The budget request included $207.1 million in PE 63384BP, 
for chemical and biological defense advanced research. The 
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST) 
currently use commercial, off-the-shelf (COTS) Gas 
Chromatographic Mass Spectrometers (GCMS) to identify threats 
posed by chemical warfare agents. The committee commends the 
Department of Defense for supporting the advanced technology 
development of next generation COTS GCMS. The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63384BP to 
continue the development, modification, test, and evaluation of 
next generation COTS GCMS products. This program will allow 
WMD-CST the ability to refresh their inventory with a 
technically superior GCMS capability.

Joint advanced concept technology demonstration

    The budget request included $35.6 million in PE 63648D8Z, 
for joint capability technology demonstrations. The Department 
of Defense initiated this new technology transition program in 
the fiscal year 2006 budget request to update the successful 
advanced concepts technology demonstrations to more closely 
align with the Joint Capabilities Interoperability Development 
System (JCIDS) and to enhance the participation of the 
combatant commanders through the JCIDS process. The committee 
recommends an increase of $2.2 million in PE 63648D8Z to 
accelerate transition of the large data image visualization 
capability that will assist the joint warfighter and the 
intelligence community in processing increasing volumes of data 
in real time.

Joint robotic autonomous systems

    The budget request included $7.7 million in PE 63711D8Z, 
for joint robotics program/autonomous systems, but included no 
funding for development of a versatile, modular, diesel hybrid 
unmanned system capable of delivering multiple payloads in the 
2000-4000 pound range. The committee recommends an increase of 
$3.0 million in PE 63711D8Z to modify existing capabilities for 
additional unmanned logistics support missions.

Advanced mobile gas-to-liquid fueler

    The budget request included $23.4 million in PE 63712S, for 
generic logistics research and development technology 
demonstrations. Adequate, reliable, and cost-effective fuel 
supplies are important for military operations in changing or 
hostile environments. Alternative fuel systems offer possible 
long-term solutions in reducing the logistical footprint of 
deployed forces, if successfully configured to meet military 
requirements. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 63712S for continued development of mobile gas-
to-liquid fuelers to demonstrate innovations in converting 
biomass to synthetic diesel fuel.

Defense Logistics Agency research and technology demonstrations

    The budget request included $23.4 million in PE 63712S, for 
generic logistics research and development technology 
demonstrations. The committee notes that the Department of 
Defense is the largest single user of energy in the United 
States. Energy and power represent significant and growing 
burdens on the Department budget. The Defense Logistics Agency 
recently reported that hydrogen as a fuel may become a viable 
option for the Department, if remaining technical and 
logistical challenges can be solved. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63712S to create a 
comprehensive and integrated strategy and to plan for the 
appropriate use and acquisition of hydrogen fuel.
    The committee further notes that the use of solid hydrogen 
storage materials for portable, vehicle, and stationary fuel 
cell applications shows promise in addressing safety, cost, and 
performance issues related to fuel cell systems. The committee 
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 63712S for 
research on and technology demonstrations of solid hydrogen 
storage systems that can support military requirements and 
technology development goals. The committee further recommends 
an increase of $7.0 million in PE 63712S for the continuation 
of the vehicle fuel cell program to accelerate the development 
and deployment of fuel cell technologies in military vehicles 
through advanced research and demonstration programs.
    The committee also recommends an increase of $12.9 million 
in PE 63712S, including $3.0 million to support the 
manufacturing supply chain and for increased involvement of 
small- and medium-sized firms in meeting defense surge 
production requirements; $4.0 million for the embedded passives 
test bed program; $4.2 million for aging systems sustainment 
and enabling technologies; and $1.7 million for the development 
of an emergency power source to meet National Guard 
requirements.

Dendrimer enhanced water remediation research

    The budget request included $67.1 million in PE 63716D8Z, 
for the Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
Program, but included no funding for dendrimer enhanced water 
remediation research. The committee notes that research has 
shown that dendrimers have remarkable capacity to retain a 
variety of metal and organic molecules, making them ideal 
materials for water remediation. This project would demonstrate 
the feasibility of dendrimers in reusable cartridges for point-
of-use water filtration units. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.0 million in PE 63716D8Z for dendrimer enhanced 
water remediation research.

Computer modernization technologies

    The budget request included $158.3 million in PE 63750D8Z, 
for advanced concepts technology demonstrations and $175.3 
million in PE 63755D8Z for the high performance computing 
modernization program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63750D8Z for the continued development of masking shunt 
cybersecurity techniques and technologies to increase the 
security of military networks and information systems against 
enemy information operations. The Joint Chiefs of Staff's 
Coalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstration Joint 
Management Office recommended further development and 
procurement of this technology after successful demonstration.
    The committee further recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE63755D8Z for upgrades to the Space and Missile 
Defense Command simulation center to meet increasing 
computational demands. The center supports high performance 
computing modernization efforts to accelerate the development 
and transition of advanced defense technologies into 
warfighting capabilities through supercomputing and 
computational modeling, including supporting the development of 
armor systems, weather forecasting models, and test and 
evaluation.

Command, control, and communications systems

    The budget request included $232.5 million in PE 63760E, 
for command, control, and communications systems. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $2.8 million in PE 63760E for the Next 
Generation (XG) program. The XG communications technology had 
been planned for a fiscal year 2007 transition to the Army in 
the Joint Tactical Radio Systems (JTRS) clusters. The committee 
notes that the JTRS program is undergoing significant technical 
reevaluation and program restructuring, so transition of this 
and other technologies appears problematic. The committee 
further recommends a decrease of $5.0 million in PE 63760E to 
better align the budget with proposed activities of the 
Predictive Analysis for Naval Deployment Activities program.

Portable explosive detection

    The budget request included $107.8 million in PE 63826D8Z, 
for quick reaction special projects. The committee notes that 
advances in capabilities to detect trace amounts of explosive 
materials support efforts to prevent attacks using bombs and 
improvised explosive devices. The committee recommends an 
increase of $3.5 million in PE 63826D8Z for rapid testing, 
training, and logistics support for a low-cost, portable, easy-
to-operate explosive screening and countermeasure system.

Joint modeling, simulation, and experimentation

    The budget request included $115.7 million in PE 63828D8Z, 
for joint experimentation, modeling, and simulation 
technologies, but included no funding for joint effects-based 
modeling and simulation that effectively incorporates 
political, economic, infrastructure, information, societal, and 
diplomatic factors, as well as coalition warfare, at the 
tactical level of operations.
    The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) Report noted that 
the Department of Defense must ``shift its emphasis from 
Department-centric approaches toward interagency solutions'' to 
incorporate all elements of national power. Cooperation across 
the Federal Government is essential and can be facilitated 
efficiently by enhanced modeling, simulation, and 
experimentation. Similarly, the Report identified that the 
ability of the United States and its allies to work together to 
influence the global environment is fundamental to defeating 
terrorist networks.
    The committee believes that the Department must develop a 
world-class experimentation, modeling, and simulation 
capability that is joint, interagency, and coalition at the 
tactical level of operation. This is especially important since 
Cold War era distinctions between tactical and strategic have 
been increasingly obscured. The committee also believes that 
joint modeling, simulation, and experimentation would be most 
effectively conducted at Joint Forces Command.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
63828D8Z, for Joint Experimentation, to further develop joint, 
interagency, and coalition modeling, simulation, and 
experimentation.

Advanced tactical airborne command, control, communications, computer, 
        intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance system

    The budget request included $80.4 million in PE 116402BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Advanced Technology 
Development, but included no funding for a SOF stand-off, 
airborne, modular advanced tactical airborne command, control, 
communications, computer, intelligence, surveillance and 
reconnaissance (C4ISR) system.
    The committee notes SOF elements require a C-130-based, 
roll-on, C4ISR system to respond to current and emerging 
asymmetrical warfare threats. The committee recommends an 
increase of $3.2 million in PE 116402BB for the further 
development of a roll-on C4ISR sensor and communications suite 
to enhance the intelligence gathering capabilities and command 
and control relay capability of SOF elements engaged in the 
global war on terror.

Advanced tactical laser

    The budget request included $80.4 million in PE 116402BB, 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Advanced Technology 
Development, including $45.0 million for the advanced tactical 
laser (ATL) program.
    The ATL Advance Concepts Technology Demonstration (ACTD) is 
a long-standing effort to weaponize directed energy technology 
into an existing tactical platform. While a potentially 
promising concept, the program has faced formidable challenges, 
including the absence of a technology transition plan.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $20.0 million in PE 
116402BB, while the technical challenges associated with ATL 
are addressed and an effective transition plan for this 
technology is developed and implemented.

Flashlight soldier-to-soldier combat identification system

    The budget request included $80.4 million in PE 116402BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Advanced Technology 
Development, but included no funding to develop new 
capabilities to address the identification of friendly forces 
for SOF elements in a ground combat environment.
    The committee commends the Department of Defense's efforts 
to develop technologies to assist in the prevention and 
ultimate elimination of friendly fire incidents on changing and 
complex battlefields. Flashlight soldier-to-soldier combat 
identification system (FSCIS) is a friend-or-foe combat 
identification system that employs focused radio frequency 
beams to identify the presence of friendly units in an area of 
impending combat.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
116402BB, for SOF Advanced Technology Development, for the 
development of FSCIS technology.

Small and medium caliber recoil mitigation technologies

    The budget request included $80.4 million in PE 116402BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Advanced Technology 
Development, but included no funding for SOF small and medium 
caliber recoil mitigation technology.
    The committee notes that the current small and medium 
caliber weapons in use today by SOF elements possess recoil 
technologies more than 50 years old. The committee further 
notes that recoil management is at the core of reducing small 
arms weight, while improving lethality and reliability.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
116402BB for the further development of advanced prototypes of 
small and medium caliber weapons to improve SOF lethality in 
close-quarter and urban combat environments.

Special Operations portable power source program

    The budget request included $80.4 million in PE 116402BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Advanced Technology 
Development, but included no funding to develop solid oxide 
fuel cell systems.
    The committee notes such systems are designed to 
significantly reduce the weight burden of batteries for SOF 
operators, and that a reduction in battery weight will have a 
direct impact on increasing the capability of SOF elements and 
their equipment. The committee further notes that the 
Department of Defense is exploring various approaches to 
solving energy and power challenges for dismounted forces, 
including lightweight zinc-air batteries for the Marine Corps.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
116402BB for SOF, Advanced Technology Development, for the SOF 
portable power source.

Anthrax and plague oral vaccine research and development

    The budget request included $73.1 million in PE 63884BP, 
for advanced technology development specific to medical bio-
defense. The committee supports the Department of Defense's 
efforts under this account to develop and test safe and 
effective prophylaxes and therapeutics for pre- and post-
exposure to biological threats and agents. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63884BP for the 
development of a single-dose oral vaccine that can protect 
against multiple biological warfare agents, including anthrax 
and plague. This effort parallels the Department's plague 
vaccine development program and may provide superior protection 
against pneumonic plague.

Airborne Infrared System

    The budget request included $514.5 million in PE 63884C, 
for ballistic missile defense sensors, but included no funding 
for the Airborne Infrared System (AIRS).
    AIRS is a system of infrared and visible sensors that can 
track ballistic missiles and their warheads in all phases of 
flight. The committee believes that such a system, if and when 
deployed, could provide important test, operational, and 
technical intelligence capabilities in support of ballistic 
missile defense.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63884C for AIRS research and development. This increase will 
allow the Missile Defense Agency to proceed with final 
engineering development and ``in-line'' demonstrations of 
system connectivity, a closed loop fire control system, and 
prototype design for integration on manned or unmanned 
vehicles.

Corrosion prevention research

    The budget request included $5.0 million in PE 64016D8Z, 
for the Department of Defense corrosion program. Established by 
the committee in section 1067 of the Bob Stump National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2003 (Public Law 107-314), 
this program is developing a comprehensive capability to 
prevent and mitigate corrosion and its effects on Department 
weapon systems and infrastructure, which some estimates 
indicate cost the Department over $20.0 billion annually.
    The committee is concerned that corrosion prevention and 
control is not effectively incorporated into existing 
accredited undergraduate engineering curricula resulting in 
continued development of new designs that do not utilize 
existing corrosion data and corrosion resistant technologies 
and materials. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
working through the Department of Defense Corrosion Executive 
and the Department of Defense Corrosion Policy and Oversight 
Office, to commission a study by the National Academy of 
Sciences to assess undergraduate corrosion education in 
engineering programs and develop recommendations for curricula 
that could enhance the corrosion-based skill and knowledge base 
of graduating engineers. The study should build on the 
congressionally-mandated report, entitled the ``2001 Corrosion 
Costs and Preventive Strategies in the United States.'' The 
results of the study should be transmitted to the congressional 
defense committees not later than April 1, 2008.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
64016D8Z to support efforts to reduce corrosion costs to the 
military through improved corrosion education and training and 
application of corrosion prevention and control technologies. 
Not more than $0.8 million of the funds provided should be 
available for the required study.

Playas command and control network

    The budget request included no funding for a command and 
control network at the training, research, development, test 
and evaluation complex at Playas, New Mexico. The development 
of a comprehensive command and control network at this facility 
was initiated in 2005. This network includes video and network 
monitoring equipment to control, communicate, observe, and 
record training taking place at the facility. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63757D8Z for a 
command and control network at Playas, New Mexico.

Militarily critical technologies support

    The budget request included $2.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW) for specific analytical 
capabilities to enhance the militarily critical technologies 
program. The committee recommends a transfer of $2.0 million 
from OMDW to Research, Development, Test and Evaluation in PE 
65110D8Z for critical technology support, which conducts the 
technical analysis to support timely updates to the militarily 
critical technologies list.

Operationally responsive space payloads

    The budget request included $20.4 million in PE 65799D8Z, 
for the Office of Force Transformation (OFT) in the Office of 
the Secretary of Defense. One of the activities, for which 
funding is requested, includes the critical design of a 
standardized bus for tactical satellite operations and the 
development of operationally responsive payloads in support of 
the warfighter. The committee notes that the Department of 
Defense has requested insufficient funding for fiscal year 2007 
to continue development of a modular, standard bus, develop 
responsive payloads, and complete the experimentation necessary 
to demonstrate tactical satellite capabilities.
    The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE 
65799D8Z for development of operationally responsive space 
capabilities. Of this amount, $20.0 million is for payloads, 
satellite busses, integration, command and control, and joint 
warfighter experimentation; and $5.0 million is to support 
adapting existing airborne reconnaissance sensor capabilities 
for use in response space missions.

DARPA management headquarters

    The budget request included $51.0 million in PE 65898E, for 
the management headquarters overhead account for the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The committee notes 
that this account has risen 58 percent between fiscal years 
2000 and 2007. The committee understands that some of these 
costs are due to additional security measures installed in the 
last few years, but believes that DARPA should continue to 
strive to limit overhead expenditures so that more funding is 
available to support high-risk, high-payoff research efforts. 
The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million in PE 
65898E for research overhead costs.

Armed Forces medical and food research

    The committee believes that the funding requested in PE 
31301L, for General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP), and in 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), is insufficient 
for medical intelligence research and development.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million in PE 
31301L, for GDIP, and $2.2 million in OMDW to develop 
capabilities to conduct threat and vulnerability analysis of 
medical and food processing and handling systems in a 
laboratory environment using biological and chemical threat 
agents.

High performance computational systems

    The budget request included no funding for the General 
Defense Intelligence Program to continue the evaluation of 
computing technologies required for the performance of next 
generation analysis, modeling, and simulation tasks. Continued 
research and analysis in this field will lead to more effective 
data fusion from distributed sensor networks for use in combat 
situations and urban environments.
    The committee is aware that the Defense Intelligence Agency 
(DIA) established a laboratory for high performance 
computational systems at the University of Alabama in 
Huntsville in 2005. It was funded at $1.6 million in fiscal 
year 2006. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million 
in PE 31301L for the continuation and expansion of a laboratory 
for high performance computational systems to support the DIA.

Commercial airborne interferometric synthetic aperture radar imagery

    Commercial airborne interferometric synthetic aperture 
radar (IFSAR) imagery provides imagery and elevation data used 
for mapping. Commercial IFSAR imagery is used regularly by the 
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) to update maps 
and conduct intelligence analysis. The technology was designed 
for broad area collection and is especially well-suited for 
regions of the world with frequent cloud cover, such as 
Colombia, Indonesia, and the Phillippines. It is also used to 
support coalition and allied countries. The use of commercial 
IFSAR imagery will assist NGA in its mapping requirements and 
permit collection platforms to satisfy other imagery 
requirements.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
35102BQ, for Defense Geospatial Program, to further the use of 
commercial IFSAR imagery for map updates, intelligence 
analysis, and to support coalition and allied nations.

Credibility assessment research

    The demand for polygraph examinations, employment 
screening, and access control in the Department of Defense has 
increased in recent years. The committee is aware of research 
conducted at Boise State University which demonstrated that 
automated polygraph tests conducted in the context of an 
employment interview can be significantly more accurate than 
those conducted by a human examiner. The university has also 
begun work a Computerized Port of Entry Screening System to 
meet the critical need for rapid and easy credibility 
assessment at ports of entry.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
35127BZ, for Foreign Counterintelligence Activities, to allow 
for continued research and initial laboratory validation of a 
fully standardized, machine-administered, scientifically-based 
polygraph test.

Combat sent wideband sensor upgrade

    The proliferation of wideband threat radars drives the 
requirement for continued advancements in wideband signal 
detection, measurement, and identification.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
35206G, for Airborne Reconnaissance Systems, for the Combat 
Sent wideband sensor upgrade program to ensure the United 
States maintains the ability to process threat radars and 
effectively track the proliferation of potentially hostile 
radar equipment. The desired goal is to have software 
reprogrammable systems that will support rapid and cost-
effective upgrades as threat radars continue to evolve.

Castings for improved readiness

    The budget request included $18.7 million in PE 78011S for 
industrial preparedness programs of the Defense Logistics 
Agency (DLA). The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million in PE 78011S to support castings for improved readiness 
program, aimed at bringing castings expertise into defense 
supply centers; reducing backorder times for critical cast and 
forged parts; developing new manufacturing processes for the 
defense industrial base, and establishing a data exchange 
system to coordinate castings information and ensure timely 
parts availability.

High performance defense manufacturing technology research and 
        development

    The budget request included $18.7 million in PE 78011S, for 
industrial preparedness activities. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 78011S to enable the Joint 
Defense Manufacturing Technology Panel to execute activities 
mandated in sections 241 through 245 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163). 
The committee notes that this legislation has been supported by 
the Defense Science Board (DSB) in its recent report, entitled 
``The Manufacturing Technology Program: A key to Affordably 
Equipping the Future Force.'' The DSB report stated that ``the 
task force supports the intent of the proposed amendment 
drafted by the Senate Armed Services Committee to enhance 
manufacturing technology strategies ..., which calls for 
public-private partnership incentives, industry roadmaps for 
new manufacturing and technology processes, test beds for 
technology transition, and other cooperative programs.''
    The committee endorses the DSB recommendation to establish 
an additional Defense-wide program element (``D line'') to 
execute ``multi-Service, multi-platform'' manufacturing 
technology initiatives. The committee encourages the Department 
of Defense to create a Defense-wide program element, managed by 
the Joint Defense Manufacturing Technology Panel for execution 
of the High Performance Defense Manufacturing Technology 
Research and Development program, and to transfer the 
additional authorized funds above from PE 78011S into the new 
line for this purpose.

Helmet mount track system

    The budget request included $45.2 million in PE 116404BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Tactical Systems 
Development, but included no funding to develop new 
capabilities for the helmet mount track system.
    The helmet mount track system has enhanced features that 
allows the operator to modify the position of their night 
vision goggles, which can lower the operator's profile, reduces 
the weight placed on the operator's neck eliminating the 
cantilever effect that otherwise causes operator injuries, and 
enhances the operator's combat identification capability.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.4 million in PE 
116404BB for the development of the helmet mount track system 
for SOF elements.

Special Operations combat assault rifle

    The budget request included $45.2 million in PE 116404BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Tactical Systems 
Development, but included no funding for the Special Operations 
Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR).
    The committee notes that the SCAR is a multipurpose weapon 
that integrates an enhanced grenade launcher module and will 
replace five different individual weapons currently used by SOF 
elements, which will vastly reduce the logistics and 
maintenance support effort. The committee further notes that 
the rifle's operating system and external configuration are 
based on an open architecture design, which will permit the 
system to accommodate future improvements in ammunition and 
accessories. The SCAR is characterized by unprecedented 
lethality, effectiveness, modularity, and dependability.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.1 million in PE 
116404BB for SOF Tactical Systems Development for development 
of the SCAR.

Wavelet packet modulation

    The budget request included $45.2 million in PE 116404BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Tactical Systems 
Development, but included no funding for Wavelet Packet 
Modulation (WPM). SOF operate in a global environment where 
their presence and communications must remain undetected. WPM 
technology surveys the signal environment to adequately 
disburse communications so that it is nearly impossible to 
detect the signal or waveform. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.4 million in PE 116404BB for the continued 
development of WPM technology for communications and networked 
threat warning sensor systems.

Multi-spectral laboratory and analytical services center program

    The budget request included $29.0 million in PE 116405BB, 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Intelligence Systems 
Development, but included no funding for multi-spectral 
sensors. The committee notes the urgent need for next 
generation, multi-spectral sensors to support the warfighter, 
specifically in the areas of stand-off biometric collection. 
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
116405BB, for the development of sensors for SOF elements to 
effectively integrate stand-off biometric capabilities.

Special Operations wireless management and control project

    The budget request included $29.0 million in PE 116405BB 
for Special Operations Forces (SOF), Intelligence Systems 
Development, but included no funding to develop new 
capabilities for the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS) as 
threats evolve.
    The special operations wireless management and control 
project will develop capabilities that can be integrated into 
the JTWS that will provide special operations forces the 
tactical capabilities to maintain situational awareness of the 
wireless communications being used by potential adversaries.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
116405BB for the development and integration of a wireless 
management and control capability for the JTWS.

                       Items of Special Interest


Airborne Laser

    The budget request contained $632.0 million in PE 63883C, 
for Ballistic Missile Defense Boost Defense Segment. The 
committee is encouraged with the recent technical progress the 
Airborne Laser (ABL) program has demonstrated over the previous 
two years, including first flight, firing of the high energy 
laser modules in ground tests, and flight testing of the 
aircraft with the beam control/fire control system installed. 
The committee further notes that these technical challenges 
were accomplished on the current schedule and within the 
current budget.
    The committee notes the decision by the Missile Defense 
Agency (MDA) to defer the procurement of a second ABL aircraft 
two years later than proposed in the President's budget request 
for fiscal year 2006 for purposes of assessing the results of a 
lethal shoot-down demonstration planned for late 2008. The 
committee further notes that a mature ABL platform, the primary 
boost phase ballistic missile defense capability, may not be 
ready for deployment until late next decade. Therefore, the 
Committee believes that if the planned shoot-down demonstration 
is fully successful, MDA should be prepared, consistent with 
its knowledge-based acquisition approach, to continue 
development, design, and testing of the ABL system in an effort 
to provide this transformational war fighting capability to the 
military commanders and war fighters.
    The committee directs the Missile Defense Agency to submit 
a report to the congressional defense committees by February 1, 
2007 to provide a detailed explanation of its plan for the 
future of the ABL program, including testing, development, 
design, and funding in the future-years defense program.

Air Force science, technology, test and evaluation

    The committee notes that the Air Force budget request for 
science and technology programs is $2.1 billion, an increase of 
over $150.0 million compared to the fiscal year 2006 budget 
request. In times of limited budgetary resources and increasing 
near-term demands, the committee commends the Air Force for 
committing to continued stable support of the critical Air 
Force research and technology enterprise. These well-managed 
and well-focused efforts are creating the capabilities that 
will shape the Air Force of the future and enable it to meet 
the threats of the 21st century. The Air Force appreciation of 
the vital role of science and technology in supporting Air 
Force missions and the resources required for quality research 
efforts extends to the inclusion of science and technology on 
the Chief of Staff of the Air Force's unfunded priorities list.
    The committee further commends Air Force efforts to 
leverage the technical skills resident in its science and 
technology enterprise to address pressing problems in weapon 
systems development and acquisition. The committee notes that 
the Air Force has begun a program to utilize assessment and 
analysis of manufacturing readiness levels to reduce risk in 
acquisition programs. The committee also notes that efforts led 
by the Air Force science and technology community to support 
the service acquisition executive with more disciplined systems 
engineering in the pre-acquisition planning phases will further 
strengthen the transition process resulting in acquisition 
programs with the latest technology and more mature technical 
planning and credibility.
    The committee notes that these activities are in contrast 
to Air Force disinvestment in vital test and evaluation (T&E) 
activities. In the fiscal year 2007 budget request, the Air 
Force has reduced T&E activities by nearly $400.0 million over 
the future-years defense program, relative to projected budgets 
for this activity presented to Congress with the fiscal year 
2006 budget request. The committee notes that T&E activities 
support the acquisition process by reducing technical risk and 
protect the warfighter by developing technologies that are 
reliable, safe, and operationally effective. The committee 
believes that the proposed reduction in T&E funding could 
result in delayed and more expensive acquisition programs, and 
even potentially in the deployment of unproven or ineffective 
technologies to the warfighters.

Future Combat Systems and current force interoperability

    The Future Combat Systems (FCS) program includes four 
``spin-out'' technologies, that will introduce FCS technologies 
and systems into the current force. These fielding spin-outs 
are currently planned to occur in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014 to 
an experimental brigade and then two years later to the rest of 
the Army. The first spin-out of FCS technology in 2008 is to 
emphasize improved munitions and sensors connected in an 
initial version of the FCS network. FCS network capabilities 
will include a pre-engineering design module of Joint Tactical 
Radio System (JTRS) radio and a wideband networking waveform. 
While the Army's focus is on FCS networking capabilities, the 
committee is concerned that funding constraints may limit the 
spin-out of FCS technologies to the current force, especially 
those capabilities that will enable FCS-equipped brigade combat 
teams (BCT) to interoperate with current force BCT. There is 
little doubt that current force systems will be in the 
inventory for decades while the Army fields FCS-equipped BCTs. 
There is also doubt that future Army budgets will be able to 
afford FCS, modularity, and reset. The Army should be exploring 
affordable alternatives to ensure that FCS-equipped and current 
force BCTs are interoperable.
    The committee believes that the Force XXI Battle Command 
Brigade and Below (FBCB2) program may provide the backbone for 
an architecture that could meet FCS-equipped and current force 
BCTs interoperability requirements. The committee also believes 
that the Army's FCS spin-out plan can provide the basis to 
develop, test, and field affordable alternatives. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than March 1, 2007, 
on the Army's strategy to ensure that FCS-equipped and current 
force BCTs can achieve affordable interoperability.

Information assurance progress report

    The committee commends the Department of Defense for recent 
efforts to focus high-level attention on the importance of 
information assurance (IA) for classified systems and for 
critical Department networks and data. New directives and 
guidance issued by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the 
U.S. Strategic Command in late 2005 and early 2006 have 
reportedly resulted in improvements to IA compliance, 
awareness, and accountability. Although these recent steps to 
improve information security and assurance are encouraging, the 
committee remains concerned about the vulnerability of the 
cyber infrastructure and the number of deficiencies that have 
not yet been addressed.
    In a September 2005 report, the Department Inspector 
General determined that ``DoD cannot be assured that it has a 
complete inventory of major information systems. Without a 
complete inventory of DoD major information systems, answers to 
questions from OMB or Congress on major information systems may 
not be accurate and information assurance is at risk because 
there is little assurance that all systems are adequately 
protected.''
    The Department has issued numerous strategies, policies, 
directives, and implementation guidance documents designed to 
ensure protection of information systems, networks, and 
communications. As noted above and in other reports and audits, 
progress has been slow.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
Congress no later than March 1, 2007, on progress in addressing 
identified deficiencies and continued vulnerabilities in IA. 
The report should address timely implementation of identified 
network and information systems security gaps, which continue 
to result in unreliable critical information systems and 
unknown large quantities of information lost or unsecured. The 
report should include schedules for, and details of, Department 
progress in the following areas:
          (1) development of a complete, comprehensive, 
        enterprise-wide inventory of information systems;
          (2) implementation of standards for interoperable, 
        joint communications;
          (3) plans to incorporate IA as a critical operational 
        training objective in every major joint exercise;
          (4) maturation of tactics, techniques, and procedures 
        for information intrusion detect, react, and restore 
        missions; and plans for strengthening forensic 
        capabilities;
          (5) development of information system and network 
        failure response and continuity plans that keep pace 
        with the pace of technology development;
          (6) implementation of firewalls or intrusion 
        detection systems in all deployed units;
          (7) definition and identification of positions with 
        significant security responsibilities;
          (8) development of training and certification 
        requirements for information technology security 
        professionals, including tracking and monitoring of 
        training progress;
          (9) determination of appropriate penalties for 
        noncompliance with IA directives and guidance;
          (10) standardization of a working definition of 
        ``system'' for purposes of management oversight;
          (11) establishment of relationships between 
        Department IA components and IA components in other 
        federal departments and agencies;
          (12) establishment of mechanisms to utilitize 
        industry technology, expertise, and knowledge to 
        address long-term Department needs and capability to 
        confront specific threats and events;
          (13) allocation of resources to support science and 
        technology developments specific to national security 
        IA requirements; analysis of international capabilities 
        in IA; and
          (14) other relevant Department IA activities and 
        efforts.
    The committee expects that the required report should focus 
attention on incomplete tasks and place a priority on timely 
implementation of completion of these tasks.

Joint Tactical Radio System

    In the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-148), the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) 
budget request was reduced $334.3 million due to program 
delays. In response to the urging of Congress, the Department 
of Defense established a JTRS Joint Program Executive Office 
(JPEO), and the program was restructured. On March 31, 2006, 
the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Logistics, and 
Technology (USD(AT&L)) signed the JTRS Acquisition Decision 
Memorandum which reflected the restructured program.
    The committee understands the complex nature of the JTRS 
program and the related difficulties of working within the 
consensus-driven Overarching Integrated Program Team management 
structure. The committee understands that the USD(AT&L) and the 
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have agreed to use the JTRS 
program as a pilot for a new acquisition governance model. The 
committee strongly encourages the Department to implement this 
pilot model now.

Survey of science and engineering workforce shaping programs

    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to conduct a survey of 
programs designed to educate, train, and recruit scientists and 
engineers for Department of Defense laboratories and 
components. The report should outline the historical and 
current program budgets; targeted populations; program 
structures and management; and program results. The programs to 
be considered as part of the technical workforce shaping survey 
include: teacher education and mentoring; curriculum 
development; prize competitions; K-12 outreach; scholarships, 
fellowships, traineeships, and internships; and coordination 
with service academies and academic institutions specific to 
education and workforce development and recruitment activities. 
The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics should submit a report on the results of the survey 
to the congressional defense committees in conjunction with the 
March 2007 strategic human capital plan for civilian employees 
of the Department.
                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Explanation of tables
    The following tables provide the program-level detailed 
guidance for the funding authorized in title III of this Act. 
The tables also display the funding requested by the 
administration in the fiscal year 2007 budget request for 
operation and maintenance programs, and indicate those programs 
for which the committee either increased or decreased the 
requested amounts. As in the past, the administration may not 
exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the tables or, 
if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth in 
budget justification documents of the Department of Defense), 
without a reprogramming action in accordance with established 
procedures. Unless noted in this report, funding changes to the 
budget request are made without prejudice.


    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Limitation on availability of funds for the Army Logistics 
        Modernization Program (sec. 311)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the expenditure of any funds for continuing the Army Logistics 
Modernization Program (LMP), other than $6.9 million in 
operation and maintenance funds, until the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense certifies that the program has adequately addressed its 
many shortcomings. The budget request included $109.5 million 
for the development, fielding, and operation of the Army LMP. 
Costs have doubled over the past 2 years in a program that was 
initially designed in 1999 as a fixed-price contract. The 
fiscal year 2007 funds represent just a fraction of the total 
funds now required. Since contract award in 1999, the program 
has fallen behind schedule by years, and only a fraction of 
logistics community is currently being served by the LMP.
    In a 2005 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, 
entitled ``Army Depot Maintenance: Ineffective Oversight of 
Army Depot Operations,'' the GAO indicated that Tobyhanna Army 
Depot's experience with the LMP--the only Army depot to have 
implemented LMP--is troubling. The GAO concluded that the 
Tobyhanna Army Depot still lacks financial and management 
reports required for depot operations. The system inefficiently 
causes orders of excess materials to be made. There is no depot 
level repairable process in LMP, and the lack of on-site 
support by the LMP contractor is causing delays in fixing 
systems problems.
    Legacy systems, which currently handle the majority of 
transactions within the logistics community, are annually under 
resourced while awaiting the implementation of the LMP 
solution. Additionally, other promising logistics 
transformation programs, such as Product Lifecycle Management 
(PLM+), remain under funded due to scarce resources for 
information technology transformation. The committee expects 
that the Chairman of the Defense Business Systems Management 
Committee will review the requirements for, and performance of, 
the LMP as part of the larger logistics modernization efforts 
underway within the Army and the Department of Defense. Only 
after the Chairman certifies that continuing the LMP is in the 
best interests of the Army, the Department, and the taxpayer, 
may the Army expend any fiscal year 2007 funds on the Army LMP.
Availability of funds for exhibits for the national museums of the 
        Armed Forces (sec. 312)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make $3.0 
million of Operations and Maintenance appropriated to each 
armed force available to each Secretary of a military 
department for education and training purposes to contract with 
the entity established to support the official national museum 
for each armed force. The funds would be available for the 
acquisition, installation, and maintenance of exhibits in each 
museum. This provision would also authorize the Secretary of 
each military department to accept amounts as reimbursement 
from the entity and to credit those reimbursements to the 
account used to cover the costs incurred by the Secretary.

Limitation on financial management improvement and audit initiatives 
        within the Department of Defense (sec. 313)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Department of Defense from obligating or expending any 
funds for financial management improvement activities related 
to the Department's preparation, processing, or auditing of 
financial statements until the Secretary of Defense submits to 
the congressional defense committees a determination that each 
activity proposed to be funded would likely result in real and 
sustainable improvements in the Department's financial 
management systems and controls.
    The committee believes that the most effective way to fix 
the Department's financial management problems is to address 
the root problems by fixing the Department's business systems 
and processes so that they provide timely, reliable, and 
complete data for management purposes. By requiring that the 
Department pursue audit activities only in accordance with a 
comprehensive financial management improvement plan that 
coordinates such activities with needed systems improvements, 
the provision would ensure that the Department first addresses 
the underlying problems with its systems and processes.

Limitation on availability of operation and maintenance funds for the 
        management headquarters of the Defense Information Systems 
        Agency (sec. 314)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
available only 50 percent of the operation and maintenance 
funding for the management headquarters function of the Defense 
Information Management Agency until the Secretary of Defense 
submits to Congress the report on an acquisition strategy for 
commercial satellite communication services, as required by 
section 818(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-136; 119 Stat. 3385).
    In April 2006, the Under Secretary of the Air Force 
testified before the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the 
Committee on Armed Services that the Department of Defense 
``depends on a vast network of commercial ground and space-
based systems to meet its telecommunications needs.'' The Under 
Secretary also stated that ``commercial satellite 
communications is a large part of the space communication 
system that supports the warfighter.'' The Under Secretary 
further indicated that commercial satellite services will be 
``an integrated part of our communications architecture going 
forward.'' This testimony reinforces the previous view of this 
committee that the Department of Defense requires a strategic 
approach for acquiring commercial satellite services that 
aggregates purchases and leverages the purchasing power of the 
Department, including through the use of multiyear contracting, 
if appropriate.

                  Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions


Response plan for remediation of military munitions (sec. 331)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense to set remediation goals for the clean up 
of unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, and 
munitions constituents. Those goals would be to complete, by 
not later than September 30, 2007, preliminary assessments at 
all active installations and formerly used defense sites; to 
complete, by not later than September 30, 2010, site 
inspections at all active installations and formerly used 
defense sites; to achieve, by not later than September 30, 
2009, a remedy in place or response complete at all military 
installations closed or realigned as part of a round of defense 
base closure and realignment prior to 2005; and to achieve, by 
a time certain established by the Secretary of Defense, a 
remedy in place or response complete at all active 
installations and formerly used defense sites (other than 
operational ranges) and all military installations realigned or 
closed under the 2005 round of defense base closure and 
realignment.
    The provision would require the Secretary to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a comprehensive plan for 
addressing the remediation of unexploded ordnance by March 1, 
2007. The plan would include a schedule, including interim 
goals, and an estimate of funding required, for achieving the 
goals for remediation of unexploded ordnance at all active 
installations and formerly used defense sites (other than 
operational ranges). The Secretary would be required to update 
this plan not later than March 15 of 2008, 2009, and 2010. The 
provision would allow the goals established for unexploded 
ordnance clean up to be adjusted to respond to unforeseen 
circumstances as part of the annual update of the plan.
    The provision would also require the Secretary to submit a 
report, to the congressional defense committees, not later than 
March 1, 2007, on the status of efforts to achieve agreement 
with relevant regulatory agencies on appropriate reuse 
standards or principles related to the remediation of 
unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, and 
munitions constituents.

Extension of authority to grant exemptions to certain requirements 
        (sec. 332)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
to grant an exemption for up to 3 years to the Secretary of 
Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments to 
transport polychlorinated biphenyls generated by, or under the 
control of, the Department of Defense into the United States 
for purposes of their disposal, treatment, or storage. The 
current period of such waivers is 1 year. This limited 
expansion of the period in which an exemption may be granted 
would expire on September 30, 2012, but would not effect the 
validity of any exemption that had been granted prior to that 
date. The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
to report by no later than March 1, 2011, to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate 
and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
Representatives, on the remaining volume of polychlorinated 
biphenyls that may require transportation into the United 
States for disposal, treatment, or storage, and the efforts 
made by the Department and other federal agencies to reduce 
such volume.
    The committee notes that the proposed expansion of the 
waiver period that may be granted to the Secretary of Defense 
or the Secretaries of the military departments from 1 to 3 
years would not change the public notice and comment process 
required before the Administrator of the EPA is authorized to 
grant such a waiver.
    The committee expects the Department to conduct appropriate 
planning to provide for the safe, orderly, and predictable 
storage, disposal, and shipment of polychlorinated biphenyls 
generated outside the United States by, or under the control 
of, the Department. The committee does not intend that the 
expansion of the waiver period from 1 to 3 years, as 
recommended by this provision, serve as a substitute for such 
long-term planning.

Research on effects of ocean disposal of munitions (sec. 333)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in cooperation with the Commandant of the 
Coast Guard, the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the heads of other 
relevant federal agencies, to conduct a historical review of 
available records to determine the number, size, and probable 
locations of sites where the armed forces disposed of military 
munitions in U.S. coastal waters. The Secretary of Defense 
would be required to periodically, but no less often than 
annually, submit interim reports to Congress with the updated 
results of the historical review. The Secretary of Defense 
would be required to complete the historical review and submit 
the final report of the findings as part of the annual report 
to Congress on environmental restoration activities for fiscal 
year 2009.
    The Secretary of Defense would be required to provide 
information to the Secretary of Commerce to assist NOAA in 
preparing nautical charts and other navigation materials for 
coastal waters that identify hazards posed by disposed military 
munitions to private activities, including commercial shipping 
and fishing operations. The Secretary of Defense would be 
required to continue activities to inform potentially affected 
users of the ocean environment of the possible hazards from 
contact with disposed military munitions and the proper methods 
to mitigate such hazards.
    The Secretary of Defense would be required to continue to 
conduct research on the effects on the ocean environment and 
those who use it of military munitions disposed of in coastal 
waters. The scope of research would be required to include 
sampling and analysis of ocean waters and sea beds at or 
adjacent to representative disposal sites to determine whether 
the munitions have caused, or are causing, contamination of 
ocean waters or sea beds; investigation into the long-term 
effects of seawater exposure on disposed military munitions; 
investigation into the impacts on the ocean environment, 
including the public health risks; investigation into the 
feasibility of removing or otherwise remediating the military 
munitions; and the development of effective safety measures. In 
conducting the research, the Secretary of Defense would be 
required to ensure that the sampling, analysis, and 
investigations are conducted at representative sites, taking 
into account depth, water temperature, nature of the military 
munitions, and relative proximity to onshore populations. At 
least two sites in areas off the Atlantic coast, the Pacific 
coast (including Alaska), and the Hawaiian Islands would be 
required among the representative sites.
    If the historical review or the required research indicates 
that contamination is being released at a particular site, or 
that the site poses significant risk to public health or 
safety, the Secretary of Defense would be required to institute 
appropriate monitoring mechanisms at the site, and report to 
the congressional defense committees on any additional steps 
that may be needed to address the release or the risk to public 
health or safety.

Clarification of multi-year authority to use base closure funds to fund 
        cooperative agreements under Environmental Restoration Program 
        (sec. 334)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that cooperative agreements with eligible entities for 
environmental restoration at defense facilities may extend 
beyond 2 years when the agreements are funded out of either the 
Department of Defense Base Closure Account 1990 or the 
Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005. The committee 
notes that under section 2701 of title 10, United States Code, 
cross-fiscal year agreements for environmental restoration are 
limited to 2 years. The committee also notes that, for 
facilities closed or realigned under a round of base closure, 
environmental restoration is funded out of the base closure 
account until the account is exhausted. Funds in a base closure 
account do not expire annually, but continue to be available 
until the base closure account is exhausted. This provision 
would clarify that agreements for environmental restoration 
that are funded from base closure accounts may extend beyond 
the 2-year limitation that would otherwise apply.

Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for certain costs in 
        connection with Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site, Moses 
        Lake, Washington (sec. 335)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
discretionary authority to the Secretary of Defense to transfer 
not more than $111,114.03 to the Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund 
Site, 10-6J special account, formerly the home of Larson Air 
Force Base. This payment would be for reimbursement to the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency for costs incurred in 
overseeing a remedial investigation and feasibility study being 
performed by the Department of Defense at the former Larson Air 
Force Base.

                          Subtitle D--Reports


Comptroller General report on readiness of the ground forces of the 
        Army and the Marine Corps (sec. 351)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) to provide an assessment 
of the readiness of Army and Marine Corps ground forces. The 
GAO assessment would include: (1) An analysis of the current 
readiness status of the active and Reserve component ground 
forces of the Army and the Marine Corps, including a 
description of any major deficiencies identified, an analysis 
of the trends in Army and Marine Corps readiness over the past 
ten years, and a comparison of the current readiness status of 
those forces to these historical readiness patterns; (2) an 
assessment of the ability of the Army and Marine Corps to 
provide trained and ready forces for ongoing operations as well 
as their other worldwide commitments; (3) an analysis of the 
availability of equipment for training by units in the United 
States in configurations comparable to that being used in 
ongoing operations; (4) an analysis of the current and 
projected ``reset'' requirement for repair or replacement of 
equipment due to ongoing operations and the impact of that 
required maintenance on the availability of equipment for 
training; (5) an assessment of the current personnel tempo of 
those forces, including an analysis of particular occupational 
specialties that are experiencing unusually high or low 
deployment rates and the retention rates in those specialties; 
(6) an assessment of each service's efforts to mitigate the 
impact of high operational tempos, including cross-leveling of 
personnel and equipment or cross-training of personnel or 
units; and (7) a description of the current policy being used 
by each service to govern the mobilization of Reserve component 
personnel and an analysis of the number of Reserve component 
personnel in each service that are projected to be available 
for deployment under those policies.
    U.S. forces are engaged at extremely high levels at home 
and abroad. In particular, ongoing operational commitments in 
Iraq and Afghanistan are requiring significant deployments by 
and a high operational tempo of U.S. ground forces. These units 
must fulfill these deployment requirements in addition to other 
demands including the ongoing and impending redeployment of 
forces from overseas locations and the conversion of Army 
brigades to a new modular configuration. In addition to the 
impact on individual service members and their families, the 
committee is concerned about the impact of sustained high 
operational tempo due to ongoing operations on the readiness of 
our forces and their ability to respond to other events or 
threats. On March 15, 2006, the Subcommittee on Readiness and 
Management Support held a hearing on the readiness of our 
ground forces with Army and Marine Corps representatives. This 
hearing identified a number of readiness challenges and the 
steps being taken to address those concerns.
    The committee also notes that the GAO has already 
undertaken an analysis of some of these issues, and expects the 
report required by this provision to build on the work GAO has 
already provided to the committee. While detailed information 
on readiness is classified, the issues being assessed in this 
report are of enormous importance to the Department of Defense 
and the Congress and should be available for open discussion to 
the extent that classification rules allow. Therefore this 
report should be provided in both classified and unclassified 
form. The various elements required by this report may be 
provided separately, as long as all the required elements are 
submitted before March 1, 2007, and the information used to 
satisfy the reporting requirement is current.

                 Subtitle E--Workplace and Depot Issues


Minimum capital investment levels for public depots serviced by working 
        capital funds (sec. 361)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
public depot that utilizes a working capital fund to invest, at 
a minimum, 6 percent of the actual total revenues from the 
previous year for capital investment within that depot, as 
defined by DOD financial regulations (DOD Financial Management 
Regulation 700.14R of June 2004). The Secretary of Defense 
would have authority to grant a waiver to a service if that 
minimum is not met, but then must report to the congressional 
defense committees the reason(s) for missing the goal, and a 
plan to return to the stipulated minimum level.
    Department of Defense working capital funds are designed to 
provide flexibility, accountability, and visibility for 
critical defense customers and process owners. Within public 
depots, these funds are used to meet customer needs, operate 
the depots, and maintain the depot facilities. While the 
working capital fund mechanism may provide a stable work flow 
and funding stream, there have also been adverse consequences 
of under investment in depot infrastructure, equipment, 
information technology, and software.
    While focusing on keeping overhead costs down, working 
capital funds have chronically under funded capital investment. 
The Department has no established baseline or benchmark from 
which to evaluate the level of investment funding in its public 
depots. Further, each military department has stated that 
oversight of capital investment programs tends to reduce the 
level of funding during budget deliberations, not enhance it. 
For example, in 2002, the Air Force recognized that their 
public depots were suffering from chronic under funding of its 
capital budgets. The Air Force responded by establishing a 
Depot Maintenance Strategy and Master Plan. One of the central 
components was the commitment of the Air Force to allocate 
$150.0 million each fiscal year for 6 years, beginning in 
fiscal year 2004, for recapitalization and investment, 
including the procurement of technologically advanced 
facilities and equipment, of the nation's three Air Force 
depots. The key facet of the Air Force strategy was to double 
the amount of investment, raising investment spending to 6 
percent of total revenues--a documented private depot industry 
benchmark.
    Even while attempting to address the problem of chronic 
under funding, the Air Force plan only goes through 2009. 
Further, that plan falls short of the benchmark of 6 percent 
because the Air Force uses low future revenue estimates from 
which to determine their benchmark figure and includes funding 
for basic property maintenance as part of its calculation of 
capital investment--funding that is not defined as capital 
investment.
    The committee expects that this provision will address the 
chronic under funding of capital investment in public depots 
serviced by working capital funds. The committee further 
expects the Air Force to fully fund the projects identified in 
its 6 year capital investment plan.

Permanent exclusion of certain contract expenditures from percentage 
        limitation on the performance of depot-level maintenance (sec. 
        362)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
permanent the exclusion of work performed by non-federal 
personnel at designated Centers of Industrial and Technical 
Excellence from the 50 percent limitation on contracting for 
depot maintenance (10 U.S.C. 2466(a)) outside the Department of 
Defense, pursuant to a public-private partnership. Currently 
the exemption is limited to funds made available in fiscal 
years 2003 through 2009.

Additional exception to prohibition on contractor performance of 
        firefighting functions (sec. 363)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide an 
exception to the prohibition on contracting for the performance 
of firefighting functions on any military installation or 
facility. This exception would only apply to contractor 
performance of firefighting functions to respond to 
nonstructural fires that occur on wildlands, such as ranges and 
forests, located on military installations, and to conduct 
preventative measures such as maintenance of firebreaks, and 
removal of underbrush.
    This provision would reduce or eliminate the reliance on 
members of the armed forces to respond to such fires, and 
permit needed supplementation of the civilian workforce for 
wildland firefighting. Other federal agencies with land 
management responsibilities, such as the U.S. Forest Service 
and the Bureau of Land Management, have the authority provided 
for in this provision.

Temporary security guard services for certain work caused by 
        realignment of military installations under the base closure 
        laws (sec. 364)

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow a 
military department to contract for security-guard services at 
installations being realigned, for a period not to exceed 1 
year, to safely relocate munitions and associated equipment as 
well as high-value items located in temporary storage areas.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters


Recycling of military munitions (sec. 371)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to establish a separate program to 
sell recyclable munitions materials resulting from the 
demilitarization of conventional military munitions in the 
United States and its possessions. This program would be exempt 
from the provisions of title 40, United States Code, relating 
to the disposal of property by executive agencies. The 
recyclable munitions material would include materials such as 
brass, scrap metal, propellants, and explosives. The proceeds 
from sales would be credited to the funds available to the Army 
for reclamation, recycling, and reuse of conventional military 
munitions. This process would be consistent with the Solid 
Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) and its 
implementing regulations. This section would assist the Army in 
addressing the increasing costs associated with its 
conventional munitions demilitarization program.

Incentives clauses in chemical demilitarization contracts (sec. 372)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense authority to include an incentives clause 
in any contract for the destruction of the U.S. stockpile of 
lethal chemical agents and munitions in order to accelerate the 
safe elimination of the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile and to 
reduce the total cost of the chemical demilitarization program 
by affording the contractor an opportunity to share in the life 
cycle cost savings that the U.S. government would realize by 
early completion of destruction operations and facility 
closure. The provision would limit the amount of incentive 
payments at each facility to $110.0 million for completion of 
destruction operations within the specified target incentive 
range, and to $55.0 million for completion of facility closure 
activities within the specified target incentive range. The 
provision would require that this authority be exercised 
consistent with the Secretary's obligation under law to provide 
for maximum protection for the environment, the general public, 
and the personnel who are involved in the destruction of the 
lethal chemical agents and munitions. The authority to include 
an incentives clause in a contract would be subject to the 
availability of appropriations for that purpose.
    The committee notes that this authority is intended to be 
available for all elements of the chemical demilitarization 
program, including the Chemical Stockpile Disposal Project, the 
Alternative Technologies and Approaches Project, and the 
Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative Program.
    The committee notes its deep disappointment in the 
notification from the Secretary dated April 10, 2006, that the 
United States will not be able to meet the Chemical Weapons 
Convention extended destruction deadline of April 29, 2012, for 
the complete destruction of the U.S. chemical weapons 
stockpile. The committee notes the Secretary's commitment in 
the notification that ``The Department will continue working 
diligently to minimize the time to complete destruction without 
sacrificing safety and security. We will also continue 
requesting resources needed to complete destruction as close to 
April 2012 as practicable.'' The committee strongly concurs in 
those sentiments and expects the Department to live up to them. 
The committee is providing the authority in this provision to 
give the Department the authority it has said it needs to 
incentivize the chemical demilitarization contractors to 
expedite their work in a safe manner. The committee urges the 
Department to continue to request the resources and authorities 
needed to redouble the Department's efforts to meet the 
Treaty's deadlines or, failing that, to come as close to them 
as possible. It is imperative that the international community 
understand that the United States is doing everything in its 
power to honor its international commitments and comply with 
this critical Treaty obligation.

Extension of Department of Defense telecommunications benefit program 
        (sec. 373)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
termination date for the Department of Defense 
telecommunications benefit authorized in section 344 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public 
Law 108-136), as amended by the Ronald W. Reagan National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-
375), from September 30, 2006, to 60 days after the date on 
which the Secretary of Defense determines that a contingency 
operation has ended. The provision would authorize the 
Secretary to extend the Department telecommunications benefit 
to members who remain hospitalized as a result of wounds or 
injuries incurred while serving in direct support of a 
contingency operation, or after the benefit would have expired 
as a result of the end of a contingency operation.
    The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on 
implementation of the Department of Defense telecommunications 
benefit 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act. The 
committee is eager to be informed on the total implementation 
of the telecommunications benefit for members serving in 
support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi 
Freedom, including the cost of implementation and donations 
received from public and private entities in support of this 
benefit. In addition, the committee seeks recommendations from 
the Department concerning additional policy, program, or 
legislative changes that are needed to improve the value of the 
telecommunications benefit for members of the armed services 
serving in support of a contingency operation.

Extension of availability of funds for commemoration of success of the 
        Armed Forces in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi 
        Freedom (sec. 374)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 378(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) to extend the authority 
for commemoration of success of the armed forces in Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom through fiscal 
year 2007. The provision would authorize the use in fiscal 
years 2006 and 2007 of up to $20.0 million to cover costs 
associated with the participation of members and units of the 
armed forces in activities associated with the commemoration 
and a day of celebration honoring soldiers, sailors, airmen, 
and marines who have served in Operation Enduring Freedom and 
Operation Iraqi Freedom and have returned to the United States.

                  Budget Items--Other Defense Programs


Chronic pain management research

    The budget request included no funding for expansion of 
research on chronic pain and fatigue management. The committee 
believes that research being conducted under the auspices of 
the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command is 
contributing to better understanding of post-deployment 
conditions characterized by ``chronic, multi-symptom illness.'' 
The committee believes that by focusing on the internal 
mechanisms of the body which experience such symptoms, this 
research will contribute to more effective treatment of post-
deployment related illnesses, including Gulf War Illness and 
fibromyalgia. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in Defense Health Program for research and development 
for chronic pain management.

Defense Health Program unobligated balances and administrative 
        efficiencies

    The budget request included $20.2 billion in the Defense 
Health Program. The committee is concerned that the request 
does not accurately reflect the true costs of the health 
program for fiscal year 2007. The Department of Defense has 
consistently under executed its operation and maintenance 
authorization and appropriation for the Defense Health Program. 
According to the Government Accountability Office, the 
Department returned an annual average of $174.3 million in 
unexpended Defense Health Program account balances to the U. S. 
Treasury for fiscal years 1996 through 2000. The annual average 
amount of unobligated balances grew to $280.6 million for 
fiscal years 2001 through 2005.
    The committee is also concerned that the President's budget 
for fiscal year 2007 does not sufficiently identify costs 
attributable to the expense of administration of the Defense 
Health Program. In contrast to private sector trends in health 
cost containment, the request does not set forth specific 
performance measures related to reducing health care 
administrative and overhead costs. The committee directs that 
in the future, as part of its budget justification submission, 
the Secretary of Defense will provide the costs of 
administration of the Defense Health Program, including 
headquarters support, and provide goals for reducing those 
costs. Management controls also need to be instituted to reduce 
the amount of unobligated balances returned to the U.S. 
Treasury through a more careful assessment of Department health 
care costs.
    In the course of the committee's consideration of 
Department proposals for modification of health care benefits 
in fiscal year 2007, health care experts have identified 
numerous opportunities for achieving administrative 
efficiencies that are consistent with good business practices. 
The Department has acknowledged that such opportunities exist, 
and the committee believes that it should proceed to implement 
them. The committee recommends a decrease of $140.3 million in 
the Defense Health Program.

Medical education and training on Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

    The budget request included $460.1 million in the Defense 
Health Program for education and training. The committee 
believes that additional educational resources are needed to 
increase dissemination of information and teaching of 
Department of Defense health care personnel to identify and 
treat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and related mental 
health conditions. Mental health experts agree that mental 
health concerns most frequently manifest months after 
experiencing combat or deployment related trauma. The committee 
is concerned that as military members are reintegrated into the 
force, failure to identify combat-related mental health 
concerns will undermine the health of the member and readiness 
of the force. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in the Defense Health Program for expanded education 
and training on Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Pregnancy recovery education program for military women and military 
        spouses

    The budget included no funding for a focused pregnancy 
recovery education project for military women and military 
spouses. The committee believes that there is a need for 
additional research and educational resources to assist both 
women on active duty and the female spouses of members on 
active duty in their physical recovery following the birth of a 
child, in order to minimize the risk of untreated illness due 
to the rigors of military duty, including deployment and 
isolation from family members. The committee believes that such 
additional research and education efforts on will be most 
effective if carried out in conjunction with the Uniformed 
Services University of the Health Sciences, and that data 
gathering and testing of educational materials should be 
conducted on at least two large military installations 
experiencing a high level of deployment. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.0 million to the Defense Health 
Program for the pregnancy recovery education program for 
military women and military spouses.

Primary care enhancement for early detection and treatment of Post-
        Traumatic Stress Disorder

    The budget request included no additional funding for an 
initiative to improve post-deployment mental health care for 
military members. The committee believes that a project 
initiated at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina by the Walter Reed Army 
Medical Center Deployment Health Clinical Center, known as 
RESPECT-MIL, is contributing to the development of educational 
materials and care models needed to enhance the capability of 
primary care providers to conduct post-deployment mental health 
evaluations, and to identify and treat Post-Traumatic Stress 
Disorder (PTSD) and related mental health disorders. The 
committee believes that broader testing and evaluation of these 
models involving primary care and mental health care 
specialists is needed, and that ultimately effective primary 
care models for early identification and treatment of PTSD and 
related mental health disorders should be available throughout 
the military health system. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.0 million in Defense Health Program for 
expansion of the RESPECT-MIL model to two additional military 
installations.

Robotic surgery for prostate cancer

    The budget request included $381.1 million in Defense 
Health Program (DHP) for medical equipment replacement and 
modernization, but included no funding for advanced technology 
robotic surgery capability at Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, 
Maryland. Robotic surgical devices use technology to allow the 
surgeon to operate in a minimally invasive manner with great 
precision. The committee believes that capability for 
procedures such as the da Vinci Prostatectomy, which utilizes a 
four-armed robotic device, will improve health outcomes for 
military victims of prostate cancer and also contribute to the 
development of robotic surgical techniques for potential new 
applications, including cardiac surgery. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.5 million in DHP for expansion of 
robotic surgery capability.

                           Budget Items--Army


Battlefield mobility enhancers

    The budget request included no funding for lightweight 
tactical utility vehicles (M-Gators). The committee recommends 
an increase of $6.8 million in Operation and Maintenance, Army, 
for lightweight tactical utility vehicles. The committee 
supports efforts by the Army to improve battlefield mobility 
and resupply.

UH-60 add-on armor

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for UH-60 add-on armor. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OMA to acquire UH-60 
add-on armor for the 82nd Airborne Division.

Rapid Data Management System

    The budget request included no funding for the Rapid Data 
Management System (RDMS). This program would expand a 
capability for collecting and disseminating critical 
information to personnel deployed in the U.S. Southern Command 
(USSOUTHCOM). It provides a web-based common operating picture 
that is used for planning and operations, to include disaster 
and humanitarian relief and stability and reconstruction 
operations. The committee recommends an increase of $2.8 
million in Operation and Maintenance, Army for the Rapid Data 
Management System for the USSOUTHCOM.

Cognitive Air Defense Simulators

    The budget request included no funding for Cognitive Air 
Defense Simulators (CADS). This system would improve home 
station training for soldiers for calling for air defense. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Army, for CADS.

Army corrosion prevention and control

    The budget request included $415.6 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for logistics support activities. The 
committee recommends an increase of $5.2 million in OMA for 
corrosion prevention and control.

Blood bag transport modernization project

    The budget request included no funding for modernizing the 
transport of blood on the battlefield. The committee recommends 
an increase of $17.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, 
Army, for the blood bag transport modernization project.

Quadruple specialty containers

    The budget request included $197.6 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for strategic mobilization. The 
committee notes that the Army deploys quadruple specialty 
containers (QUADCONS) at key power projection platforms for 
early deploying units. This equipment has been particularly 
well used in support of ongoing contingency operations. The 
committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in OMA for 
QUADCONS.

Army Strategic Management System

    The budget request included $6.1 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for the Army Strategic Management 
System (SMS). The SMS provides senior leadership with an Army 
enterprise-wide strategic performance management system that 
ensures Army Transformation Strategy is translated into 
actionable programs and initiatives and communicated throughout 
its component headquarters. The system also provides an 
automated format for assessing performance and managing 
resource allocation for attainment of the Army's strategic 
objectives. Finally, the SMS meets the 2002 DoD Management 
Initiative Decision 901, Performance Outcomes and Tracking 
Performance Results, which required the Army to use the 
Balanced Scorecard methodology in support of the President's 
Performance Management Agenda.
    The committee is encouraged by the Army's use of a 
strategic performance management system and the improvements in 
the technology supporting that system, but is concerned that 
the Army is not fully funding the requirements of the program. 
Therefore, the committee directs that the Army move forward 
with accelerated implementation of the program, and that, of 
the funds available in Operation and Maintenance, Army, $30.0 
million may be made available to accelerate the full 
enterprise-wide implementation of the Army Strategic Management 
System.

Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Management Command Integrated Digital 
        Environment pilot program

    The budget request included $453.4 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for Central Supply Activities. The 
committee notes the utility of electronic business (e-business) 
portals in weapon systems product life cycle management. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OMA to 
allow the Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Management Command 
Integrated Material Management Center to complete the expansion 
of the Army aviation fleet logistics management e-business 
portal. This portal will demonstrate the utility of extending 
product life cycle management from the program office to the 
operational user at Ft. Drum, New York. This will allow the 
integration of acquisition, logistics, and operational 
communities under the Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC) 
concept.
    In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Army to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees by March 31, 2007, on the status of the pilot 
program as well as evaluating the effectiveness of Integrated 
Digital Environments in achieving the goals of the LCMC 
concept.

Military to civilian conversions

    The committee remains concerned that the Department of 
Defense has not provided adequate information on the funding 
requirements and execution data for military to civilian 
conversions. While the committee recognizes that the military 
to civilian conversion program is an important tool to 
alleviate stress on the force by replacing uniformed service 
members in non-military essential positions with federal 
civilian or contractor personnel, it remains concerned that 
budget justification materials do not adequately describe the 
Department's conversion program, and that the Department lacks 
a clear methodology for developing its budget estimates.
    According to an April 29, 2005, analysis by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO), the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense and service budget officials acknowledged that they 
were unable to provide a clear methodology to calculate the 
Department's budget cost estimates for replacing military 
positions with civilians in fiscal year 2006. According to the 
GAO analysis, Department officials also acknowledged that the 
services had not determined the federal civilian employee and 
contractor mix for these conversions. The GAO analysis stated: 
``Without determining this mix, the Department can not be 
certain whether it accurately estimated its need for staffing 
resources and the funds to pay for such resources in its fiscal 
year 2006 budget.''
    The committee concurred with this assessment in the Fiscal 
Year 2006 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2006 (Public Law 109-163). The committee believed that the 
military to civilian conversions should be reviewed and 
validated by the Secretary of Defense to ensure that such 
requirements are formulated in a consistent manner; that there 
is an availability of qualified civilian employees; and that 
the mix of Department civilians and contractors be more clearly 
understood. The Department has yet to respond with adequate 
justification or methodology.
    In the statement of managers to accompanying the Defense 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (H. Rept. 109-359), the 
conferees directed the Department to include comprehensive data 
on the military to civilian conversion program in future budget 
justification materials. The conferees directed that the budget 
materials should include: the number of conversions completed 
in the two fiscal years prior to the budget request year, the 
mix of positions filled by civilian contractors or government 
employees, the number of conversions expected to occur in the 
budget year, the mix of civilian contractors and government 
employees expected to be hired, and a detailed explanation of 
the cost estimates used in developing the budget request. This 
information was not provided in the President's budget request 
for fiscal year 2007 nor was it provided in response to 
subsequent requests for information.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $160.0 
million in Department's Operation and Maintenance (O&M) 
accounts for military to civilian conversions, as follows:
          O&M, Army (OMA)--$50.0 million;
          O&M, Navy (OMN)--$40.0 million;
          O&M, Marine Corps (OMMC)--$10.0 million;
          O&M, Air Force (OMAF)--$50.0 million; and
          O&M, Defense-wide (OMDW)--$10.0 million.

Working capital funds

    The budget request included $2.4 billion in discretionary 
spending for defense working capital funds. These working 
capital funds serve a vital role in providing financial 
transaction flexibility for critical defense customer support 
activities. When working capital funds produce an annual net 
operating result involving a surplus--revenues exceeding 
expenses--consideration should be given to adjusting customer 
rates in future years. Working capital funds that do not 
appropriately return surplus funds to the supported 
departments, commands, and agencies through rate-change 
mechanisms artificially inflate the cost of support and deprive 
the supported units of limited resources. In many cases, the 
global war on terrorism has created increased work flow in and 
out of working capital funds annually over scheduled peacetime 
projections.
    The committee continues to urge the Department of Defense 
to anticipate the full amount of increased workload being 
experienced within the working capital funds and to budget 
accordingly. While some agencies and services have begun to 
take these additional revenue and expenses into account, the 
Army and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) still plan the next 
year revenues at only 75 percent of current operations tempo. 
Consequently, end of year positive operating balances and 
excess cash balances continue to grow for these working capital 
funds.
    Revenues of the DLA have exceeded expenses for the past 3 
years. The DLA had over $539.9 million in excess balances at 
the end of fiscal year 2005. The DLA plans to use these excess 
balances in its non-energy supply accounts to supplement 
planned losses due to higher-than-expected fuel prices in its 
energy supply accounts. However, the committee believes the two 
accounts must be managed separately. Any actual losses due to 
higher-than-expected fuel prices should be managed as they have 
been in the past--either through increased surcharges on 
customers, through supplemental emergency appropriations, or 
accounted for within the overall budget. Allowing one working 
capital fund to subsidize another leads to inefficient 
management decision making, and negates the customer-buyer 
relationship created under a working capital fund. To ensure 
proper management of the funds, the committee recommends a 
decrease of $50.0 million in the DLA working capital fund to 
reduce excess balances within the account.
    The current projections of net operating result for fiscal 
year 2007 for the Army are also based, in part, on artificially 
low revenue estimates. Since 2002, revenues within the Army 
Working Capital Fund have risen by billions of dollars each 
year. However, the current Army plan counterintuitively calls 
for revenues to fall by $2.0 billion from fiscal years 2006 to 
2007. As higher revenues are realized, the Army working capital 
fund will continue to maintain large, positive operating 
balances and excess cash balances. To ensure proper management 
of the funds, the committee recommends a decrease of $50.0 
million in the Army working capital fund to reduce excess 
balances within the account.

Unobligated balances

    The Department of Defense has consistently under executed 
its operation and maintenance (O&M) authorization and 
appropriation since fiscal year 1995 for the active and Reserve 
components. According to the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO), the Department returned an annual average of $976.6 
million in unexpended balances to the U.S. Treasury for fiscal 
years 1996 through 2000. The Department had $750.8 million in 
average yearly unobligated balances for fiscal years 2001 
through 2005. While the trend is improving, the committee 
remains concerned with the Department's inability to properly 
manage the funds for which it is authorized and appropriated.
    The Department reduced the O&M portion in its fiscal year 
2007 funding request and future-years defense program before 
submission to Congress based, in part, on the GAO analysis of 
unobligated balances. The Department did not reduce the fiscal 
year 2007 amounts fully in accord with the analysis, or as 
significantly as in the out years. The committee recommends a 
decrease of $265.6 million in O&M accounts, as follows:
          Operation and Maintenance, Army--$67.6 million;
          Operation and Maintenance, Navy--$67.3 million;
          Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps--$1.6 
        million;
          Operation and Maintenance, Air Force--$75.0 million; 
        and
          Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide--$54.1 
        million.

Information assurance vulnerability alert cell

    The budget request included $957.8 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for service-wide communications 
support. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million 
in OMA to complete the establishment of the logistics program 
manager for the information assurance vulnerability alert cell 
and to provide information security analysis and response 
capabilities to protect systems from attack.

Connect and Join

    The budget request included no funding for the Connect and 
Join project. Connect and Join is a secure Internet web portal 
where families can share information and photographs with a 
service member during deployment. The committee believes that 
Connect and Join would significantly enhance the ability of 
deployed military members to communicate at no cost with family 
members. Connect and Join supports a need identified by the 
National Military Family Association report on the ``Cycles of 
Deployment'', in which military families expressed a need to 
expand communication for deployed members and their families 
throughout deployments. The committee believes that Connect and 
Join would be responsive to that need, and in doing so will 
enhance both soldier and family readiness. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army, for Connect and Join.

                           Budget Items--Navy


Long arm high-intensity arc metal halide handheld searchlight

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for high-intensity handheld 
searchlights. The committee understands that the Navy uses 
high-powered handheld lighting to allow safer nighttime 
operations. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in OMN to acquire high-intensity handheld searchlights.

Man Overboard Identification safety system

    The budget request included no funding to procure Man 
Overboard Identification (MOBI) safety systems. The MOBI system 
provides devices, which are worn by sailors aboard ship, to 
allow rescue forces to respond quickly in the event a sailor 
falls overboard. The committee believes MOBI not only saves 
lives, but also reduces the time spent searching for sailors 
who have fallen overboard. The committee recommends an increase 
of $3.9 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy, for 
installation and maintenance of MOBI systems.

Mark-45 gun system overhauls

    The budget request included $433.9 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy (OMN), for weapons maintenance. The committee 
recommends an increase of $25.0 million in OMN for Mark-45 gun 
system overhauls.

Navy Marine Corps Intranet program management

    The budget request included $1,681.5 million for the Navy 
Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) program. Of these funds, the Navy 
requested $94.0 million for the program management of the 
contract with Electronic Data Systems (EDS). The requested 
amount for fiscal year 2007 is over three times the amount 
requested in fiscal year 2004, and three times the amount 
budgeted for the future years of the contract from 2008 through 
2010. The Navy should better define its program management 
roles, mission, and budget in future budget justification 
materials to the Congress. The committee recommends a decrease 
of $30.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Navy, for the 
NMCI program office--to more closely align the 2007 funding 
level with future years plans.
    The committee notes that the Navy recently had to reprogram 
$74.6 million to settle numerous legal claims between EDS and 
the Federal Government. The committee is concerned that the 
flawed development of the NMCI contract led to this additional, 
unplanned cost. The committee notes that many organizations 
within the Navy and the Office of the Secretary of Defense, 
including the Chief Information Officers of both organizations 
and the Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation, did not 
perform adequate oversight and analysis of the details of the 
contract and its terms. The committee believes that the 
Department of Defense should examine the development of this 
contract to derive lessons learned on structuring, managing, 
and performing adequate oversight for similar information 
technology programs in the future. Additionally, the NMCI 
program should remain on the ``watch list'' of major automated 
information systems which the Department uses to monitor the 
progress of such programs.
    Despite past difficulties, the committee is encouraged by 
the recent negotiations between the Navy and EDS. By exercising 
the 3 year option on the NMCI contract, the Navy expects to 
realize lower costs per sailor and marine for information 
technology services. Long-standing disputes surrounding the 
initial contract, including fees and legacy systems migration, 
are being remedied.
    However, the committee notes that entering the recent 
renewal negotiation, the Navy was not in the best position to 
explore all possible options to acquire needed information 
technology services. The committee has been assured that the 
modified contract will enable the Navy to acquire the 
information technology services it requires and be in a more 
flexible position to adjust how it acquires those services in 
the future--should it be deemed necessary. With nearly $6.0 
billion already spent, and another $3.0 billion expected to be 
expended over the next 3 years, the Congress will continue its 
close oversight of this program to ensure that sailors and 
marines receive world-class information technology services.

Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements

    The budget request included $57.3 billion for civilian 
personnel pay in fiscal year 2007. Based on an analysis of the 
services' end strength data for civilian personnel as of April 
14, 2006, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) projects 
that the Navy/Marine Corps' civilian personnel costs are 
overstated for fiscal year 2007 by $96.8 million. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $96.8 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Navy.

                       Budget Items--Marine Corps


Acclimate high performance undergarments

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for acclimate high 
performance undergarments. The committee notes that the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps continues to support the 
initiative to make improvements in form, fit, and function of 
Marine clothing and accessories. Acclimate high performance 
undergarments allow Marines to adapt to all environments using 
one type of undergarment system. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in OMMC for acclimate high performance 
undergarments.

Cold Weather Layering System

    The budget request included no funding for the Cold Weather 
Layering System (CWLS). The CWLS is part of the Marine Corps' 
Mountain and Cold Weather Clothing and Equipment Program, which 
provides lightweight, durable combat clothing, that allows 
Marines to operate in all kinds of cold weather environments. 
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in 
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps, for the CWLS.

Command Post-Large

    The budget request included no funding for upgrading the 
Marine Corps' Command Post Shelters. The Marine Corps has a 
requirement for Command Post Shelters that require less 
manpower, contain more square footage, and are easier to 
assemble. New shelter technology would eliminate the redundancy 
involved with having multiple types of shelters, which would 
provide enhanced support to current and future Command and 
Control, and Medical Systems. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Marine 
Corps, for Command Post-Large tactical shelters.

Individual Water Purifier System

    The budget request included $2.2 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for the Individual Water 
Purifier System. This system enables Marines to gather water 
from any source and purify it into drinking water that meets 
EPA standards. It is part of the Marine Corps' Individual Load 
Bearing Equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $4.5 
million in OMMC to procure additional Individual Water Purifier 
Systems.

Portable tent lighting

    The budget request included $2.5 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for portable tent lighting. 
The committee notes that Marine Corps portable tent lighting is 
electro-magnetic interference hardened to prevent compromising 
peripheral electronics and computers. Additional funding for 
portable tent lighting has been included on the Commandant of 
the Marine Corps' Unfunded Programs List. The committee 
recommends an increase of $8.4 million in OMMC for portable 
tent lighting.

Ultra-light Camouflage Net System

    The budget request included $26.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for the Ultra-light 
Camouflage Net System (ULCANS). The committee notes that ULCANS 
greatly enhances the ability of combat troops and support units 
to conceal military target signatures of weapons, vehicles, and 
semi-permanent positions in situations where natural cover or 
concealment may be absent or inadequate. The committee 
recommends an increase of $6.0 million in OMMC for ULCANS.

Marine Corps corrosion prevention and control

    The budget request included $10.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for corrosion prevention and 
control. The committee notes that Marine Corps equipment is 
regularly subjected to extreme conditions due to the normal 
operating locations of many Marine forces. The result is a 
significant amount of rust and corrosion that, if unattended, 
can rapidly degrade the operational capability of that 
equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million 
in OMMC for the Marine Corps corrosion prevention and control 
program.

                        Budget Items--Air Force


Joint Modular Ground Targets and Urban Close Air Support site

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF) for ground targets for training 
at the Bell Fourche Range in South Dakota and the Powder River 
Training complex in South Dakota and Wyoming. The committee is 
aware that training at these facilities could enhance training 
opportunities and reduce costs. Joint Modular Ground Targets 
(JMGT) are visual and heated targets used for aircrew training. 
The committee recommends an increase of $0.1 million in OMAF 
for JMGT and shipping containers, for use as part of the Urban 
Close Air Support Site at the Bell Fourche Range and Powder 
River Training complex.

F-16 supply chain management DMSMS program

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for a F-16 Diminishing 
Manufacturing and Material Shortages (DMSMS). The committee 
recommends an increase of $0.9 million in OMAF for a DMSMS 
proactive program to ensure support to the warfighter 
throughout the life cycle of the F-16 weapons system.

Air Force space surveillance system

    The budget request included $31,342.3 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), but included no funding for 
space situational awareness. As part of the Space Surveillance 
Network, the Air Force Space Surveillance System (AFSSS) 
provides observations of objects in near earth and deep space 
in support of U.S. Strategic Command's space situational 
awareness mission. The AFSSS was transferred from the Navy to 
the Air Force in fiscal year 2004, requiring additional Air 
Force funding to operate and maintain the system. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.5 million in OMAF to support the 
AFSSS.

Consequence management

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintencance, Air Force (OMAF), account for command and control 
integration for Joint Task Force Civil Support (JTF-CS) 
consequence management. JTF-CS msut be capable of providing 
rapid, standardized, and integrated command and control 
responses to domestic chemical, biological, radiological, 
nuclear, and high-yield explosive (CBRNE) consequence 
management events.
    The Commander, U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), has 
identified funding shortfalls for the operations and 
maintenance of JTF-CS to conduct effective command and control 
integration in response to consequence management incidents. 
The Commander, USNORTHCOM, has identified consequence 
management as one of the highest priorities for additional 
funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.8 million in 
OMAF to address this funding shortfall and to support the 
enhancement of JTF-CS command and control capabilities to 
respond to consequence management incidents.

Interoperable communications

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for interoperable 
communications. U.S. Northern Command requires the capability 
to effectively communicate with Federal, State, and local 
governments in order to facilitate support to civil authorites, 
share information, and provide situational awareness in 
response to natural or manmade disasters.
    The Commander, U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), 
identified a funding shortfall for the operations and 
maintenance of interoperable communications, and has identified 
interoperable communications as his highest priority for 
additional funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in 
OMAF to address this funding shortfall and to provide the 
interoperable communications capability for USNORTHCOM to 
effectively communicate with federal, state, and local 
authorites.

National capital region operational enhancements

    The budget request included no funding in the Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for command and control 
integration for Joint Force Headquarters National Capital 
Region (JFHQ-NCR).
    The committee notes the Commander, U.S. Northern Command 
(USNORTHCOM), has identified funding shortfalls for JFHQ-NCR to 
effectively integrate and disseminate information during 
natural or manmade disasters and national special security 
events. The Commander, USNORTHCOM, has identified JFHQ-NCR 
operational enhancements as one of the highest priorities for 
additional funding.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in 
OMAF to address this funding shortfall and to provide the 
Commander, USNORTHCOM, the capability to enhance JFHQ-NCR 
situational awareness, as well as their capability to rapidly 
respond to natural or manmade disasters in the national capital 
region.

National Security Space Institute

    The budget request included $19.8 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for space training, education, 
and professional development, of which $12.0 million is for the 
National Security Space Institute (NSSI). The committee 
understands that NSSI is the execution arm of the 
congressionally-mandated Space Professional Development Program 
for the Air Force, and is designed to develop and maintain a 
sufficient cadre of space-qualified personnel to support the 
Air Force mission in space. The committee believes more should 
be done to support this critical training mission. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in OMAF for 
the NSSI to expand the instructor base; accelerate development 
of advanced space courses; develop a distance learning 
laboratory; and enhance NSSI interaction with space educational 
efforts outside the Air Force, to include universities, 
colleges, and primary education.

Tuition assistance

    The budget request included $156.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air Force (OMAF), for the voluntary educational 
assistance program. The committee believes that voluntary 
educational assistance programs contributes to the quality and 
readiness of the armed forces. The committee recommends an 
increase of $8.0 million in OMAF for the voluntary educational 
assistance program for military members.

                       Budget Items--Defense-wide


Gamma Radiation Detection System

    The budget request included no funding for Gamma Radiation 
Detection Systems (GaRDS) at U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) 
facilities. USCENTCOM has a validated force protection 
requirement to inspect foreign workers and non-authorized 
visitors for weapons and explosives, as well as requirements to 
install this technology throughout Central Asia and the Middle 
East. The committee recommends an increase of $9.5 million in 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, for two GaRDS mobile 
units and six GaRDS gantry units for USCENTCOM.

Information assurance scholarship program

    The budget request included $5.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the information assurance 
scholarship program (IASP). The committee recommends an 
increase of $3.0 million in OMDW for this program. As noted 
elsewhere in this report, information and cyber security remain 
a challenge for the Department of Defense. There are currently 
120 students in the IASP, supported in part by previous 
increases to the budget request. Ensuring adequate numbers of 
experts in the areas of information security, assurance, and 
architecture who are educated and recruited through the 
scholarship program remains a priority for the committee.

Meals Ready to Eat war reserve stockpile

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the Meals Ready to Eat 
(MRE) war reserve stockpile. The committee is aware of the 
potentially life-saving role MREs play in responding to any 
crisis, humanitarian or otherwise. The committee recommends an 
increase of $30.0 million in OMDW for increasing the number of 
MREs in the war reserve stockpile to ensure there are enough 
available to meet any crisis. Furthermore, the committee 
directs the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency to provide 
to the congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 
2007, a report containing a description and justification of 
the current inventory objective for the MRE war reserve 
stockpile and any additions or reductions to that inventory 
objective over the past three years, together with an analysis 
of the usage of MREs over that time period.

Increased funding for conservation buffer zones

    The budget request included $20.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), to continue implementation of 
conservation buffer zones under the Department of Defense's 
Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative.
    The committee believes that the Department should continue 
to pursue voluntary agreements with willing third parties under 
section 2684a of title 10, United States Code, to limit the 
development or use of property that would be incompatible with 
the mission of an installation, and preserve habitat that is 
compatible with environmental requirements which may reduce 
current or anticipated environmental restrictions on military 
installations.
    The committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in 
OMDW for the Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative. 
The committee directs that, in allocating the funding provided 
for the Department's Readiness and Environmental Protection 
Initiative, the Department should give priority to projects 
that benefit high-priority training sites, which have the 
greatest potential to reduce or prevent encroachment through 
the implementation of a compatible use buffer zone.

Citizen-Soldier Support Program

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide (OMDW), for the Citizen-Soldier 
Support Program. The Citizen-Soldier Support Program is a 
partnership involving academic and community-based 
organizations, which is developing community-based strategies 
designed to promote support systems for members of the National 
Guard and Reserves. The committee believes that the Citizen-
Soldier Support Program, authorized in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law l09-163), 
has begun to play a vital role in developing a model for 
strengthening local community support to members of the 
National Guard and Reserve component personnel and their 
families. The committee also believes that there is a need for 
further development of strategies to increase access to support 
services for these members, many of whom reside far away from 
military installations, and encourages expansion of the 
Citizen-Soldier Support Program both geographically and 
programmatically. For example, the program could focus new 
efforts on providing assistance to eligible family members in 
obtaining health care benefits under TRICARE, in addition to 
other needed community support services. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in OMDW, for the 
Citizen-Soldier Support Program.

Institute for national security information analysis

    The requirement for employees trained in national security 
analysis is growing across the Federal Government. Traditional 
liberal arts colleges and universities at the undergraduate 
level often do not provide training in national security 
analysis. This unique skill set requires a multidisciplinary 
approach with emphasis on foreign language training, regional 
studies, as well as rational decision theory, counterfactual 
reasoning, information technologies, information assurance, and 
statistical analysis. The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review 
Report describes a need to develop a new breed of warriors. 
Accordingly, our national security analysts require a new blend 
of skills.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, to further develop 
such an institute or program in national security analysis at a 
civilian undergraduate institution.

                       Budget Items--Army Reserve


Army Reserve budget justification materials

    The budget request included $2,134.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR), a $325.8 million increase 
over the fiscal year 2006 appropriated amount. The committee 
notes the outstanding contributions of the Reserves in the 
ongoing global war on terrorism. The committee expects that 
contribution will continue as the United States remains engaged 
in this long war. However, the committee is concerned by the 
lack of detail provided in the Army Reserve operation and 
maintenance budget justification materials. The budget 
justification books differed from briefing materials provided 
to the committee. Those discrepancies were not adequately 
clarified, and the committee found the budget materials for 
this account insufficient to justify the requested increase. 
The committee recommends a decrease of $125.8 million in OMAR.

Military technicians pay in excess of requirements

    Based on analysis of the services' actual mobilization data 
as of April 14, 2006, the General Accountability Office 
projects that the Department of Defense could realize $28.9 
million in cost avoidance per month for mobilized technicians 
(MilTechs), for a total savings in fiscal year 2007 of $347.0 
million. Normally, compensation costs plus benefits for 
MilTechs in their capacity as civilian employees are included 
in Operation and Maintenance Appropriation accounts. When 
MilTechs are mobilized, their compensation is covered by the 
Military Personnel Appropriation account. Assuming that the 
services experience the same level of participation of the 
Reserves in the ongoing global war on terrorism in fiscal year 
2007, the Department will not require the amounts included in 
its budget request for MilTechs. The committee recommends a 
decrease in Operation and Maintenance accounts by $173.5 
million, as follows:
          Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve--$33.7 
        million;
          Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve--$100.7 
        million;
          Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard--$15.6 
        million; and
          Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard--$23.5 
        million.

                    Budget Items--Air Force Reserve


Air Force Reserve training, test and ferry flying hours

    The budget request included $197.9 million for Air Force 
Reserve training, test, and ferry (TTF) flying hours. The TTF 
is the funding process for the Air Force Reserve to reimburse 
for strategic airlift associate aircrew readiness training. The 
TTF currently funds C-5 and C-17 aircrew flying hours for Air 
Force Reserve and Air Mobility Command (AMC) flight crews to 
maintain or upgrade readiness and flying proficiency.
    Budgeting for the TTF is based on hourly rate structures 
developed by the U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) as a 
subset of the Transportation Working Capital Fund (TWCF). 
Current Department of Defense policy requires TTF rates to 
recover 100 percent of the costs of the TWCF, including 
recouping direct and indirect costs--support, depreciation, and 
amortization--incurred by AMC in providing airlift services and 
operating the global air transportation system. The USTRANSCOM 
budget requests, and the TTF rates, attempt to maintain or 
recover TWCF operating balances.
    While sound in theory, in practice, encumbering readiness 
training flying with the full costs of maintaining the 
Department's global mobility air transportation system results 
in substantial added expense. Current TTF flying hour rates are 
nearly double the costs per flying hour for Air Force Reserve 
units that have aircraft assigned. Additionally, the TTF 
account has grown 100 percent over the last 2 years, while 
another subset account that is designed to also maintain or 
recover TWCF operating balances, the Airlift Readiness Account 
(ARA), has not been utilized. Until the ARA is funded to help 
defray TWCF operating expenses, the Air Force Reserve should 
not be charged the full burdened rates of the TTF. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $48.0 million in the TTF.

                   Budget Items--Army National Guard


Battlefield mobility enhancers

    The budget request included no funding for lightweight 
tactical vehicles. The committee recommends an increase of 
$11.5 million in Operation and Maintenance, Army National 
Guard, for lightweight tactical utility vehicles. The committee 
supports efforts by the Army to improve battlefield mobility 
and resupply.

Operator driving simulator

    The budget request included no funding for operator driving 
simulators for the Army National Guard. The committee notes 
that a number of casualties have occurred in Iraq and 
Afghanistan as a result of vehicle accidents, including single 
vehicle accidents. Ensuring vehicle operators have quality 
training is vital to the readiness of the armed forces as well 
as their safety. These driving simulators would ensure that 
training time for soldiers is maximized, even with limited 
vehicle assets. The fielding plan includes 79 simulator units 
at 27 sites, including Army National Guard sites at 9 states. 
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in 
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard, for operator 
driving simulators.

Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams sustainment training 
        and evaluation program

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG), for the development 
and implementation of a comprehensive sustainment training 
program to address the perishable and critical skills of the 55 
congressionally-authorized Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil 
Support Teams (WMD-CST).
    The committee notes that each WMD-CST must achieve the 
certification required by law in accordance with Department of 
Defense criteria prior to their deployment. The committee 
further notes that the National Guard must be properly 
resourced to develop, implement, and execute a comprehensive 
sustainment training program that will ensure WMD-CST maintain 
the highest level of proficiency in their critical and 
technical skills.
    To ensure the WMD-CST are effectively and comprehensively 
trained and exercised, the committee recommends an increase of 
$8.5 million in OMARNG for the development of a sustainment 
training and exercise program for the WMD-CST. The committee is 
aware that a number of federal entities possess the capability 
and expertise in scenario-based training that could assist in 
the development of a comprehensive sustainment training 
program, and encourages the National Guard to utilize those 
existing federal facilities when implementing this initiative.

Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams upgrades

    The budget request included no funding to upgrade the 
original 32 Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams 
(WMD-CST) to the same level of technology as the 23 teams 
fielded during fiscal years 2004 and 2005. Because the current 
acquisition process has not kept pace with most rapid 
technological developments, most of the purchased equipment 
used by the WMD-CST are commercial, off-the-shelf. The 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Army National Guard, for WMD-CST equipment 
upgrades.

                    Budget Items--Air National Guard


Warrior skills and convoy trainer

    The budget request included no funding in Operation and 
Maintenance, Air National Guard (OMANG) for warrior skills and 
convoy trainers for the Air National Guard. There are 4 Air 
National Guard regional training centers, and 3 do not have 
this equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $6.2 
million in OMANG for warrior skills and convoy trainers.

                    Budget Items--Transfer Accounts


Funding for Formerly Used Defense Sites

    The budget request included $242.8 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for environmental restoration 
of Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS). The committee notes that 
the budgeted amount is below the level authorized for this 
program in fiscal year 2006. The committee notes that it is 
Department of Defense's goal to achieve a remedy in place or 
response complete at all FUDS sites by 2020 under the 
Installation Restoration Program for hazardous substances, 
pollutants, or contaminants. It is also the Department's goal 
to complete preliminary assessments at all FUDS sites by 2007, 
and complete site inspections at all FUDS sites by 2010, under 
the Military Munitions Response Program for clean up of 
unexploded ordnance.
    The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million in 
OMDW to expedite the clean up of FUDS and to move more 
aggressively to achieve the Department's goals. The committee 
expects the Department to demonstrate its commitment to these 
goals, and improve on them where it is possible to do so, by 
steadily increasing the amount of funding budgeted for this 
effort.

Increased funding for clean up of unexploded ordnance at BRAC sites

    The budget request included $413.8 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-wide (OMDW), for the Defense Environmental 
Restoration Fund, Army. The committee notes that according to 
the Defense Environmental Programs Fiscal Year 2005 Annual 
Report to Congress, the estimated cost to complete the clean up 
of unexploded ordnance under the Military Munitions Response 
Program at defense installations closed in the 1988, 1991, 
1993, and 1995 rounds of base closure and realignment (BRAC) is 
$699.2 million. Funding for environmental remediation at BRAC 
sites is provided from the applicable Department of Defense 
base closure account until the closure of that account, and 
afterwards from the applicable environmental restoration 
account. The committee expects the Department to fund 
environmental restoration accounts at levels that are 
consistent with the Department's goal to achieve clean up of 
unexploded ordnance at BRAC sites closed prior to 2005 by 
fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million in OMDW to expedite unexploded ordnance clean up at 
sites closed or realigned under BRAC rounds prior to 2005.

                       Items of Special Interest


40 mm day/night training cartridge

    The committee supports the Marine Corps, Army, Air Force, 
and Special Operations Command interests in acquiring non-
developmental solutions to provide safe, ``dud free'' training 
ammunition to the operating forces in support of the 40 mm MK-
19 heavy machine gun. The committee understands that these non-
developmental ``green ammunition'' solutions were initially 
requested and fielded by the Marine Corps. The new 40 mm day/
night training cartridges have been providing the Marine Corps 
with the ability to conduct safe, yet realistic day and night 
fire and maneuver training, which could not be conducted with 
the older pyrotechnic MK19 training cartridge. The committee 
also understands that the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine 
Command notified the Army of problems related to MK19 training 
and requested that the Army rapidly replace its old pyrotechnic 
training cartridge with the fielded solution used by the Marine 
Corps.
    The committee recognizes that in addition to the reduced 
unit costs for acquisition of this new training cartridge, the 
Department of Defense will enjoy significant financial savings 
in operation and maintenance accounts related to (1) reduced 
frequency of fire fighting operations, (2) reduced frequency of 
UXO render safe operations, (3) reduced costs for range 
clearance and safety, and (4) reduced fuel and transport 
expenses for transporting Reserve personnel to Department 
training ranges.
    Besides the obvious cost savings, the committee notes that 
non-developmental training ammunition provides all Department 
personnel with improved training opportunities where dry 
conditions on Department training ranges frequently preclude 
commanders from training with pyrotechnic devices. Further, the 
committee notes that the reduced frequency of range fires will 
directly reduce the environmental damage that results from 
range fires and UXO contamination.
    The committee commends the Marine Corps on their leadership 
in applying non-developmental technology to improve the quality 
of training, while reducing training costs, and encourages all 
Department elements to budget and quickly transition to the new 
40 mm day/night training ammunition to provide realistic fire 
and maneuver training and improved utilization of Department 
training ranges.

Comptroller General study of the Defense Transportation Coordination 
        Initiative

    The U.S. Transportation Command initiated the Defense 
Transportation Coordination Initiative (DTCI) to change how the 
Department of Defense handles its transportation management 
services for freight shipping within the continental United 
States. The DTCI intends to incorporate industry best practices 
to decrease costs and improve operational effectiveness, while 
increasing visibility of overall traffic movement patterns and 
performance across the Department's supply chain. The committee 
supports efforts by the Department to improve the efficiency 
and effectiveness of its material shipments. However, the 
committee is concerned that current implementation efforts of 
DTCI may undermine the intended objectives of DTCI or weaken 
the additional goal of supporting small businesses throughout 
the nation.
    The committee directs the Comptroller General to conduct a 
study of the DTCI and to submit a report not later than 
February 1, 2007, to the congressional defense committees. The 
report shall: (1) assess the business case analysis underlying 
the DTCI, including the assumptions regarding cost savings; (2) 
identify lessons learned from the 3 year pilot study on 
improving the Department's transportation management services 
in the southeast United States; and (3) examine whether those 
identified lessons are being fully incorporated into the DTCI.

Defense Information System Network Access Transport Services

    The committee notes that the Defense Information Systems 
Agency (DISA) is in the process of acquiring additional network 
access to connect remote Department of Defense locations to 
terrestrial networks that are part of a component of the Global 
Information Grid (GIG), known as the GIG Bandwidth Expansion 
(GIG-BE). This connectivity, called the Defense Information 
System Network Access Transport Services (DATS), will provide 
the Department with a high speed fiber optic network that will 
greatly enhance network-centric operations.
    The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is currently 
reviewing the analyses and underlying assumptions used by DISA 
in developing its DATS acquisition strategy. Preliminary 
analyses that the CBO has shared with the committee indicates 
that there may be a cost benefit to the Department in using a 
combination of purchases and leases of fiber optic connectivity 
to the remote sites, rather than the current approach of 
leasing all of the connections.
    The committee also notes that the Department's estimates of 
the growth in required bandwidth for defense missions have 
changed over time. Estimates for the annual growth of bandwidth 
requirements by the Department have changed from 100 percent 
down to 35 percent. The level of growth in bandwidth 
requirement will strongly influence the DATS acquisition 
strategy. The committee directs the Department's Chief 
Information Officer to ensure that an accurate assessment of 
future bandwidth requirements growth, and the final results of 
the CBO review, be utilized to pursue future network access 
acquisitions.

Defense Readiness Reporting System

    As the challenges to our country have grown, so too has the 
need for a readiness reporting system that more accurately 
assesses and reports the capabilities of the Department of 
Defense to respond to the increased ranges of threats to the 
safety of our nation. The committee supports the goals of the 
Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS) as the single, 
capability-based readiness reporting system for the Department.
    The committee is concerned that multiple, redundant 
readiness systems are both wasteful and undermine the 
Department's ability to ensure timely and accurate information. 
Furthermore, the committee believes it is inexcusable to allow 
the expenditure of funds on other readiness reporting systems 
that do not meet the requirements of a capability-based system 
in light of the many demands on the resources of the 
Department.
    The existing reports submitted to Congress pursuant to 
section 482 of title 10, United States Code, are not providing 
information to the Congress in a timely manner, and the 
committee expects the DRRS to enhance both the ability of 
Department managers to manage readiness issues and 
congressional oversight. The committee supports the full and 
rapid implementation of the DRRS, and believes that no funds 
should be expended on any other readiness reporting system in 
the Department other than as necessary to support the 
implementation of DRRS.

Defense Travel System

    Over the last 10 years, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) and the Department of Defense Inspector General's 
office have documented serious problems with existing Defense 
travel systems. The Department responded to these concerns by 
working to develop a new travel system, known as the Defense 
Travel System (DTS), which would process all Defense travel 
requests.
    The committee is aware that DTS has experienced serious 
problems. More than seven years after the initial DTS contract 
was awarded, the system still is not fully functional.
    Nonetheless, the committee continues to support investment 
in the travel reengineering effort. In this regard, the 
committee is encouraged by the fundamental restructuring of the 
DTS contract, which took place in 2004. The Department has 
indicated that this restructuring should address many of the 
problems identified by GAO and the Department Inspector 
General.
    Moreover, the committee remains convinced that the 
Department's travel problems must be addressed on a 
comprehensive basis. As a GAO witness explained at a hearing 
before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee 
last year:

          One of DOD's long-standing problems has been the lack 
        of integrated systems. To address this issue and 
        minimize the manual entry of data, interfaces between 
        existing systems must be developed to provide the 
        exchange of data that is critical for day-to-day 
        operations. For example, DTS needs to know before 
        permitting the authorization of travel that sufficient 
        funds are available to pay for the travel--information 
        that comes from a non-DTS system--and once the travel 
        has been authorized, another system needs to know this 
        information so that it can record an obligation and 
        provide management and other systems with information 
        on the funds that remain available.

At the present time, DTS remains the only integrated approach 
to these issues available to the Department.
    However, DTS will not be able to maximize savings unless it 
is utilized on a more extensive basis throughout the 
Department. It is not helpful for the Department to develop a 
comprehensive and money-saving solution to its travel problems 
if this system is not used by Defense officials at sites where 
it has been deployed.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Department to 
provide a semi-annual report on DTS to the congressional 
defense committees for the next 2 years, beginning in 2007. 
Each report should address: (1) the number of defense 
installations at which DTS has been deployed; (2) the extent of 
usage of DTS at such sites; (3) steps taken or to be taken by 
the Department to increase such usage; (4) the savings 
resulting from such deployment and usage; and (5) any 
continuing problems in the implementation and usage of DTS.

Department of Defense foreign language training

    The budget request included $8.3 million for the Defense 
Language Institute in Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA), 
specifically for satellite communications language training 
activities (SCOLA).
    SCOLA is a unique and innovative satellite-based language 
training activity that provides television programming in a 
variety of languages from around the world. SCOLA also has an 
Internet-based streaming video capability that greatly 
increases the availability of this training medium to military 
and civilian linguists, virtually anywhere they can obtain an 
Internet connection. In addition, SCOLA is developing a digital 
archive that will allow users anywhere to review and sort 
language training on demand.
    The committee commends the Department of Defense for 
increasing investment in language technology. SCOLA can help 
sustain and improve foreign language skills and cultural 
understanding of military and civilian linguists in the 
Department. Accordingly, the committee expects that funding 
provided for SCOLA related training activities be used for the 
intended purpose.

Marine Aviation Training Transformation savings

    The committee understands that the Marine Corps' Deputy 
Commandant for Aviation issued the Marine Aviation Training 
Transformation Policy Letter (dated April 4, 2005), which 
directs the reorganization of Marine aviation training into a 
comprehensive and fully integrated system that more effectively 
links training to readiness requirements and to the Marine 
Corps' Flying Hour Program, while increasing the efficient use 
of aircraft resources. To encourage maximum savings from this 
transformation process, the committee directs the Department of 
the Navy to allow Marine aviation to reinvest funds from 
Aircraft Acquisition Programs, Flight Hour Programs, and Flight 
Hour Other, made available through implementation of Marine 
Aviation Training Transformation, into Marine aviation training 
and readiness.

Performance of certain work by Federal Government employees

    Section 343 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) required the Secretary of 
Defense to prescribe guidelines and procedures for ensuring 
that consideration is given to Federal Government employees for 
certain work that is currently performed or would otherwise be 
performed under Department of Defense contracts. These 
guidelines and procedures apply only to work that: (1) has been 
performed by Federal Government employees at any time since, 
October 1, 1980; (2) is associated with inherently governmental 
functions; (3) was not awarded on a competitive basis; or (4) 
was determined by a contracting officer to have performed 
poorly. Section 343 does not specify a deadline for the 
issuance of such guidelines and procedures. The committee 
directs the Secretary to issue the required guidelines and 
procedures not later than January 6, 2007, which is 1 year 
after the date of enactment of section 343.

Radio frequency identification report

    The committee is aware that under the Department of 
Defense's July 30, 2004, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) 
Policy, all ``consolidated shipments moving to, from, or 
between overseas locations are tagged'' and are made a part of 
the In-Transit Visibility Network, which tracks all material 
from point to point. This policy should substantially increase 
the Department's visibility of overseas shipments of supplies, 
resulting in cost savings.
    The committee understands that the Department's policy 
currently mandates use of active data-rich RFID for overseas 
shipments. The use of this tracking method within the United 
States has not been fully implemented. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to review the potential costs and 
benefits of mandating the use of active data-rich RFID to track 
supplies and shipments within the United States, and to submit 
a report on the findings of that review to the congressional 
defense committees not later than February 1, 2007.

Training Range Vegetation Encroachment

    The committee is concerned that significant amounts of Army 
training range acreage may have become unusable because of 
uncontrolled vegetation, such as excessive weed and tree growth 
as well as invasive species. Maintaining usable training ranges 
is vitally important for ensuring our armed forces remain fully 
prepared to execute whatever missions are required of them. 
Ensuring all of our range facilities are usable is even more 
important given the movement of forces as a result of the 
Global Posture Review. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to conduct a statistically significant 
survey of Army training ranges and provide a report no later 
than 1 February 2007, to the congressional defense committees 
detailing the extent of loss of training range acreage to 
vegetation and the types of vegetation involved at each 
training range site.
              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

End strengths for Active Forces (sec. 401)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
active duty end strengths for fiscal year 2007, as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Fiscal Year
                             -------------------------------------------
                                   2006          2007          2007
                              authorization    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................       512,400       482,400        512,400
Navy........................       352,700       340,700        340,700
Marine Corps................       179,000       175,000        180,000
Air Force...................       357,400       334,200        334,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-163) authorized active duty end strength for 
the Army at 512,400 and 179,000 for the Marine Corps. 
Additional authority was also provided in section 403 of that 
Act to increase active duty end strength for the Army by up to 
20,000 and increase Marine Corps active duty end strength by up 
to 5,000 above the fiscal year 2006 authorized levels of 
512,400 and 179,000, respectively, during fiscal years 2007 
through 2009.
    The Army and the Marine Corps continue substantial 
deployment of forces in support of operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, although the growing number of trained Iraqi and 
Afghan military and security forces may allow reduction of U.S. 
commitments in the future. The Army continues major 
organizational change by creating modular units of deployment 
at the combat brigade level, shifting soldiers between the 
institutional Army and the operational Army, and rebalancing 
critical skills and units between the active and Reserve 
component forces.
    The Marine Corps continues to shift manpower to meet the 
requirement for high demand skills in deploying units and is 
establishing a Marine Corps component command within U.S. 
Special Operations Command. The Commandant of the Marine Corps 
has testified before the Committee on Armed Services that he 
believes that the Marine Corps will continue to require an 
active duty end strength of about 180,000.
    The committee believes that given the challenges the Army 
faces in continuing to meet the requirement for deploying 
forces in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and 
its ongoing internal restructuring efforts, the authorized 
active duty end strength for the Army should remain at 512,400, 
while retaining the discretionary authority to increase that 
level by up to 20,000 through 2009. The committee also believes 
that the active duty Marine Corps end strength should be 
increased to 180,000, while retaining the discretionary 
authority to increase that level up to 184,000 through 2009.
    The Navy and the Air Force continue large manpower 
reductions achieved through major changes in organizational 
structure, including deleting redundancies, retiring manpower-
intensive platforms, incorporating new technology, and shifting 
non-core military functions from military personnel to 
civilians. These efforts are extremely challenging and will be 
monitored closely.
    The committee recommends an active duty end strength for 
the Army of 512,400 and 180,000 for the Marine Corps for fiscal 
year 2007. The Army level is 30,000 above the requested level 
for fiscal year 2007 and equal to the level authorized in 
fiscal year 2006. The recommended level for the Marine Corps is 
an increase of 5,000 from the requested level and an increase 
of 1,000 from the authorized level in fiscal year 2006. The 
committee has recommended funding for these higher end strength 
levels within the regular budget, rather than through 
supplemental appropriations. The recommended active duty end 
strength for the Navy is decreased by 12,000 and the 
recommended active duty end strength for the Air Force is 
decreased by 23,200, as requested.
Repeal of requirement for permanent end strength levels to support two 
        major regional contingencies (sec. 402)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 691 of title 10, United States Code, that establishes 
permanent end strength levels necessary to support a national 
defense strategy calling for the United States to be able to 
successfully conduct two nearly simultaneous major regional 
contingencies.
    The committee notes that the national defense strategy has 
evolved over time since 1996 when section 691 was enacted and 
is no longer based on a response to two nearly simultaneous 
major regional contingencies. The committee also believes that 
section 691 has not been effective as a management tool for 
sustaining the size of the armed forces. During time of war or 
national emergency, the President is authorized under section 
123a of title 10, United States Code, to waive any statutory 
end strength with respect to that fiscal year. Section 115 of 
title 10, United States Code, provides further management 
flexibility by authorizing the Secretary of Defense to vary end 
strength of the active duty forces by 3 percent, and Selected 
Reserve forces by 2 percent. Section 115 also authorizes 
service secretaries to vary the end strength of active duty 
forces by 2 percent.
    Section 691 has not precluded, and should not preclude, the 
President from proposing in the annual budget end strength 
levels that vary from those set in section 691 as the armed 
forces modernize, reorganize, shift manpower from military 
personnel to civilian employees, and rebalance skills between 
the active duty and Reserve component forces. The committee 
believes that the requested personnel force levels made as part 
of the annual budget submission provide a more accurate and 
timely measure upon which to judge the proper size of the armed 
forces and the sufficiency of funding to sustain them. Should 
the annually requested personnel levels fall short of what 
Congress believes provides for the proper size of the armed 
forces, Congress has the constitutional authority to act to 
increase the force levels and provide funding for them. Section 
691 does not add to this constitutional authority and does not 
provide a more meaningful or effective means of managing 
personnel force levels.

                      Subtitle B--Reserve Forces 

End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2007, as shown 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Fiscal Year
                             -------------------------------------------
                                   2006          2007          2007
                              authorization    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of         350,000       350,000        350,000
 the United States..........
The Army Reserve............       205,000       200,000        200,000
The Navy Reserve............        73,100        71,300         71,300
The Marine Corps Reserve....        39,600        39,600         39,600
The Air National Guard of          106,800       107,000        107,000
 the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve.......        74,000        74,900         74,900
The Coast Guard Reserve.....        10,000        10,000         10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The budget request included $5.3 billion in National Guard 
Personnel, Army, to support an end strength of 332,900 for 
fiscal year 2007. The committee recommends an increase of 
$164.0 million in the National Guard Personnel, Army, 
appropriation to support the requested end strength of 350,000 
for the Army National Guard. The committee directs that the 
increase in authorized appropriations for Army National Guard 
end strength be executed only for Army National Guard 
personnel. Should Army National Guard end strength fall below 
the authorized number, the unused additional funds may only be 
used to procure Army National Guard equipment, and only after 
the Department of Defense complies with the normal budget 
process that includes submitting prior notification and a 
detailed justification to Congress.
End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the Reserves 
        (sec. 412) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2007, as shown 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Fiscal Year
                             -------------------------------------------
                                   2006          2007          2007
                              authorization    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of          27,396        27,441         27,441
 the United States..........
The Army Reserve............        15,270        15,416         15,416
The Navy Reserve............        13,392        12,564         12,564
The Marine Corps Reserve....         2,261         2,261          2,261
The Air National Guard of           13,123        13,206         13,206
 the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve.......         2,290         2,707          2,707
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The committee recommends increases of 45 in the Army 
National Guard, 146 in the Army Reserve, 83 in the Air National 
Guard, and 417 in the Air Force Reserve. The committee supports 
increases in full-time support manning consistent with 
requested levels to increase readiness in the Reserve 
components.
    The committee also recommends a decrease of 828 in the Navy 
Reserve consistent with reductions in both active Navy and Navy 
Reserve end strength. The committee recommends an end strength 
for the Marine Corps Reserve equal to the fiscal year 2006 
level, consistent with the budget request.
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
end strengths for military technicians (dual status) for fiscal 
year 2007, as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Fiscal Year
                             -------------------------------------------
                                   2006          2007          2007
                              authorization    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of          25,563        26,050         26,050
 the United States..........
The Army Reserve............         7,649         7,912          7,912
The Air National Guard of           22,971        23,255         23,255
 the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve.......         9,852        10,124         10,124
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fiscal year 2007 limitation on number of non-dual status technicians 
        (sec. 414) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
numerical limits on the number of non-dual status technicians 
who may be employed in the Department of Defense as of 
September 30, 2007, as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Fiscal Year
                             -------------------------------------------
                                   2006          2007          2007
                              authorization    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of           1,600         1,600          1,600
 the United States..........
The Army Reserve............           695           595            595
The Air National Guard of              350           350            350
 the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve.......            90            90             90
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maximum number of Reserve personnel authorized to be on active duty for 
        operational support (sec. 415)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
limits on the number of Reserve personnel authorized to be on 
active duty for operational support under section 115(b) of 
title 10, United States Code, as of September 30, 2007, as 
shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Fiscal Year
                             -------------------------------------------
                                   2006          2007          2007
                              authorization    request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of          17,000        17,000         17,000
 the United States..........
The Army Reserve............        13,000        13,000         13,000
The Navy Reserve............         6,200         6,200          6,200
The Marine Corps Reserve....         3,000         3,000          3,000
The Air National Guard of           16,000        16,000         16,000
 the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve.......        14,000        14,000         14,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Subtitle C--Authorizations of Appropriations

Military personnel (sec. 421)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
total of $112.0 billion for military personnel for fiscal year 
2007, an increase of $1.3 billion above the budget request. 
This includes: (1) $1.7 billion for active-duty Army end 
strength; (2) $265.0 million for active-duty Marine Corps end 
strength; and (3) $164.0 million for Army National Guard end 
strength.
Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 422)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$54.8 million to be appropriated for fiscal year 2007 from the 
Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund for the operation and 
maintenance of the Armed Forces Retirement Home.

                              Budget Items

Unobligated balances
    The Department of Defense has consistently under executed 
its military personnel funding authorization and appropriation 
since fiscal year 1995 for the active and Reserve components. 
According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), from 
fiscal years 2000 through 2004, the lowest annual unobligated 
balance was $248.1 million and the highest was $2,049.2 
million.
    The Department reduced the fiscal year 2007 military 
personnel funding request by $318.6 million based, in part, on 
the GAO analysis of unobligated balances. The Department 
stated, ``While it is recognized that some low level of 
unexpended balances are likely to occur to avoid Anti-
Deficiency Act (ADA) violations, the continued loss of limited 
Departmental resources each year due to excessive balances is 
unacceptable.'' However, the Department did not reduce the 
fiscal year 2007 amounts fully in accord with GAO's analysis, 
or as significantly as they should have. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $752.2 million in the services' 
accounts, as follows:
          Military Personnel, Army--$31.4 million;
          Military Personnel, Navy--$85.0 million;
          Military Personnel, Marine Corps--$88.1 million;
          Military Personnel, Air Force--$248.3 million;
          Military Personnel, Army Reserve--$66.5 million;
          Military Personnel, Navy Reserve--$17.3 million;
          Military Personnel, Marine Corps Reserve--$15.4 
        million;
          Military Personnel, Air Force Reserve--$25.8 million;
          Military Personnel, Army National Guard--$84.5 
        million; and
          Military Personnel, Air National Guard--$89.9 
        million.
Reserves cost avoidance
    Based on analysis of the services' current and planned 
mobilization of the Reserve components during fiscal year 2006 
and fiscal year 2007, the General Accounting Office (GAO) 
projects that the services will sustain military personnel 
strength levels lower than that planned in the Department of 
Defense's budget request due to their activation for the 
ongoing global war on terrorism. The GAO estimates cost 
avoidance of $71.1 million for fiscal year 2007. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $71.1 million in the Reserve component 
military personnel accounts according to GAO's estimates by 
component, as follows:
          Army Reserve--$34.9 million;
          Air Force Reserve--$3.3 million; and
          Air National Guard--$31.9 million.
                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy

               Part I--Officer Personnel Policy Generally

Military status of officers serving in certain intelligence community 
        positions (sec. 501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
status of flag and general officers assigned to certain 
positions in the Office of the Director of National 
Intelligence (ODNI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 
to protect the officers and organizations concerned from 
perceptions of organizational conflicts of interest or 
inappropriate influence.
    Officers serving in these positions shall not be subject to 
the supervision or control of the Secretary of Defense or 
exercise any supervision or control of military or civilian 
personnel in the Department of Defense, except as authorized by 
Law. While serving in these positions and remaining on active 
duty, the officers shall continue to receive military pay and 
allowances, but shall not receive pay prescribed for the 
position. In addition, the provision directs that ODNI and CIA 
shall reimburse the Department for the military pay and 
allowances of the officers serving in these positions.
    This provision is consistent with provisions formerly in 
place for certain officers assigned to the Office of the 
Director of Central Intelligence before they were repealed by 
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of 
2004 (Public Law 108-458). This provision is also consistent 
with provisions in IRTPA for flag and general officers assigned 
as the Director of National Intelligence or as the Principal 
Deputy Director of National Intelligence.
Extension of temporary reduction of time-in-grade requirement for 
        eligibility for promotion for certain active-duty list officers 
        in grades of first lieutenant and lieutenant (junior grade) 
        (sec. 502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 619(a) of title 10, United States Code, to extend the 
authority from October 1, 2005, through October 1, 2008, to 
promote officers in the grade of first lieutenant or lieutenant 
(junior grade) who satisfy a time-in-grade requirement of 18 
months.
Extension of age limits for active-duty general and flag officers (sec. 
        503)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1251 of title 10, United States Code, to increase the 
age for mandatory retirement for general and flag officers from 
62 to 64. The provision would authorize the Secretary of 
Defense to defer retirement of officers serving in grades above 
major general and rear admiral to age 66 and the President to 
defer retirement for such officers until age 68. The provision 
would also eliminate the numerical limit on the number of 
deferments of retirement that may be in effect at any one time. 
The committee believes that it is not unusual for highly 
qualified and experienced commissioned officers, and 
particularly the most senior general and flag officers, to 
exceed current age limits as a result of changes in the officer 
corps and military career patterns and that reducing the 
requirement for deferments by the Secretary and the President 
is warranted.
Modification of authorities on senior members of the Judge Advocate 
        General's Corps (sec. 504)
    The committee recommends a provision that would raise the 
required statutory grades of the Judge Advocates General of the 
Army, Navy, and Air Force to lieutenant general or vice 
admiral, as appropriate. These three officers would be in 
addition to the numbers that would otherwise be permitted for 
their armed forces for officers serving on active duty in 
grades above major general or rear admiral, as the case may be. 
The provision would also change the title of the Assistant 
Judge Advocate General of the Army to ``Deputy Judge Advocate 
General,'' as is presently the case for the corresponding 
officers in the Navy and Air Force.
    The greatly increased operations tempo of the armed forces 
has resulted in an increase in the need for legal advice from 
uniformed judge advocates in such areas as operational law, 
international law, the law governing occupied territory, the 
Geneva Conventions, and related matters. In addition, the 
system of military justice, administered by the Judge Advocates 
General, has taken on increased importance. Section 508 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public 
Law 109-163) gave permissive authority for the appointment of 
these three officers in the grades of lieutenant general or 
vice admiral. However, none of these officers has been so 
appointed. In view of the developments set out above and the 
vital importance of the duties of these officers, the committee 
believes that the time has come to raise the required statutory 
grade and to grant corresponding grade relief.

Requirement for significant joint experience for officers appointed as 
        Surgeon General of the Army, Navy, and Air Force (sec. 505) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would add a new 
section 3036a and amend sections 3036, 5137, and 8036 of title 
10, United States Code, to require that officers recommended 
for appointment as the Surgeon General of the Army, Navy, and 
Air Force must have significant joint experience as determined 
by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The committee 
believes that senior military medical executives who are 
appointed in the future as the Surgeon General must be afforded 
opportunities to develop joint experience and qualifications in 
order to effectively manage and lead the uniformed medical 
professional communities and medical commands worldwide, and to 
participate most effectively in the management of the Defense 
Health Program and TRICARE. In this regard, the committee 
considers key positions in the defense health system, 
particularly the TRICARE Regional Directors, as assignments 
which provide significant joint experience. The requirements of 
this provision would become effective with respect to all 
appointments to the position of Surgeon General of the Army, 
Navy, and Air Force on or after October 1, 2008, but this 
limitation would be waivable by the Secretary of Defense, if 
warranted, until October 1, 2010.

Grade and exclusion from active-duty general and flag officer 
        distribution and strength limitations of officer serving as 
        Attending Physician to the Congress (sec. 506) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would add section 
722 to chapter 41 and amend section 12210 of title 10, United 
States Code, to provide that an active-duty or Reserve general 
or flag officer, while serving as the Attending Physician to 
the Congress, would hold the grade of major general or rear 
admiral and be excluded from the numerical and distribution 
requirements of sections 525 and 526 of title 10, United States 
Code. The committee believes that the important role of the 
Attending Physician to the Congress and the dedicated service 
of the officers who have held this position warrant statutory 
recognition and an exception from the limits on numbers and 
grades of general and flag officers.

Discretionary separation and retirement of chief warrant officers, W-4, 
        twice failing selection for promotion (sec. 507) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 580(a) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
the service secretaries in their discretion to retain, retire, 
or separate from active duty chief warrant officers in the 
grade of W-4, who have twice failed of selection for promotion. 
The committee believes that current procedures, which require 
automatic retirement or separation of regular chief warrant 
officers who twice fail of selection for promotion unless they 
are continued by selection board action, should be more 
flexible and that this provision would support the retention of 
highly experienced and qualified chief warrant officers in the 
grade of W-4.

Increased mandatory retirement ages for Reserve officers (sec. 508) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the mandatory retirement age for Reserve component officers. 
The provision would increase the mandatory retirement age for 
officers in the grade of O-8 from 62 to 64 years; for officers 
in the grade of O-7 from 60 to 62 years; and for officers in 
grades below O-7 from 60 to 62 years. The provision would also 
increase the mandatory retirement age of officers holding 
certain offices, such as the Chief of the National Guard 
Bureau, Chiefs of Reserve of the services, Directors of the 
Army and Air National Guard, and the adjutants general of the 
states, from 64 to 66 years.

                   Part II--Officer Promotion Policy 


Promotions (sec. 515) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 624 and 14311 of title 10, United States Code, 
relating to promotion procedures. The provision would specify 
that a promotion list that requires Senate confirmation shall 
be treated as being established for purposes of chapter 38 of 
title 10 on the date the list is received by the Senate for 
consideration. This provides a clear line of demarcation 
between the procedures applicable for processing reports of 
selection boards and promotion lists. The provision would 
require the Secretary of Defense, not later than March 1, 2008, 
to prescribe regulations controlling delays in appointment 
following Senate confirmation under sections 624 and 14311. The 
committee believes that the Secretary of Defense should 
establish uniform procedures in this regard aimed at ensuring 
consistency in service practices, necessary oversight, and 
timely review and disposition of allegations of potentially 
adverse information arising after nomination and Senate 
confirmation, but prior to appointment. The provision would 
also clarify that delays in appointment to higher grade are 
warranted by the need to review substantiated and potentially 
adverse information which may be material to the decision on 
whether or not to appoint based on a determination that an 
officer has not fulfilled the requirements for exemplary 
conduct for commanding officers and those in positions of 
authority is permissible.

Consideration of adverse information by promotion selection boards in 
        recommendations on officers to be promoted (sec. 516)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 616(c) and 14108(b) of title 10, United States Code, 
to require that a promotion selection board may not recommend 
an officer for promotion unless a majority of the members of 
the board, after consideration by all the board members of any 
adverse information about the officer that is provided to the 
board under section 615 of title 10, United States Code, finds 
that the officer is among those best qualified for promotion to 
meet the needs of the armed force concerned consistent with the 
requirement of exemplary conduct set forth in sections 3583, 
5947, and 8583 of title 10, United States Code. The committee 
views this as an essential function of promotion board members 
in making their recommendations.

Expanded authority for removal from reports of selection boards of 
        officers recommended for promotion to grades below general and 
        flag grades (sec. 517)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 618(d) and 14111(b) of title 10, United States Code, 
to authorize the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary 
of Defense, in addition to the President, to remove the name of 
an officer from the report of a selection board with respect to 
officers being recommended for promotion to grades below 
brigadier general and rear admiral (lower half). The committee 
believes that limiting this removal authority to the President 
for officers below general and flag officer rank is 
unnecessary.

Clarification of nondisclosure requirements applicable to promotion 
        selection board proceedings (sec. 518)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 618 and 14104 of title 10, United States Code, to 
clarify the nondisclosure requirements applicable to 
deliberations of military promotion selection boards. The 
provision would specify that discussions and deliberations of 
selection boards, including any written or documentary records 
thereof, shall be immune from legal process; shall not be 
admitted as evidence; and shall not be used for any purpose in 
any action or suit, or judicial or administrative proceedings 
without the consent of the Secretary of the military department 
concerned.
    The committee believes that existing policies of the 
Department of Defense and the services and oversight exercised 
by senior military and civilian officials relating to selection 
board procedures provide necessary safeguards and are effective 
in ensuring that promotion selection board members fulfill 
their duty under law to recommend the best qualified officers 
for promotion. Erosion over time of the limits on judicial 
review and discovery in connection with litigation have not 
been consistent with the statutory framework and military 
necessity.

Special selection board authorities (sec. 519)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 628 and 14502 of title 10, United States Code, with 
respect to authority to conduct special selection boards. The 
provision would limit the availability of special selection 
boards to officers who are in or above the primary promotion 
zones. This is consistent with the treatment of Reserve 
component officers under section 14502 and, additionally, 
limits the substantial administrative burden of conducting 
special selection boards only to those cases in which material 
error may have occurred. The provision would also clarify that 
errors in active and Reserve board procedures that are not in 
accordance with law must also be determined by the service 
secretaries to be material to the outcome of the board's 
determination.

Removal from promotion lists of officers returned to the President by 
        the Senate (sec. 520)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 629 and 14310 of title 10, United States Code, to 
clarify the conditions under which officers whose nominations 
have not received the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate 
will by operation of law be removed from promotion lists. The 
committee believes, consistent with the intent of existing 
sections 629 and 14310, that there must be statutory procedures 
for automatic removal of officers from promotion lists when it 
is clear that these officers will not receive a favorable 
committee recommendation or the advice and consent of the U.S. 
Senate and, within a foreseeable time frame, fulfill the legal 
requirements for appointment to higher grade after ample 
opportunity for review of adverse or potentially adverse 
information.
    Currently, under these conditions, and when designated 
senior military and civilian leaders take no action to remove 
an officer from a promotion list under sections 629 or 14310, 
officers may be permitted to remain on a promotion list for 
protracted, indefinite periods. Relegation of any officer to 
such a ``limbo'' status serves the interests of neither the 
individual officer nor the officer corps. This provision would 
enable changes in the status quo, require the officer, if 
removed from a promotion list, to compete once again with his 
or her peers for promotion, and lead to final resolutions 
consistent with the efficient administration of officer 
personnel and the needs of the services.
    The provision would prescribe processes applicable to both 
active-duty and Reserve officers whose nominations require 
Senate confirmation. The provisions for automatic removal would 
not apply to officers on promotion lists that have been 
returned to the President by the Senate on the date of 
enactment of this Act. No later than October 1, 2008, however, 
any such officer would be removed from a promotion list.

            Part III--Joint Officer Management Requirements


Modification and enhancement of general authorities on management of 
        joint qualified officers (sec. 526)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 661 of title 10, United States Code, to restructure the 
system for designation and management of joint qualified 
officers. This provision would implement the recommendation 
made by the Department of Defense in its strategic plan to link 
joint officer development to overall missions and goals of the 
Department, as required by section 531 of the Ronald W. Reagan 
National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2005 (Public 
Law 108-375). The provision would facilitate the commencement 
of a process aimed at achieving the strategic objectives of 
developing a joint officer management system relevant to 21st 
century missions and force structure requirements, producing 
the largest possible number of fully qualified and inherently 
joint officers for joint command and staff responsibilities and 
service as general and flag officers, and maintaining the 
highest quality of officers serving in joint assignments.
    Key aspects of this provision would include: (1) 
replacement of the term ``joint specialty officer'' with 
``joint qualified officer;'' (2) authorizing the Secretary of 
Defense to establish criteria for designation of officers as 
joint qualified; (3) retention of the requirement for joint 
professional military education (JPME) but permitting waiver of 
the JPME under certain circumstances, e.g., completion of two 
tours of duty in joint assignments resulting in demonstrated 
mastery of knowledge, skills, and abilities on joint matters; 
and (4) replacing the system of required time in billets for 
joint qualification to a capabilities-based system in which 
experience and performance lead to progressive levels of joint 
qualification.

Modification of promotion policy objectives for joint officers (sec. 
        527)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 662(a) of title 10, United States Code, to repeal the 
requirement for a separate promotion policy objective for 
officers who have the joint specialty or who are designated as 
joint qualified. The provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense to ensure that officers who are serving in or have 
served in joint duty assignments, including those officers who 
previously have been designated as joint specialty officers 
(JSO) and are determined to be joint qualified under the 
changes to section 661 of title 10, United States Code, 
included in this Act, are expected, as a group, to be promoted 
to the next higher grade at a rate not less than the rate for 
all officers of the same armed force in the same grade and 
competitive category. The committee believes that the increased 
number of officers who have attained the joint specialty 
qualification and who will be designated as joint qualified, 
the acceptance throughout the officer corps of the importance 
of joint qualification, and the assignment of JSO and joint 
qualified officers to numerous ``other joint'' billets 
throughout the Department calls for elimination of a separate 
promotion policy objective for JSO.

Applicability of joint duty assignment requirements limited to 
        graduates of National Defense University schools (sec. 528)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 663 of title 10, United States Code, to specify that 
joint professional military education (JPME) schools for 
purposes of this section are limited to schools within the 
National Defense University. The provision would limit the 
requirement that more than 50 percent of officers completing 
the second phase of JPME must be assigned to joint duty 
assignments as those officers' next duty assignments following 
graduation. The committee believes that this change, in 
conjunction with the increased availability of JPME credit at 
service colleges, is necessary to enable the services to fill 
all joint and internal billets, particularly those in 
warfighting specialties, with appropriately qualified officers.

Modification of definitions relating to jointness (sec. 529)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 668 of title 10, United States Code, to revise the 
definition of the term ``joint matters.'' The new definition 
would expand the concept of joint matters to include integrated 
use of military forces that may be conducted under unified 
action on land, sea, or air, in space, or in the information 
environment with participants from multiple armed forces, the 
armed forces and other departments and agencies of the United 
States Government, the armed forces and the military forces or 
agencies of other countries, the armed forces and non-
governmental persons or entities, or any combination thereof. 
The committee believes that this revised definition more 
accurately reflects the nature of modern military operations 
and recognizes that jointness should be understood as broader 
than the integrated operation of two or more services.
    The provision would also modify the definition of ``joint 
duty assignments'' to broaden the assignments that may be 
considered and recognize the value of certain assignments 
within the services and to add a definition to section 668 of 
the term ``critical occupational specialty.''

            Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Matters


Enhanced flexibility in the management of Reserve component personnel 
        (sec. 531)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
members of the National Guard and Reserve serving on Active 
Guard and Reserve duty, and military technicians (dual status), 
to perform specified additional duties that would expand their 
flexibility to train and instruct other personnel and increase 
the ability of such personnel to support certain operations or 
missions.
    The provision would authorize such members, performing 
Active Guard and Reserve duty under either title 10 or title 
32, to instruct or train active-duty members, foreign military 
forces (under the same authorities and limitations that apply 
to active-duty personnel), Department of Defense contractor 
personnel, and Department of Defense civilian employees.
    The provision would also authorize members of the National 
Guard and Reserve, on Active Guard and Reserve duty under 
section 12310 of title 10, United States Code, to support 
operations or missions assigned in whole or in part to the 
Reserve components; to support operations or missions performed 
or to be performed by a unit composed of elements from more 
than one component of the same armed force, or joint forces 
that include Reserve component units or personnel; and to 
provide advice to senior officials in the Department on Reserve 
component matters.
    The provision would also expand the duties of military 
technicians (dual status), in section 10216a of title 10, 
United States Code, to support operations or missions assigned 
in whole or in part to the military technician's unit; or to be 
performed by elements from more than one component of the 
military technician's armed force, or joint forces that include 
units or personnel of the military technician's Reserve 
component.
    The provision would also amend title 32 to authorize 
members who have been ordered by their Governor, with consent 
of the secretary concerned, to perform National Guard Active 
Guard and Reserve duty, to perform additional duties to support 
operations or missions undertaken by the member's unit at the 
request of the President or the Secretary of Defense, and to 
support federal training operations or training missions 
assigned in whole or in part to the member's unit.
    The provision would also authorize National Guard 
technicians to perform additional duties under title 32 to 
support operations or missions undertaken by the member's unit 
at the request of the President or the Secretary of Defense, 
and to support federal training operations or training missions 
assigned in whole or in part to the member's unit.
    The additional duties that may be assigned to National 
Guard and Reserve members on Active Guard and Reserve duty, and 
military technicians (dual status), would only be authorized to 
the extent that the additional duties do not interfere with the 
ability of such members to carry out their prescribed duties 
relating to organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, 
or training the Reserve components.

Expansion of activities authorized for Reserves under Weapons of Mass 
        Destruction Civil Support Teams (sec. 532)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to approve the deployment of Weapons 
of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CSTs) to Canada 
and Mexico, if appropriate authorities in those countries 
consent to the entry of any WMD-CST into their sovereign 
territory in order to train for or respond to cross-border 
incidents. The provision would also expand the types of 
emergencies for which the Secretary may prepare or employ WMD-
CSTs to include the intentional or unintentional release of 
nuclear, biological, radiological, toxic or poisonous chemical 
materials, or natural or manmade disasters.
    The committee notes that natural disasters, criminal acts, 
acts of negligence, and unforseen accidents can result in the 
release of nuclear, biological, radiological, or toxic or 
poisonous chemical materials that could have catastrophic 
impacts similar to the intentional release of a Weapon of Mass 
Destruction or a terrorist attack.
    The committee further notes that WMD-CSTs are a limited 
resource, and as such, the use of WMD-CSTs for such disasters 
should be limited to catastrophic situations where resources of 
State governments are overwhelmed and are authorized by the 
Secretary and performed in an active-duty status if the 
activities are performed outside of the United States.

Modification of authorities relating to the Commission on the National 
        Guard and Reserves (sec. 533)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 513 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375), 
which created the Commission on the National Guard and 
Reserves, to authorize the chairman of the commission to 
exercise the same waiver authority regarding eligibility by 
annuitants for pay as would be available to the Director of the 
Office of Personnel Management under sections 8344(i)(1) and 
8468(f)(1) of title 5, United States Code. Additionally, the 
provision would authorize extension of the commission's 
deadline for submission of a final report from 12 to 18 months 
after its first meeting.

Pilot program on reintegration of members of the National Guard into 
        civilian life after deployment (sec. 534)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to carry out a pilot program to assess 
the feasibility and advisability of a voluntary program to 
facilitate the reintegration of members of the National Guard 
into civilian life upon return from an overseas deployment. The 
program would consist of: (1) initial reintegration training to 
facilitate reintegration with families and communities; (2) 30-
day reintegration training to identify signs and symptoms of 
combat stress; (3) 60-day reintegration training to assist in 
matters relating to combat stress, including chemical 
dependency, anger management, and gambling abuse; (4) 90-day 
reintegration training to conduct a thorough physical and 
mental health assessment; and (5) development and distribution 
of educational materials on reintegration for National Guard 
families and communities. The Secretary of the Army shall 
submit a report on the pilot program to the congressional 
defense committees not later than one year after commencement 
of the pilot program.

            Subtitle C--Military Justice and Related Matters


Applicability of Uniform Code of Military Justice to members of the 
        Armed Forces ordered to active duty overseas in inactive duty 
        for training status (sec. 551)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
service secretaries, no later than March 1, 2007, to prescribe 
regulations, or amend current regulations, consistent with 
article 2 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), to 
provide that military personnel who are ordered to perform 
inactive duty for training at overseas locations shall be 
subject to jurisdiction under the UCMJ throughout the period 
that the orders are in effect. The committee is aware that the 
Department of Defense, pursuant to section 557 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163), has concluded that the differences between services' 
policies regarding inactive duty for training and the 
inapplicability of the UCMJ during drill periods could present 
obstacles to the invocation of protections under status of 
forces agreements (SOFA). The committee believes that prompt 
regulatory action should be taken at the earliest time to 
enhance good order and discipline through extension of UCMJ 
jurisdiction over reservists training overseas and, by doing 
so, to make the strongest case possible for SOFA coverage for 
Reserve personnel performing inactive duty for training.

               Subtitle D--Education and Training Matters


Detail of commissioned officers as students at medical schools (sec. 
        561)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of a military department to detail up to 25 
commissioned officers of the armed forces each year as students 
at accredited medical schools or schools of osteopathy in the 
United States for training leading to the degree of doctor of 
medicine. To be eligible for such medical training, an officer 
must agree to serve on active duty for 2 years for each year of 
the officer's medical training.
    The committee recommends this provision, in addition to 
others in this subtitle, in response to significant and growing 
shortfalls of military medical personnel, in both active and 
Reserve components of the armed forces. The committee has 
learned, for example, that the Army has only 65 percent of the 
general surgeons and 66% of the thoracic surgeons required to 
meet requirements for the active component. Army transformation 
to the brigade combat team structure would deepen medical 
shortfalls. The committee intends in this and other sections of 
this subtitle to provide greater flexibility to the Secretaries 
of the military departments in the recruitment and retention of 
students and fully qualified health care personnel.

Expansion of eligibility to provide Junior Reserve Officers' Training 
        Corps instruction (sec. 562)

    The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 
eligibility of officers and non-commissioned officers who may 
be employed as Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) 
instructors to include retired Reserve and National Guard 
members. Currently, only active-duty and retired regular 
officers and non-commissioned officers are authorized to serve 
as JROTC instructors. The Department of Defense would be 
authorized to pay an institution hiring a retired Reserve or 
National Guard member an amount equal to one-half of the amount 
paid to the retired member by the institution for any period, 
up to a maximum of one-half the difference between the retired 
or retainer pay for an active-duty officer or noncommissioned 
officer of the same grade and years of service for that period 
and the active-duty pay and allowances, which the member would 
have received for that period if on active duty.

Increase in maximum amount of repayment under educational loan 
        repayment for officers in specified health professions (sec. 
        563)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
an increase from $22,000 to $60,000 for each year of obligated 
service the amount the Secretary of a military department may 
repay for educational loans of a fully qualified health care 
professional that the Secretary of the military department 
concerned has determined to be necessary to meet identified 
skill shortages.

Increase in benefits under Health Professions Scholarship and Financial 
        Assistance Program (sec. 564)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
new maximum amounts for stipends and grants, under the Health 
Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance Program. The 
Health Professions Scholarship Program is the primary source 
for the accession of medical and dental corps officers for the 
military departments. The committee is concerned that the 
current statutory formula for the educational assistance 
programs for health care professionals does not permit 
flexibility for the Secretary of the military department to 
respond to economic factors faced by medical and dental 
students.

Report on Health Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance 
        Program (sec. 565)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to report by March 1, 2007, to 
congressional defense committees on the success or failure of 
the military departments in achieving recruiting goals under 
the Health Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance 
Program for active service during fiscal years 2000 through 
2006.
    The committee is concerned that the decline in achievement 
of goals for these programs will create significant medical 
manpower challenges in future years. Elsewhere in this report, 
the committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
modification to the amount of payment of stipends under these 
programs.

Expansion of instruction available at the Naval Postgraduate School for 
        enlisted members of the armed forces (sec. 566)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
all eligible enlisted members of the armed forces to 
participate in certificate programs and courses required for 
the performance of their duties offered by the Naval 
Postgraduate School by removing the current limitation that 
restricts such participation to enlisted members of the Navy 
and Marine Corps. The provision would also authorize eligible 
enlisted members who hold a baccalaureate degree to receive 
graduate-level instruction at the Naval Postgraduate School on 
a space-available basis in programs leading to a master's 
degree in technical, analytical, and engineering curricula. 
Upon successful completion of the course of instruction, an 
enlisted member may be awarded a master's degree by the Naval 
Postgraduate School.
    The 2005 Base Closure and Realignment Commission 
recommended realigning the Naval Postgraduate School and the 
Air Force Institute of Technology. The Commission's 
recommendation is intended to eliminate unnecessary curricula 
and program development; identify, approve, and implement 
programs of collaboration in research and instruction between 
the two schools; and expand nonresident programs and 
arrangements with private institutions of higher learning to 
meet common curriculum and non-Department of Defense focused 
class requirements. A current distinction between the Naval 
Postgraduate School and the Air Force Institute of Technology 
is the broader authority of enlisted members to participate in 
programs at the Air Force Institute of Technology.
    The provision would expand the eligibility of enlisted 
members to receive instruction from the Naval Postgraduate 
School as a means of achieving a closer alignment of the 
programs of instruction at the two institutions.

Modification of actions to address sexual harassment and sexual 
        violence at the service academies (sec. 567)

    The committee recommends a provision that would change the 
frequency of the administration of the service academy sexual 
assault survey and its associated report to Congress from an 
annual to a biennial requirement. The provision would also 
extend until 2010 the academy program years in which the survey 
is required. The provision clarifies that the subject of the 
required academy policy and the survey is sexual harassment and 
sexual violence, and that the policy and survey are directed at 
cadets and midshipmen.

Department of Defense policy on service academy and ROTC graduates 
        seeking to participate in professional sports before completion 
        of their active-duty service obligations (sec. 568)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe a policy not later than July 
1, 2007, on whether to authorize service academy and Reserve 
Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) graduates to participate in 
professional sports before completion of their active-duty 
service obligation, and if so, on the active-duty service 
obligations of such personnel.
    Prior to prescribing the policy, the Secretary of Defense 
would be required to review current policies, practices, and 
regulations of the military departments on the active-duty 
service obligations of graduates of the service academies and 
ROTC, including policies on authorized leaves of absence and 
excess leave programs. The Secretary of Defense would be 
required to consider the compatibility of participation in 
professional sports, including training for professional 
sports, with service on active duty; the benefits for the armed 
forces of waiving obligations for service on active duty; the 
manner in which the services have resolved issues relating to 
participation in professional sports, including the extent of, 
and any reasons for, differing policies by service; and the 
recoupment of the costs of education if the period of obligated 
service is not completed. Variations in the policy due to 
distinctive requirements of a particular armed force would be 
allowed, but would be specifically addressed. The Secretary of 
Defense would set a prospective effective date for the policy 
and address its application to personnel currently serving as 
commissioned officers, cadets, or midshipmen.
    The provision would require the secretary of each military 
department to prescribe regulations, or modify current 
regulations, to implement the policy of the Secretary of 
Defense by no later than December 1, 2007.

            Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education Matters


Funding for assistance to local educational agencies that benefit 
        dependents of members of the armed forces and Department of 
        Defense civilian employees (sec. 571)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$30.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide 
(OMDW), for continuation of the Department of Defense 
assistance program to local educational agencies that are 
impacted by enrollment of dependent children of military 
members and civilian employees of the Department of Defense. 
The committee also recommends authorization of $10.0 million in 
OMDW, for assistance to local educational agencies with 
significant changes in enrollment of military and civilian 
school-aged dependent children due to base closures, force 
structure changes, or force relocations.

Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 572)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$5.0 million in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide, for 
impact aid payments for children with disabilities under 
section 8003(d) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7703(d)), using the formula set forth in 
section 363 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398), 
for continuation of the Department of Defense's assistance to 
local educational agencies that benefit dependents with severe 
disabilities.

Plan to assist local educational agencies experiencing growth in 
        enrollment due to force structure changes, relocation of 
        military units, or BRAC (sec. 573)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prepare a plan to provide assistance to 
local educational agencies that will experience a growth in 
enrollment of military and Department of Defense civilian 
children as a result of force structure changes, the relocation 
of military units, and the closure or realignment of a military 
installation as a result of the 2005 Base Realignment and 
Closure (BRAC) round. The committee is concerned that the 
impact of troop relocation on local educational districts 
during the time period between 2005 and 2010 will be 
significant, and expects the Department to work in partnership 
with the Congress, local governments, and other governmental 
agencies to provide maximum support to local communities as 
they face growth challenges associated with troop relocations, 
rebasing, and BRAC.
    The committee intends that the plan required by this 
provision would be in addition to the report on school 
enrollment increases, including a plan for working with 
federal, state and local agencies, for the period 2004 through 
2011, directed in the report accompanying section 572 of the 
Conference Report for the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163).

Pilot program on parent education to promote early childhood education 
        for dependent children affected by military deployment or 
        relocation of military units (sec. 574)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out a 3-year pilot program to 
develop models to enhance educational tools and support for 
parents of pre-school aged children, who are affected by 
deployments or the relocation of military units. The provision 
would require the utilization of models designed to identify 
specific risk factors for children related to military life, 
and maximize the educational readiness of young children who 
experience the rigors of military life. The provision would 
require that the Secretary designate military installations for 
conduct of the pilot program, and that one or more of the 
installations include outreach services to members in the 
National Guard or Reserve components who have been mobilized in 
the global war on terrorism. The committee recommends that $1.5 
million be authorized for the pilot program in fiscal year 
2007.
    The committee believes that high quality services for 
children are an essential factor in military quality of life, 
and encourages the Department of Defense to utilize 
organizations such as Parents as Teachers, which has broad 
experience through its Heroes at Home program in enhancing 
child development and school achievement through parent 
education involving military families. The committee believes 
that outreach is needed to families of National Guard and 
Reserve components who have been mobilized in support of the 
global war on terrorism, and believes that a program known as 
Our Military Kids has gained valuable experience in working 
with local community resources to provide enrichment 
opportunities for children of Guard and Reserve families that 
would inform the Department's outreach to such families.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters


Administration of oaths (sec. 581)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 502 and 1031 of title 10, United States Code, to allow 
the oath required in connection with enlistment or appointment 
in the armed forces to be administered by the President, the 
Vice President, the Secretary of Defense, any commissioned 
officer of any armed force, or any other person designated 
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary. The provision 
would clarify differences in existing law regarding who may 
administer oaths required for enlistment or appointment of any 
person in the armed forces.

Military ID cards for retiree dependents who are permanently disabled 
        (sec. 582)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretaries of the military departments to issue a permanent 
military ID card to a permanently disabled dependent of a 
military retiree. The provision would lessen the challenges 
faced by a military retiree in arranging for support of a 
disabled dependent based on eligibility for Department of 
Defense benefits.

Military voting matters (sec. 583)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 1566(d) of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Department of Defense Inspector General to periodically conduct 
unannounced assessments of the compliance of Department 
installations with the requirements of the Uniformed and 
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), set forth in 
section 1973ff of title 42, United States Code. The committee 
believes that these assessments are unnecessary in view of the 
requirement for annual reviews of the effectiveness of voting 
assistance programs by the inspectors general of the Army, 
Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force under section 1566(c) of 
title 10, United States Code, and the requirement for an annual 
report by the Department Inspector General.
    The provision would also require the Comptroller General to 
submit a report to Congress by March 1, 2007, on the programs 
and activities undertaken by the Department to facilitate voter 
registration, transmittal of ballots to absentee voters, and 
voting using electronic means. The report would assess progress 
made, if any, in developing a secure, deployable system for 
Internet-based, electronic voting, pursuant to section 567 of 
the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375). While the goal of 
providing a means for reliable, secure, and timely electronic 
voting should remain a priority, the committee believes that, 
in the present, every effort should be made to support and 
cooperate with state and local officials in authorizing and 
relying on electronic methods of communication, particularly 
email, to facilitate voter registration and the forwarding of 
balloting materials to military and civilian voters covered 
under UOCAVA.

Presentation of Medal of Honor Flag to primary next of kin of Medal of 
        Honor recipients (sec. 584)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 3755, 6257, and 8755 of title 10, United States Code, 
and section 505 of title 14, United States Code, to authorize 
the President to present a Medal of Honor Flag to all living 
recipients of the Medal of Honor. Additionally, the provision 
would authorize presentation of one Medal of Honor Flag to the 
primary, living next of kin of a deceased Medal of Honor 
recipient under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of 
Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security in the case of 
members of the U.S. Coast Guard. The committee trusts that the 
Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Homeland Security will 
prescribe appropriate procedures for the presentation of the 
Medal of Honor Flag and issue consistent regulations that will 
designate the primary, living next of kin and readily resolve 
any potential conflicts over who should be presented the flag 
on behalf of a deceased recipient of the Medal of Honor.

Modification of effective period of authority to present recognition 
        items for recruitment and retention purposes (sec. 585)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2261 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
presentation of recognition items during any period of war or 
national emergency declared by the President or Congress. The 
committee believes that appropriate use of this authority 
during wartime and periods of national emergency in order to 
recognize the service of military members and their families 
and individuals who support the men and women of the armed 
forces is essential.

Military Severely Injured Center (sec. 586)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a Military Severely Injured 
Center to augment and support programs of the military 
departments to provide individual case management services to 
severely injured members of the armed forces and their 
families. The provision would require the Secretary to 
establish a central data base for the purposes of tracking all 
severely injured service members who qualify for support by the 
Center.
    The committee commends the Department of Defense, including 
the service secretaries, for mobilizing support programs for 
severely injured members of the armed forces and their 
families. These programs include the Military Severely Injured 
Joint Support Operations Center, which was established in 
February 2002 by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Army 
Wounded Warrior Support Program, the Navy Safe Harbor Program, 
the Air Force Palace HART Program, and the Marine for Life 
Injured Support Program of the Marine Corps. The committee 
believes that the complexity of long term needs of severely 
injured service members requires a continuous, fail-safe 
structure of support; integration of services; and a capability 
for augmentation over a period of many years. A Military 
Severely Injured Center is essential to ensure that those needs 
will be met.
    The committee believes that the Department of Defense, in 
cooperation with the Department of Veterans Affairs, Department 
of Labor, Transportation Security Administration within the 
Department of Homeland Security, and State and local 
governments, is meeting the challenge of providing timely, 
expert assistance to severely wounded members and their 
families. The committee, however, believes that more needs to 
be done. Community-based support groups and non-profit service 
organizations can play a key role in addressing many of the 
needs of severely wounded personnel. Organizations such as 
Still Serving Veterans in Huntsville, Alabama, provide 
invaluable assistance to wounded service members, including 
guiding them to successfully making use of existing support 
systems in their region when leaving active duty, and obtaining 
gainful employment and necessary support services. The 
committee expects the Department of Defense to ensure that the 
contributions of community-based support organizations are 
addressed in the comprehensive policy required by section 563 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-163) and that the individual services and the 
Military Severely Injured Center will work closely with them in 
support of individual members and veterans.

                       Items of Special Interest


Funding for the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command

    The committee is concerned that the Joint POW/MIA 
Accounting Command (JPAC) may not be organized or funded to 
effectively accomplish its mission of achieving the fullest 
possible accounting of personnel who remain missing as a result 
of hostile acts. JPAC was created at the direction of the 
Secretary of Defense on October 1, 2003, by merging the Joint 
Task Force-Full Accounting with the U.S. Army Central 
Identification Laboratory, Hawaii, as a single, joint command 
reporting to the U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM). JPAC functions 
include analysis, archival research, operational and technical 
planning, negotiation, investigation, recovery, repatriation, 
identification, and reporting.
    Funding for JPAC was initially established by merging the 
fiscal year 2004 operating budget for the U.S. Army Central 
Identification Laboratory with the budget for Joint Task Force-
Full Accounting. The fiscal year 2006 funding baseline for JPAC 
was $44.0 million, which is about $2.5 million lower than the 
fiscal year 2004 baseline when JPAC was created. JPAC had 
planned missions for fiscal year 2006 to support recovery 
operations in Southeast Asia and world-wide that would have 
required about $50.4 million. Because JPAC is burdened with 
inordinately high personnel and overhead costs, the lower 
amount made available for fiscal year 2006 resulted in fewer 
recovery missions being executed than had been planned in 
Vietnam and Laos, as well as in World War II battlefields in 
the Pacific. The fiscal year 2007 budget is $47.2 million.
    The committee recommends that the Secretary of Defense 
review carefully the organization of the command and the 
funding relationship between JPAC, USPACOM, the Department of 
the Navy, and the Department of Defense to determine if the 
current alignment under USPACOM and funding through the Navy, 
as the Executive Agent, is appropriate and efficient 
considering the mission of JPAC. The committee also recommends 
that the JPAC organization, management, and budget be reviewed 
to achieve efficiencies, where possible, and that JPAC be 
funded to sustain a robust POW/MIA accounting effort.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2007, on the 
Department's review of these matters and actions it considers 
appropriate to address them.

Military medical recruiting

    The committee is concerned that shortfalls in recruitment 
and retention of medical, dental, and nurse corps officers have 
received insufficient attention from senior Department of 
Defense leadership. The inability of the military departments 
to achieve recruiting and retention goals for critical health 
care professionals, in both the active and Reserve components, 
has resulted in shortages in critical medical, dental and nurse 
corps resources that could threaten future medical readiness. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Personnel and Readiness, in conjunction with the military 
personnel chiefs and senior medical leadership, to analyze the 
Department's current and projected needs in medical manpower, 
and to report to the congressional defense committees no later 
than February 1, 2007, on the results of a comprehensive 
analysis of medical, dental, nurse, and medical service corps 
personnel needs and shortages. As part of its analysis, the 
Department must reassess its plans for conversion of military 
medical positions to civilian positions, an initiative which 
the committee believes has, in some instances, compounded 
shortages of personnel needed in support of military 
operations.
    At a minimum, the report must include the following:
          (1) a reassessment of the adequacy of current 
        manpower modeling tools in capturing requirements for 
        medical and dental personnel in the global war on 
        terrorism;
          (2) an analysis of current and projected manpower 
        needs for military medical, dental, nurse, and medical 
        service corps personnel;
          (3) identification of shortfalls, in both active and 
        Reserve components;
          (4) an analysis of monetary and non-monetary 
        incentives to improve recruitment and retention, such 
        as reexamining the Navy's policy on general medical 
        officer deployments, and examining tour lengths for key 
        medical personnel in both active and Reserve 
        components;
          (5) an analysis of medical recruitment efforts by the 
        military departments, and a plan of action to make 
        necessary improvements, including greater use of 
        medical and dental corps officers to assist in 
        recruiting;
          (6) reexamination of the professions deemed to be 
        critical skills needed in wartime, including clinical 
        psychologists to address combat-stress related mental 
        health concerns;
          (7) a plan of action to provide resources necessary 
        to address any shortfalls; and
          (8) recommendations on changes in policy and 
        legislation needed to provide greater flexibility to 
        the military departments to assist them in meeting 
        medical readiness manpower requirements.
    The committee believes that in addition to the report 
directed in this section, it is critical that the Tenth 
Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC), directed by 
the President on August 2, 2005, carefully examine compensation 
issues pertaining to the military's shortage of uniformed 
medical personnel to support the global war on terrorism. The 
committee expects the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel 
and Readiness to provide the results of the analysis required 
by this section to the QRMC to inform its analysis of future 
military compensation of military medical personnel.
          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Fiscal year 2007 increase in military basic pay and reform of basic pay 
        rates (sec. 601)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
pay raise for members of the uniformed services of 2.2 percent 
effective on January 1, 2007; targeted pay raises for warrant 
officers and enlisted members serving in the E-5 to E-7 grades 
that would be effective on April 1, 2007; and extension of the 
basic pay table to 40 years, providing longevity step increases 
for the highest officer, warrant officer, and enlisted grades.
    The committee supports the goal of the Department of 
Defense, as recommended by the 9th Quadrennial Review of 
Military Compensation, to bring regular military compensation 
to the 70th percentile of private civilians when comparing 
experience and education. This provision contributes to its 
achievement. The provision would also accommodate longer career 
lengths and provide appropriate financial incentives for 
continued active-duty service beyond 30 years by the most 
experienced and capable military, officer and enlisted, leaders 
of the armed forces.
Increase in maximum rate of basic pay for general and flag officer 
        grades (sec. 602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 203(a)(2) of title 37, United States Code, to provide 
that the rates of basic pay for officers in pay grades O-7 
through O-10 may not exceed the monthly equivalent of the rate 
of pay for level II, vice III, of the Executive Schedule. The 
committee notes that this provision will primarily affect 
officers serving in positions of importance and responsibility 
under section 601 of title 10, United States Code. Raising the 
pay cap for these officers is fully commensurate with the 
levels of authority and responsibility typically vested in such 
officers.
Clarification of effective date of prohibition on compensation for 
        correspondence courses (sec. 603)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 206(d) of title 37, United States Code, to clarify that 
the prohibition on compensation for work or study in connection 
with correspondence courses, including the prohibition as it 
relates to a member of the National Guard while not in federal 
service, applies to any such work or study performed on or 
after September 7, 1962, and to any claim for compensation 
based on such work or study arising after that date.
    The committee believes that judicial rulings interpreting 
section 206(d) to permit compensation for completion of 
correspondence courses misinterpreted this provision and did 
not give adequate weight to the consistent practices of the 
services in administering training of members of the Reserve 
and National Guard in this regard. The changes to section 
206(d) of title 37, United States Code, incorporated in section 
604 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2006 (Public Law 109-163) did not, in the committee's view, 
change, but rather clarified the meaning and purpose of this 
section.
One-year extension of prohibition against requiring certain injured 
        members to pay for meals provided by military treatment 
        facilities (sec. 604)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 402(h)(3) of title 37, United States Code, to extend 
for an additional year the prohibition on requiring members who 
are undergoing medical recuperation or therapy, or are 
otherwise in the status of continuous care, including 
outpatient care, at a military treatment facility for injuries, 
illnesses, or diseases incurred or aggravated while on active 
duty serving in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation 
Enduring Freedom. The provision would also require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees by February 1, 2007, on the administration 
of section 402(h)(3), including an assessment of the 
implementation by the services and recommendations regarding 
whether this authority should be continued.
Additional housing allowance for Reserves on active duty in support of 
        a contingency operation (sec. 605)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 403(g) of title 37, United States Code, to authorize 
service secretaries to pay a second housing allowance in lieu 
of per diem to Reserve component members who are ordered to 
active duty in support of a contingency operation for greater 
than 139 days when government quarters are not available. 
Implementation of this provision would reduce costs while 
ensuring that mobilized reservists are adequately compensated 
both for their civilian housing costs at home and while serving 
at their contingency operation duty locations when their 
mobilization will be for extended periods.

Extension of temporary continuation of housing allowance for dependents 
        of members dying on active duty to spouses who are members of 
        the uniformed services (sec. 606)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 403(l) of title 37, United States Code, to provide that 
a member of the uniformed services, who is a spouse of a 
deceased member who died while serving on active duty, may 
continue to be paid the basic allowance for housing (BAH). Only 
non-military spouses currently qualify for the temporary 
continuation of BAH. This provision would avoid loss of income 
in the aftermath of a military spouse's death and could 
encourage military spouses to continue serving on active duty 
despite their loss.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays


Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for Reserve 
        Forces (sec. 611)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the Selected Reserve reenlistment 
bonus; the Selected Reserve affiliation or enlistment bonus; 
the special pay for enlisted members assigned to certain high 
priority units; the Ready Reserve enlistment bonus for persons 
without prior service; the Ready Reserve enlistment and 
reenlistment bonus for persons with prior service; and the 
Selected Reserve enlistment bonus for persons with prior 
service.

Extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for certain 
        health care professionals (sec. 612)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the nurse officer candidate 
accession bonus; the repayment of education loans for certain 
health care professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve; 
the accession bonus for registered nurses; incentive special 
pay for nurse anesthetists; special pay for Reserve health 
professionals in critically short wartime specialties; the 
accession bonus for dental officers; and the accession bonus 
for pharmacy officers.

Extension of special pay and bonus authorities for nuclear officers 
        (sec. 613)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the special pay for nuclear-
qualified officers extending their period of active service; 
the nuclear career accession bonus; and the nuclear career 
annual incentive bonus.

Extension of authorities relating to payment of other bonuses and 
        special pays (sec. 614)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year the authority to pay the aviation officer retention 
bonus; assignment incentive pay; the reenlistment bonus for 
active members; the enlistment bonus for active members; the 
retention bonus for members qualified in critical military 
skills or assigned to high priority units; the accession bonus 
for new officers in critical skills; and the incentive bonus 
for conversion to military occupational specialty to ease 
personnel shortage. The provision would also extend through 
December 31, 2009, the authority to pay the incentive bonus for 
transfer between the armed forces.

Increase in special pay for Selected Reserve health care professionals 
        in critically short wartime specialties (sec. 615)

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
from $10,000 to $25,000 the maximum amount of special pay the 
Secretary of a military department could pay health care 
professionals in the Selected Reserve who are in critically 
short wartime specialties. The committee is concerned that the 
operational tempo in the global war on terrorism has put 
intense pressure on strength levels of these critically needed 
health care specialties. An increase in special pay for certain 
Selected Reserve health professionals would support efforts to 
meet vitally important retention goals in the Selected Reserve.

Expansion and enhancement of accession bonus authorities for certain 
        officers in health care specialties (sec. 616)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
an increase in the maximum amount authorized for an accession 
bonus for dental officers from $30,000 to $200,000. The 
provision also authorizes a new accession bonus of up to 
$400,000 for medical officers and dental specialists in 
critically short wartime specialties. In order to be eligible 
for receipt of these bonuses, an individual must be a graduate 
of a fully accredited school of medicine or dentistry, and 
commit to remaining on active duty for 4 consecutive years.
    The committee believes that, in addition to improved 
recruiting and education provisions included elsewhere in this 
report, accession bonuses for fully qualified medical and 
dental personnel will allow the Secretaries of the military 
departments to rapidly address personnel shortfalls. The 
committee also believes that the current accession bonus level 
for dental officers has lost its effectiveness and has not 
changed since 1997. The lump sum nature of the existing and new 
accession bonuses is intended to serve as a recruitment 
inducement and recompense for the lower annual salary that 
medical and dental officers earn during 4 years of military 
service.

Increase in nuclear career accession bonus for nuclear-qualified 
        officers (sec. 617)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 312b(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, to increase 
the maximum authorized amount of the nuclear career accession 
bonus for nuclear-qualified officers from $20,000 to $30,000. 
The committee believes that this authority is necessary to 
ensure that the Navy is able to succeed in a highly competitive 
recruiting environment for individuals who qualify for the 
nuclear power program.

Modification of certain authorities applicable to the targeted shaping 
        of the Armed Forces (sec. 618)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1175a of title 10, United States Code, to facilitate 
targeted shaping of the armed forces. The provision would make 
the voluntary separation incentive (VSI) available to officers 
and enlisted personnel with more than 6 but no more than 20 
years of service. It would increase the maximum authorized 
amount of the VSI to an amount not greater than four times the 
full amount of separation pay for a member of the same pay 
grade and years of service who is involuntarily separated under 
section 1174 of title 10, United States Code. The provision 
would also extend the authority to use the provision through 
December 31, 2012, and increase the maximum amount of the 
incentive bonus for transfer between the armed forces from 
$2,500 to $10,000. The committee recognizes the value of the 
military training, skills, and experience possessed by certain 
sailors and airmen leaving active duty, and believes that an 
incentive comparable to what they would receive for affiliating 
with the Selective Reserve of their parent service would be 
useful in encouraging more officers and enlisted personnel to 
remain on active duty in connection with a ``blue to green'' 
transfer to the Army.

Extension of pilot program on contributions to Thrift Savings Plan for 
        initial enlistees in the Army (sec. 619)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
pilot program on contributions to Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) for 
initial enlistees in the Army, as required by section 606 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-163), until December 31, 2008. This pilot 
program requires the Army to test the effects on recruiting and 
levels of participation in the TSP stemming from the 
availability of matching contributions for the most junior 
soldiers (i.e., those serving under an initial enlistment for a 
period of not more than 2 years). The committee notes that the 
Army did not commence the pilot program until April 2006 and 
believes that additional time is necessary to demonstrate the 
effects of matching TSP contributions. The provision would also 
extend the due date for the report on the pilot program to 
February 1, 2008.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances


Expansion of payment of replacement value of personal property damaged 
        during transport at Government expense (sec. 631)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2636a of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense, no later than March 1, 2008, to include 
in contracts for the transportation of baggage and household 
effects for military members and civilian employees a clause 
requiring the carrier to pay the full replacement value for 
loss or damage. The provision would also require certain 
certifications by the Secretary about, and a review and 
assessment by the General Accountability Office on December 1, 
2006, and June 1, 2007, of the ``Families First'' program.
    The committee believes that the time is past due for 
implementing the contractual authority requested by the 
Department in 2003 and included in section 634 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136). Military personnel and their families have waited long 
enough for realization of the Families First promise of full 
replacement value for household goods lost and damaged by 
movers in connection with permanent changes of station.
    The committee has concluded that implementation of the full 
replacement standard for both military members and civilian 
employees by means of contractual changes with carriers must 
precede implementation of the Defense Personal Property System 
(DPS) under the Families First program. The collective 
inability over an extended period of the Military Surface 
Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC), its predecessor, 
the Military Traffic Management Command, and the Defense 
Information Systems Agency to successfully develop, test, and 
field a commercial, off-the-shelf computer application 
represents another troubled information technology program 
requiring strong oversight. In this regard, the committee 
believes that, in addition to the Internet application problems 
DPS has experienced, SDDC has not made sufficient progress in 
ensuring Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps participation 
in the design of DPS and that much work needs to be done to 
avoid problems with service acceptance and deployment.
    The committee acknowledges the efforts by Commander, U.S. 
Transportation Command, to correct the problems with DPS. 
However, in view of the importance of the Families First 
program, the committee urges the Secretary to transfer 
responsibility for the development of DPS from SDDC to the 
Defense Business Systems Acquisition Executive under the 
Department's Business Transformation Agency. At a minimum, the 
Department should include this program on the ``watch list'' of 
major automated information systems that the Department uses to 
monitor the progress of such programs.

             Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits


Modification of Department of Defense contributions to Military 
        Retirement Fund and Government contributions to Medicare-
        Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (sec. 641)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1111, 1465, and 1466 of title 10, United States Code, 
in order to authorize the Department of Defense to contribute 
into the Military Retirement Fund (MRF) at the lower, part-time 
normal cost percentage rate for Reserve component members who 
are mobilized or performing active duty for special work. This 
provision, which would become effective on October 1, 2007, 
would correct excessive retirement accrual contributions the 
Department currently is obligated to make to the MRF. This 
provision would also exclude cadets and midshipmen from the end 
strength figures on which accrual payments to the Medicare-
Eligible Health Retiree Care Fund (MERHCF) are based because 
these individuals do not receive credit towards retirement 
while serving in this status. The provision would also clarify 
section 1115 of title 10, United States Code, regarding 
exclusion of certain active-duty members, and change references 
from the Ready Reserve to the Selected Reserve to achieve 
greater consistency with the actuarial calculations that 
establish the accrual rates.

Repeal of requirement of reduction of SBP survivor annuities by 
        dependency and indemnity compensation (sec. 642)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
sections 1450 and 1451 of title 10, United States Code, to 
repeal the requirement for reduction of annuities received 
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) by the amount of 
dependency and indemnity compensation paid to certain 
beneficiaries under section 1311(a) of title 38, United States 
Code. The provision would require return, without interest, 
over a period of time (not to exceed 10 years) agreed to by the 
surviving spouse or specified by the Secretary of Defense, of 
SBP premiums refunded to beneficiaries under section 1450(e) of 
title 10, United States Code. The committee believes that 
recoupment of premiums, with provision for waiver by the 
Secretary in the event of hardship, is a necessary action in 
view of the substantial benefit that this provision represents. 
The committee notes that the funding for implementation of this 
provision was included in the Senate version of the Concurrent 
Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2007 (S. Con. Res. 
83), which passed on March 16, 2006.

Effective date of paid-up coverage under Survivor Benefit Plan (sec. 
        643)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1452(j) of title 10, United States Code, to change the 
effective date for paid-up coverage under the Survivor Benefit 
Plan from October 1, 2008, to October 1, 2006. The committee 
notes that the funding for implementation of this provision was 
included in the Senate version of the Concurrent Resolution on 
the Budget for Fiscal Year 2007 (S. Con. Res. 83), which passed 
on March 16, 2006.

Expansion of conditions for direct payment of divisible retired pay 
        (sec. 644)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1408(d) of title 10, United States Code, to provide 
that direct payments of divisible retired pay by the Defense 
Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) may be made in all cases 
in accordance with the terms of a court decree. The committee 
notes that the provision would not affect the eligibility of 
former spouses of military members for a portion of retired pay 
and would only enable DFAS to provide direct payment. The 
committee agrees with the conclusion made in the ``Report to 
Congress Concerning Federal Former Spouse Protection Laws,'' as 
required by section 643 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), with respect to 
this recommendation. The Report stated that:

          Overwhelming justification exists for abolishing this 
        requirement. First, no other examined public or private 
        retirement plan or system contains such a restriction. 
        Second, repeal should prevent the courts, 
        practitioners, and parties to divorce proceedings from 
        mistakenly interpreting a rule applicable to direct 
        payments as a prerequisite to allocation of retired 
        pay. Third, repealing this requirement would allow DFAS 
        to issue separate Federal income tax reporting 
        documents to the parties for their respective shares of 
        the allocations.

Authority for cost of living adjustments of retired pay treated as 
        divisible property (sec. 645)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1408 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
payment of cost of living adjustments in connection with awards 
of retired pay stated in dollar amounts. Existing law limits 
the flexibility of the parties and the courts in this regard in 
negotiating property settlement agreements and causes 
unnecessary confusion.

Notice and copy to members of court orders on payment of retired pay 
        (sec. 646)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1408 of title 10, United States Code, to allow members 
to waive notice of an application for payment of retired pay 
and eliminate the requirement that a copy of the court order be 
sent to all members in every case. Under the provision, the 
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) would notify 
members that, upon request, it would send a copy of the order 
to them. This would eliminate an unnecessary administrative 
burden on the DFAS.

Retention of assistive technology and devices by certain members of the 
        Armed Forces after separation from service (sec. 647)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
severely injured or ill members of the armed forces who have 
been provided assistive technology or devices to retain such 
technology or devices after separation from the armed forces.
    The committee commends the Department of Defense Computer/
Electronic Accommodations Program (CAP) for its outreach to 
military members who have been wounded in Operation Enduring 
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Building on more than 10 
years of experience in providing assistive technology to 
employees with disabilities throughout the Federal Government, 
CAP has reached out to wounded military members at Walter Reed 
and Brooke Army Medical Centers to provide computer technology 
and assistive devices, which facilitate communication and 
enhance the capability of the wounded members for reemployment. 
The committee expects the Secretary of Defense to provide 
appropriate increases in the budget in future years for CAP in 
recognition of its increased mission in support of severely 
injured or ill members of the armed forces.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


Audit of pay accounts of members of the Army evacuated from a combat 
        zone for inpatient care (sec. 661)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to conduct an audit of the pay accounts 
of each member of the Army wounded or injured in a combat zone 
who was evacuated from a theater of operations for inpatient 
care during the period beginning on May 1, 2005, and ending on 
April 30, 2006. The provision would also require the Secretary 
of the Army to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees, no later than 120 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, on the results of the audit. The provision would 
also require the Secretary of Defense to establish within the 
Department of Defense an assistance center through which a 
member of the armed forces or the primary next of kin of 
deceased members, using toll free telephone numbers, may obtain 
assistance in resolving difficulties relating to military pay 
within prescribed time standards.

                        Item of Special Interest


Department of Defense child care services

    The committee is pleased with the progress the Department 
of Defense is making in reducing the shortfall of subsidized 
childcare spaces for military members and their families, based 
on additional appropriations and more flexible military 
construction authorities provided by the Congress. Phase I of 
the Department's child care plan would increase capacity by 
4,077 spaces on military installations; phase II of the plan 
would increase capacity by an additional 3,799 spaces. Because 
of the importance of the availability of child care as a 
quality of life asset to military personnel, the committee 
expects the Department to continue to make progress toward the 
goal of reducing the remaining shortfall of 30,000 child care 
spaces. In addition, the committee is concerned that outreach 
to Reserve and National Guard families needs to be improved. 
The committee directs the Department to report to the 
congressional defense committees by February 1, 2007, on 
strategies to improve opportunities for support of child care 
services for mobilized members of the National Guard and 
Reserve components who do not live in the immediate vicinity of 
military installations.
                         TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE

                      Subtitle A--Benefits Matters

Improved procedures for cancer screening for women (sec. 701)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
additional flexibility to the Secretary of Defense in providing 
primary and preventive health care services needed by women, 
specifically screenings for cervical cancer and breast cancer. 
The committee is concerned that the current statutory 
limitation concerning pap smears and mammograms in section 
1074d of title 10, United States Code, is a barrier to access 
to newly developed and more effective screening techniques.
National mail-order pharmacy program (sec. 702)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
existing pharmacy benefit for military beneficiaries by 
requiring that all refill prescriptions of maintenance 
medications be obtained from the Department of Defense national 
mail-order pharmacy program, unless waived by the Secretary of 
Defense based on clinical need. The provision would also 
prohibit the Department from requiring co-payment for refills 
of generic medications, as well as brand name medications 
determined by a physician to be medically necessary, which are 
obtained from the national mail-order pharmacy program.
    The committee believes that the Department has ample 
evidence to support action to stimulate use of the national 
mail-order pharmacy program as an alternative to its more 
costly retail pharmacy program, and that benefit changes in the 
pharmacy program should be initiated in fiscal year 2007. 
Shifting refills of maintenance medications from military 
treatment facility pharmacies to the national mail-order 
pharmacy program should provide opportunities to realign 
hospital and clinic resources in support of other needs. The 
committee commends the Department for providing incentives and 
encouragement for beneficiaries to use the national mail-order 
pharmacy program.
Availability under TRICARE of anesthesia for children in connection 
        with dental procedures for which dental anesthesia is 
        inappropriate (sec. 703)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
payment under TRICARE for hospitalization and anesthesia 
services in connection with dental treatment for a child under 
the age of six for whom conventional dental anesthesia is not 
advisable or safe. Although such services may be available in 
certain military treatment facilities, cost sharing features of 
the TRICARE Dental Program are a barrier to access to these 
services from civilian hospitals if care is not available in a 
military hospital.
TRICARE coverage for forensic examinations following sexual assaults 
        and domestic violence (sec. 704)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
payment under TRICARE for forensic examinations following a 
sexual assault or domestic violence. Although such examinations 
may be compensated by a State's Victim Compensation Funds, 
practices vary widely within and among states. The committee 
believes that a consistent policy of payment for such 
examinations is an appropriate improvement to the TRICARE 
program.
Prohibition on increase in fiscal year 2007 in enrollment fees for 
        coverage under TRICARE Prime (sec. 705)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
any increase in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees during fiscal 
year 2007. The committee is concerned that the proposed fee 
adjustments, intended to achieve a cumulative increase of 115 
percent, comparable to that of the Federal Employee Health 
Benefit Program, by fiscal year 2008, are premature. The 
committee notes that the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Personnel and Readiness has pledged to work in partnership with 
the Congress in determining future benefit changes. The 
committee believes that the audit of health care costs of the 
Department of Defense by the Comptroller General, authorized 
elsewhere in this report, is an essential building block prior 
to consideration of future increases.

Limitation on fiscal year 2007 increase in premiums for coverage under 
        TRICARE of members of Reserve components who commit to 
        continued service in Selected Reserve after release from active 
        duty (sec. 706)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
increase in premiums under the program known as TRICARE Reserve 
Select to 2.2 percent, the amount of the pay raise, in fiscal 
year 2007. The committee believes that the audit of Department 
of Defense health care costs required elsewhere in this report 
is essential prior to consideration of further significant 
adjustments to health care cost sharing requirements, including 
the application of any annual inflationary index.

           Subtitle B--Planning, Programming, and Management


Treatment of TRICARE Retail Pharmacy Network under Federal procurement 
        of pharmaceuticals (sec. 721)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that the TRICARE retail pharmacy network is covered by the 
federal pricing limits applicable to covered drugs under 
section 8126 of title 38, United States Code. The provision 
would reaffirm a decision made by the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs on October 24, 2002, and implemented by the Department 
of Defense on October 1, 2004, that drugs purchased by the 
Department of Defense through the TRICARE retail pharmacy 
network are subject to the same federal pricing limits that 
have long applied to drugs purchased by the Department and 
provided through military hospitals and clinics and the 
national mail order program.

Relationship between the TRICARE program and employer-sponsored group 
        health care plans (sec. 722)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
public and private employers with 20 or more employees from 
providing a financial incentive to TRICARE-eligible retirees to 
utilize TRICARE as the primary payer for health care in lieu of 
health care benefits offered to all other employees. The 
provision would establish a penalty of $5,000 for each 
violation. The provision would ensure the right of any military 
retiree who is eligible for TRICARE to obtain those benefits on 
the same basis as all other retirees who have earned such 
coverage in return for a career of military service.
    The Secretary of Defense testified before the Committee on 
Armed Services on February 7, 2006, that as a result of many 
private and state employers dropping their employer coverage 
for military retirees and directing or encouraging them to rely 
on TRICARE, ``the military is increasingly subsidizing the 
health care costs of private corporations, organizations and 
state and local governments.'' The committee believes that such 
efforts will drain needed operational resources from the 
Department of Defense, and though legal at this time, must be 
curtailed in the future.
    The committee expects the Department to consult with the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney 
General, as appropriate, in the administration and enforcement 
of this provision.

Enrollment in the TRICARE program (sec. 723)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a system of enrollment for 
all beneficiaries who obtain health care services from the 
military health care system. The provision would authorize the 
Secretary to collect a one-time administrative fee not to 
exceed $25.00 for individuals and $40.00 for families, unless 
waived, as a condition for certain beneficiaries to receive 
military health care services under TRICARE standard. The 
provision would require the Secretary to reach out to covered 
beneficiaries through health risk assessments, improved 
communication, and surveys. The committee believes that a 
modern health care system must have the capability to reach out 
to its users in order to become more efficient, to improve 
customer service, and to identify persons whose complex medical 
conditions will benefit from improved care management.

Incentive payments for the provision of services under the TRICARE 
        program in medically underserved areas (sec. 724)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
incentive payments for physicians who provide services to 
TRICARE eligible beneficiaries in medically underserved areas. 
The incentive payment would be 5 percent of the amount payable 
for the service under the TRICARE program in an area designated 
by the Secretary of Health and Human Services as a primary care 
scarcity county or specialist care scarcity county, and 10 
percent of the TRICARE amount in an area designed as a health 
professional shortage area. The bonus amount would be in 
addition to the maximum authorized payment under the TRICARE 
program.
    The committee is concerned that eligible service members 
and their families who live in such areas, especially members 
of the National Guard and Reserve components, continue to 
experience challenges in access to health care services under 
TRICARE. The provision is intended to extend to the TRICARE 
program authority similar to that provided in the Medical 
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 
(Public Law 108-173) to improve health care access in medically 
underserved areas. The committee believes that the recommended 
provision would be complementary to the Department's existing 
authority to waive local reimbursement rates when access is 
impeded due to lack of providers, and will contribute to 
improvements in health care access for all beneficiaries, 
especially members of the National Guard and Reserve 
components.

Standardization of claims processing under TRICARE program and Medicare 
        program (sec. 725)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that by October 1, 2007, all TRICARE claims processing 
requirements with respect to identification of providers and 
documentation of medical necessity be identical to medicare 
claims processing requirements. The provision would also 
authorize Department of Defense health care claims processing 
contractors to collect amounts owed by third party payers 
immediately upon presentation of claims. Finally, the provision 
would require the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual 
report to Congress setting forth a complete list of claims 
processing requirements under the TRICARE program that differ 
from the medicare program, and a business case justifying the 
Department's unique requirement. The committee believes that 
increased efficiencies can be obtained through a higher degree 
of uniformity with the medical claims processing requirements 
in medicare, including greater utilization of electronic claims 
submission by providers.

Requirements for support of military treatment facilities by civilian 
        contractors under TRICARE (sec. 726)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
each TRICARE Regional Office Director to develop an integrated 
plan for support of military treatment facilities by contracted 
civilian health care and administrative personnel. The 
provision would require approval by the TRICARE Regional Office 
Director of all such contracts, in accordance with a consistent 
process for developing cost benefit analyses of such agreements 
prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. The provision would 
also require consistent standards of quality for contracted 
support personnel, including accreditation of health care 
staffing in accordance with the Joint Commission on 
Accreditation of Health Care Organization Health Care Staffing 
Standards.
    The committee is concerned that contracting for support 
services has become fragmented and inefficient in the TRICARE 
program. Based on information obtained from beneficiaries and 
contractors alike, it appears to lack rigor in terms of 
performance outcomes, providing incentives for achieving 
efficiencies, and consistent quality standards for contracted 
personnel. In light of the Department's intent to continue 
conversion of military medical personnel to civilians, either 
as federal employees or contracted support, it is crucial that 
the Department reexamine the effectiveness of all of its 
contracting approaches in order to achieve maximum efficiency 
in the military health care system.

Uniform standards for access to health care services for wounded or 
        injured servicemembers (sec. 727)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe uniform standards for the 
access of wounded or injured service members to health care 
services. The provision would ensure that if the standard 
established by the Secretary of Defense cannot be met due to 
any limitation on military health care resources, that services 
will be obtained, in accordance with access standards, from 
authorized civilian providers. The Secretary of each military 
department would be required to maintain a system to track the 
performance of the military health care system in achieving 
uniform standards of access for all types of care for wounded 
or injured members.
    In cases that have been brought to the attention of the 
committee, wounded members have been delayed in obtaining 
needed medical and rehabilitative services due to a shortage of 
providers in military hospitals and clinics. The required 
policy is intended to clarify the priority for service to the 
wounded throughout the military health care system, to ensure 
that care is obtained through civilian sources of care if it is 
not available in a timely manner in military hospitals and 
clinics, and to ensure that the performance of the health care 
system in this regard is monitored by senior leadership.

Disease and chronic care management (sec. 728)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a comprehensive program on 
disease and chronic care management for all categories of 
beneficiaries under TRICARE. The program would include, at a 
minimum, the most common chronic diseases--diabetes, cancer, 
heart disease, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, 
and depression and anxiety disorders. The program would meet 
nationally-recognized accreditation standards for such 
programs, such as those available through the National 
Committee for Quality Assurance.
    The committee notes that the Defense Business Board's 
Healthcare for Military Retirees Task Group recommended in its 
December 2005 report that the Department move aggressively in 
the establishment of wellness initiatives. The committee 
believes that a more comprehensive and structured care 
management program for chronically ill beneficiaries of all 
ages is needed. The committee recognizes that quality 
improvements and savings will be dependent on the level of 
financial investment, and would require the Secretary to 
eliminate financial disincentives in support of disease and 
chronic care management programs within the Department of 
Defense health care system.

Post-deployment health assessments for members of the Armed Forces 
        returning from deployment in support of a contingency operation 
        (sec. 729)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe requirements for post-
deployment health and mental health assessments for each member 
of the armed forces returning from deployment in support of a 
contingency operation, and that each such assessment be 
conducted by a qualified health care provider. The provision 
would require the Secretary to prescribe the criteria to be 
used by health care providers in determining whether to refer a 
member of the armed forces for further evaluation for mental 
health care, and to ensure that providers are properly trained 
in the consistent application of the criteria. The provision 
would also require the establishment of tracking and quality 
assurance mechanisms to ensure that needed referrals for mental 
health care are accomplished and can be documented.
    The committee is concerned by recent findings of the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) that reveal significant 
shortfalls in the Department's post-deployment health 
assessment processes in the area of mental health care. The GAO 
found that the Department of Defense did not provide specific 
criteria for health care providers to follow when deciding to 
issue a referral for mental health or combat/operational stress 
evaluation, and that there was no specific training required to 
ensure the consistent identification by health care providers 
of persons who are at risk for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder 
(PTSD). On average, only 22 percent of service members whose 
response to questions on the post-deployment health assessment 
were consistent with risk for PTSD were referred for further 
evaluation. In addition, the Department could not document that 
mental health services were obtained by service members as a 
result of the referral for care. The committee expects urgency 
in the resolution of the problems identified by the GAO 
concerning consistency and effectiveness of post-deployment 
mental health referrals.

                    Subtitle C--Studies and Reports


Pilot projects on early diagnosis and treatment of Post Traumatic 
        Stress Disorder and other mental health conditions (sec. 741)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct three pilot projects during 
fiscal year 2007 to evaluate the efficacy of various approaches 
to improving the capability of the military and civilian health 
care systems to provide early diagnosis and treatment of Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and other mental health 
conditions experienced by military members returning from 
combat.
    The provision would require that:
          (1) one pilot project be carried out at a military 
        medical facility that supports a large mobilization and 
        demobilization site;
          (2) a second pilot project be carried out at the 
        location of a National Guard or Reserve unit located 
        more than 40 miles away from a military installation; 
        and
          (3) a third pilot project use and evaluate the 
        utility of Internet-based automated tools to aid 
        military and civilian health care providers in the 
        diagnosis and treatment of PTSD, as well as web-based 
        tools available to family members to assist them in the 
        identification of emerging symptoms in military 
        members.
    The committee recommends $10.0 million for support of the 
pilot projects in fiscal year 2007.
    Studies of soldiers returning from Operation Enduring 
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom conducted over the last 2 
years have consistently found that a significant number of 
military service members are at risk for depression or PTSD due 
to combat-related stress. Although the Department of Defense 
announced in January 2005 its intention to require additional 
follow-up mental health assessments, the program is not fully 
implemented. A recent General Accountability Office study on 
post-deployment mental health care found that 80 percent of 
service members who were at risk for PTSD based on answers to 
post-deployment mental health questions were never referred for 
additional care. Of those that were referred, the Department 
could not document that care was actually received. Finally, as 
of April 21, 2007, the Department had not established the 
Department of Defense Task Force, as required in section 721 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-163), which was intended to be instrumental in 
the initiation of a broad range of mental health efforts for 
military members and their families, and has not, to our 
knowledge, implemented the required pilot project in section 
721(b) of that Act, which would employ Internet-based tools for 
diagnosis, treatment, and educational assistance to families on 
PTSD and other combat-related stress disorders.
    The committee expects that the Department of Defense will, 
in the development and implementation of strategies to address 
the mental health needs of those serving in the global war on 
terror, ensure that such programs are designed to address the 
unique needs and circumstances faced by members and families of 
the National Guard and Reserve.

Annual reports on certain medical malpractice cases (sec. 742)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
each Secretary of a military department to report annually to 
the Secretary of Defense on cases involving allegations of 
medical malpractice for non-active duty beneficiaries in 
military hospitals, and involving a judgment or settlement in 
the amount of $1.0 million or more. The provision would also 
require the Secretary of a military department to report 
annually to the Secretary of Defense on any case in which the 
death or serious injury of a military member occurred as a 
result of medical malpractice. The provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to transmit to the congressional defense 
committees the results of the reports submitted by the 
Secretaries of the military departments by February 1, 2007, 
and annually thereafter. The committee intends in this 
provision to increase timely awareness of significant cases 
involving medical malpractice, and actions taken to improve 
medical quality performance throughout the Department of 
Defense health care system.

Comptroller General study on the Department of Defense pharmacy 
        benefits program (sec. 743)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
study of the Department of Defense pharmacy benefits program by 
the Comptroller General 9 months from the date of enactment of 
this Act. The study would examine the cost and structure of the 
program required by section 1074g of title 10, United States 
Code, as well as the composition and function of the Pharmacy 
and Therapeutics Committee and Beneficiary Advisory Panel. The 
committee believes that an external review of the pharmacy 
benefit program is timely, in light of expanding utilization of 
pharmaceuticals in health care delivery. The Department's 
pharmacy benefits program has not been reviewed externally 
since its implementation in 2003.

Comptroller General audits of Department of Defense health care costs 
        and cost-saving measures (sec. 744)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General to conduct a detailed audit of Department 
of Defense health care costs, in order to examine the basis for 
comparison of costs for health care benefits provided to 
eligible beneficiaries from 1995 to 2005. The provision would 
require analysis of the assumptions used by the Department in 
estimating savings through increased cost-sharing by 
beneficiaries beginning in fiscal year 2007, including the 
annual rate of inflation of defense health care costs and how 
that rate compares with the average annual rate of increase in 
the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program. The provision 
would also require an audit of the costs of the Department in 
implementing expanded health care benefits for Reserves through 
the TRICARE Reserve Select Program, and a comparison of premium 
rates established for that program with actual costs of 
providing benefits, including the 8.5 percent increase applied 
in January 2005.
    The committee believes that an independent audit of the 
financial basis and effect of any proposed increase in TRICARE 
premiums or deductibles is necessary prior to proceeding with 
further consideration of future benefit changes.

Review of Department of Defense medical quality improvement program 
        (sec. 745)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to contract for an independent review of 
the scope and performance of the Department of Defense medical 
quality improvement program, and to compare the program with 
quality improvement programs and mechanisms used by other 
public and private health care systems and organizations.
    The committee understands that the Department is pursuing 
numerous quality improvement techniques, based on its annual 
report to Congress on health care quality. The committee 
believes that continuous improvement in medical quality is the 
highest healthcare priority. Accordingly, the committee 
believes than an independent assessment of the Department's 
program, along with a comparative analysis of the practices of 
other public and private health care organizations, is a 
valuable building block in ensuring health care quality for all 
military beneficiaries.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


Extension of limitation on conversion of military medical and dental 
        positions to civilian medical and dental positions (sec. 761)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend to 
fiscal year 2007 and future years a requirement in section 744 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-163) for the Secretary of Defense to certify 
that conversion of military medical positions to civilian or 
contractor positions does not increase the cost, or erode 
access to or the quality of military health care. The provision 
would require that the certification be submitted with the 
President's budget request beginning in fiscal year 2008.
    The committee intends to remain vigilant over the planned 
conversions of military medical positions in the Department of 
Defense, especially in light of challenging medical readiness 
requirements and anticipated shortfalls in medical personnel 
needed during wartime. The committee considers a conversion of 
a military medical position to a civilian or contractor 
position to occur on the effective date of the documentation 
converting the position. The committee encourages the 
Department to consider the full cost, including training costs, 
of military and civilian health care personnel in making its 
determination concerning cost saving in this initiative.

                       Items of Special Interest


Sustaining the military health care benefit

    The committee believes that the Secretary of Defense has 
acted prudently in calling attention to the increasing costs of 
military health care benefits, and concurs that reform is 
needed in order to sustain the highest quality health care 
benefits for all members of the armed forces and their 
families, and for retired members and their families. The 
committee is concerned, however, that the President's budget 
request for fiscal year 2007 was reduced by $735.0 million in 
anticipation of enactment of legislation and significant 
benefit changes related to its package of reforms, known as 
``Sustain the Benefit'', without prior consultation with 
Congress. The committee believes that more time is needed to 
examine both the factual basis and the potential for savings 
assumed by proposed increases in enrollment fees for retirees 
under TRICARE Prime, increases in deductible amounts for 
TRICARE Standard, and a potential annual inflation index for 
future financial stability. The committee is also concerned 
that savings which rely on the departure from TRICARE of 
military retirees who have earned health care coverage in 
return for a career of military service is contrary to the 
nation's responsibility for stewardship that such retirees 
deserve.
    The committee is aware of the programming and budgeting 
practices of the Department of Defense. As such, the committee 
has reason to believe that the Defense Health Program (DHP) has 
been decreased in the Future Years Defense Program in 
anticipation of savings from these reforms. Inasmuch as the 
committee is not recommending that all the reforms be enacted, 
the DHP is also underfunded in future years. The committee 
strongly urges the Secretary to adjust the funding programmed 
for the DHP accordingly before the President's budget request 
for fiscal year 2008 is submitted to the Congress.
    Rising health care costs are not unique to the military 
health care system. In hearings conducted by the Subcommittee 
on Personnel of the Committee on Armed Services in April 2005, 
private sector experts described ongoing reform efforts in 
private industry that include, but are not limited to, 
increasing the level of financial participation by covered 
beneficiaries. Best practices in private industry also include 
aggressive disease management and quality improvement programs.
    The committee commends the Department for reform efforts 
already underway, including plans for the deployment of an 
electronic medical records system. However, the committee 
believes that more needs to be done. Health care reform will be 
incremental, but it must be achieved. The committee recommends 
10 provisions (secs.702, 721, 722, 723, 725, 726, 728, 744, 
745, and 923) for fiscal year 2007 that are intended to support 
the transformation of the military health system to a modern 
and more efficient health care system. The committee will 
continue to work with all TRICARE stakeholders in the 
formulation of future health care reforms to ensure that high 
quality benefits are sustainable for generations to come.

Basrah Children's Hospital, Iraq

    The Basrah Children's hospital is a public-private venture 
of the United States Government and Project Hope to provide a 
94 bed acute care hospital to care for severely ill children 
throughout Iraq. The facility will include a capability to 
provide a special focus on childhood cancers. In spite of 
schedule delays, which are consistent with reconstruction 
efforts elsewhere in Iraq, Project Hope and the Iraqi Ministry 
of Health continue to train Iraqi health care providers in 
specialty medical services needed by severely ill children in 
Iraq. The committee believes that the Basrah Children's 
Hospital, when complete, will serve as a model of excellence 
for improving pediatric health care in Iraq and treatment for 
critically ill infants and children.

Mental Health Self-Assessment Program

    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has 
utilized the Mental Health Self-Assessment Program to 
facilitate identification by soldiers and their families of 
symptoms or warning signs of depression or Post-Traumatic 
Stress Disorder (PTSD) following deployment. The committee 
believes that this program can be an effective tool in helping 
service members and their families deal with the stress of 
deployments. The committee directs that the Secretary of 
Defense report to the congressional defense committees within 
120 days of enactment of this Act on the Department's efforts:
         (1) to include the Mental Health Self-Assessment 
        Program in ongoing efforts to address PTSD and other 
        mental health conditions related to deployment;
         (2) to include services for the children of deployed 
        or mobilized service members in the program; and
         (3) to increase awareness of the program for military 
        members and their families, including the National 
        Guard and Reserve components.

Services for autism

    The committee has learned from concerned military families 
that a recent change in policy concerning Applied Behavior 
Analysis (ABA) services for autistic children under TRICARE has 
resulted in restricted access to care for hundreds of military 
families who had previously received such services. Prior to 
the establishment of the Extended Care Health Option (ECHO) on 
September 1, 2005, military families had access to ABA services 
for autistic children under TRICARE, generally in accordance 
with the recommendation of the National Research Council report 
on ``Educating Children with Autism'' (2001), of 25 hours a 
week, 12 months a year, using trained therapists working under 
the supervision of a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. Upon 
institution of the ECHO program, the Department of Defense 
restricted reimbursement for the hands-on providers of ABA 
services to Board Certified Behavior Analysts, based on quality 
of care concerns. The committee is concerned about the 
restriction on access to care that the new policy under ECHO 
has created. The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Health Affairs to reexamine the policy on ABA 
services in light of the needs of hundreds of military families 
for such services, and to report to the congressional defense 
committees on the results of such reexamination within 60 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act, including any policy, 
program, and legislative changes needed to provide adequate ABA 
services to autistic children who are authorized TRICARE 
beneficiaries.

TRICARE customer service

    The committee views improvements in customer service as a 
continuing challenge for the Department of Defense, and one 
which must be accorded a high priority in health care reform 
efforts. While overall satisfaction with TRICARE remains high, 
according to independent surveys and comparison with other 
large health plans, the committee believes that greater 
efficiencies are achievable in customer service support. 
TRICARE has more than 14 separate toll free lines, each 
operated to address a specific program, such as the TRICARE 
pharmacy program, TRICARE for Life, or the TRICARE Dental 
Program. At the local level, individual telephone access 
numbers for appointments, beneficiary counseling, or debt 
collection multiply even further. The committee believes that 
the proliferation of separate telephone lines in a unified 
health benefits program represents an outdated solution to 
modern customer service support, and that opportunities for 
improved customer service need to be examined as the Department 
proceeds to define requirements for future health care support 
contracts. The committee directs the Department to conduct a 
study on the cost benefit and feasibility of establishing an 
enterprise-level call and communications system for the TRICARE 
program, and to report to the congressional defense committees 
its findings by February 1, 2007.
  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

             Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

Additional certification requirements for major defense acquisition 
        programs (sec. 801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 39 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to include additional certifications 
before a major defense acquisition program receives Milestone B 
approval, or Key Decision Point B approval in the case of a 
space program.
    Section 801 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) required the Secretary to 
make certain certifications regarding the maturity of 
technology at the initiation of a major acquisition program; 
the affordability of the program; the completion of an analysis 
of alternatives with respect to the program; and the validation 
of the operational requirements for the program by the Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council. However, the committee 
understands that the Defense Acquisition Board takes other 
factors into consideration that must be considered as part of 
the process for Milestone B approval.
    The National Military Strategy provides the overarching 
guidance for the Department of Defense's execution of the 
National Security Strategy and a program should be evaluated 
and validated in that context. Prior into entry into system 
development and demonstration, the Department conducts an 
independent cost estimate that includes the total costs of the 
program. The Secretary should pay particular attention to 
estimated costs of the program as it enters into full rate 
production to ensure that the program is affordable within an 
estimate of the future defense budget.
    This provision would ensure that a program certified by the 
Secretary meets validated requirements consistent with the 
National Military Strategy; reasonable estimates have been 
developed to execute the product development and production 
plan under the program; and funding is available to execute the 
product development and production plan.
Extension and enhancement of Defense Acquisition Challenge program 
        (sec. 802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend and 
modify authority for the Department of Defense to execute the 
Defense Acquisition Challenge program. The provision would 
extend through 2012 the program originally established in the 
Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2003 (Public Law 107-314). Although the Department originally 
opposed the establishment of the program, the committee notes 
that the Department now supports the program and believes it 
``helps to encourage small and medium business innovation in 
weapon system products and facilitates rapid adoption of near-
term technologies by the warfighter.'' Despite the programmatic 
mission to increase participation by nontraditional defense 
contractors, the committee understands that 7 out of the 
Department's 10 largest dollar volume contractors in fiscal 
years 2004 and 2005 have made use of the limited acquisition 
challenge budget and staff resources to pursue challenge 
proposals. Consistent with the original congressional and 
Department plans for the program, the provision would also 
provide the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics with authority to establish 
procedures to ensure that the program is focused on small and 
medium-sized businesses, as well as nontraditional defense 
contractors, who often serve as the engine of innovation in 
technology.
Baseline description and unit cost reports for major defense 
        acquisition systems (sec. 803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
definition of the term ``Original Baseline Estimate'', and 
provide for periodic reporting of program acquisition unit 
costs and procurement unit costs above the significant cost 
growth thresholds identified in section 2433 of title 10, 
United States Code.
    Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) defined the term Original 
Baseline Estimate and restricted the circumstances in which a 
baseline estimate could be modified. The committee acknowledges 
that cost estimates made prior to a program entering into 
systems development and demonstration are a more realistic 
approximation of the actual costs of the program and are 
independently reviewed by the Department of Defense. The 
provision would modify the definition of Original Baseline 
Estimate to mean the baseline established before the program 
enters into system development and demonstration.
    The provision would also clarify the Department's reporting 
obligations after the program acquisition unit cost or 
procurement unit cost has exceeded the significant cost growth 
threshold. The provision would require that each Selected 
Acquisition Report following the breach include updated 
information concerning unit costs, but does not compel the 
program manager to submit an out of cycle report of each 
additional increase in unit costs.
Major automated information system programs (sec. 804) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that, as part of the annual budget justification materials, the 
Department of Defense provide to the congressional defense 
committees a report on programs designated as major automated 
information systems (MAIS). The report would include the 
estimate of developmental costs and total life-cycle costs 
(original and current), a schedule of major events (original 
and current), and a brief summary of key performance criteria 
(original and current).
    The provision would further require the Department to 
promptly notify the congressional defense committees when a 
program manager responsible for a MAIS program becomes aware 
that a MAIS program may exceed 25 percent of either 
developmental or life-cycle cost estimates, expects to slip any 
major scheduled event by more than 1 year, or expects to 
deviate significantly in performance goals. That program would 
be subject to the reporting requirements similar to those 
included in section 2433, of title 10, United States Code, 
commonly referred to as the Nunn-McCurdy reporting 
requirements.
    Over the past several months, the committee has been 
disappointed to learn of multiple major automated information 
systems within the Department that have slipped in both cost 
and schedule without notification to Congress. The committee 
remains disturbed by the continued requirements creep and 
resources drain from which most major information technology 
programs suffer.
    In Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction Number 5000.2, 
the Department stipulates the criteria to be met in order to 
designate a program as a major automated information system 
(MAIS). Currently, 47 programs meet the MAIS criteria. The 
Department has 26 internal reporting requirements for MAIS 
programs that incorporate aspects of cost, schedule, and 
performance. Additionally, the services are required to report 
deviations in accordance with Department Strategic Information 
Management Plans. As of June 2004, according to the Government 
Accountability Office, no MAIS program has been reported as 
having deviated significantly from its goals, despite not one 
MAIS program having met cost, schedule, or performance 
criteria. This legislative provision would clarify reporting 
requirements to the congressional defense committees for MAIS 
programs and stipulate actions required if deviations occur to 
program cost, schedule, or performance criteria.
Adjustment of original baseline estimates for major defense acquisition 
        program experiencing cost growth resulting from damage caused 
        by hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma (sec. 805) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Department of Defense to adjust the original baseline estimate 
under section 2435(d) of title 10, United States Code, for a 
major defense program that is carried out primarily in the 
areas affected by Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma for the 
sole purpose of addressing cost growth that is directly 
attributable to damage caused by those hurricanes. The 
provision would require that the Secretary of Defense notify 
the congressional defense committees of a program adjustment 
under this provision and provide an explanation of the basis 
for an adjustment in the first Selected Acquisition Report that 
is submitted under section 2432 of title 10, United States 
Code.
    In division B of the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal 
Year 2006 (Public Law 109-138), the Congress appropriated $1.9 
billion ``for extraordinary shipbuilding and ship repair costs 
* * *'' for areas affected by Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and 
Wilma. In the Department's fiscal year 2006 supplemental 
request for hurricane relief and recovery, the Department 
requested an additional $1.0 billion for ship repair and 
shipyards-related costs. The committee acknowledges that 
supplemental funds added to the shipbuilding programs affected 
by Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma will likely cause the 
shipbuilding programs to breach Nunn-McCurdy thresholds. This 
provision would allow for a one-time adjustment to address cost 
growth associated with these natural disasters.
Internal controls for procurements on behalf of the Department of 
        Defense by certain non-defense agencies (sec. 806) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Department of Defense Inspector General (IG), in consultation 
with applicable Inspector's General of non-defense agencies, to 
determine whether the policies, procedures, and internal 
controls of non-defense agencies for purchases on behalf of the 
Department are adequate to ensure compliance with defense 
procurement requirements. The provision would also expand 
section 811 of the National Defense Authorization for Fiscal 
Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) to include IG reviews of the 
National Institutes of Health and the Veterans' Administration. 
The provision would modify section 811 to make clear that in 
case of a disagreement between the Department IG and the IG of 
a non-defense agency on the level of compliance with defense 
procurement requirements or termination of applicable 
limitations the Department IG would make the final 
determination.
Regulations on use of fixed price contracts in development programs 
        (sec. 807) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to modify Department of Defense 
regulations regarding the use of fixed-price contracts in 
development programs. The provision would permit contracts 
other than fixed-price contracts, only if the Secretary 
determines that the program is so complex and technologically 
challenging that it would not be practical to reduce program 
risk to the level that would permit the use of a fixed-price 
contract. The provision would also repeal section 807 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1989 (Public 
Law 100-456), which prohibited the use of fixed-price 
development contracts.
    Twenty years ago, the Department experimented with the 
aggressive use of fixed-price development contracts, and 
learned that the use of such contracts is not practicable in 
development programs with a high degree of technical risk. In 
response, Congress enacted section 807, which prohibits the use 
of fixed-price type development contracts unless a waiver is 
granted by the Secretary of Defense. In testimony before the 
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on 
March 29, 2006, Mr. Terry R. Little, Acquisition Advisor to the 
Director, Missile Defense Agency, stated:

          In particular, the Department applied fixed-price 
        contracts to very high-risk development programs and, 
        typically, the program selected the low bidder as the 
        winning contractor. These two factors together produced 
        contracts with very unrealistically low prices and 
        predictable bad results as the work unfolded.

    Unfortunately, the prohibition on the use of fixed-price 
development contracts appears to have contributed to widespread 
cost and schedule growth on major defense acquisition programs. 
Mr. Little further explained:

          The certain prospect of a cost reimbursable contract 
        encourages contractors and acquirers to undertake 
        developments that are excessively high risk. A new 
        development that relies on essential technologies that 
        are immature, manufacturing processes that not yet 
        proven, or beyond the state-of-the-art breakthroughs is 
        surely going to be disappointing. It's going to cost 
        more, take longer, and deliver less than anyone 
        expected when it started. I argue that most everything 
        the Department needs to develop today can proceed in 
        low-risk stages with each stage providing an increment 
        of capability. The expectation for that capability 
        should be consistent with what we know we can provide 
        at low-risk and in a short, predictable development 
        time. Therefore, each increment should also be 
        compatible with a fixed price contract; if it's truly 
        not, then the risk is probably too high to start.

    The committee and the Department have consistently 
recognized the importance of reducing program risk by avoiding 
the incorporation of immature technologies and unproven 
manufacturing processes into major defense acquisition 
programs. Over the past several months, a series of major 
studies have reaffirmed the need for reducing program risk, 
including a July 2005 report by the Center for Strategic and 
International Studies, a January 2006 report of the Defense 
Acquisition Program Assessment, a February 2006 report by the 
Defense Science Board, and the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review. 
One of the common themes that ran through all these reports was 
the need for program stability and reduced program risk.
    In a March 2006 report, entitled ``Improved Business Case 
Is Needed for Future Combat System's Successful Outcome,'' the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) highlighted the use of 
technology readiness levels (TRL) as:

        a valuable decision-making tool because they can 
        presage the likely consequences of incorporating a 
        technology at a given level of maturity into a product 
        development. The maturity level of a technology can 
        range from paper studies (level 1), to prototypes that 
        can be tested in a realistic environment (level 7), to 
        an actual system that has proven itself in mission 
        operations (level 9).

The GAO noted that ``best practices of leading commercial firms 
and successful DOD programs have shown that critical 
technologies should be mature to at least a TRL 7 before the 
start of product development.''
    According to Department acquisition policy, a technology 
should have been demonstrated in a relevant environment (TRL 6) 
or, preferably, in an operational environment (TRL 7) to be 
considered mature enough to use for product development in 
systems integration. DOD Instruction 5000.2 states that at the 
time of entry into the System Demonstration phase of a program:

          The management and mitigation of technology risk, 
        which allows less costly and less time-consuming 
        systems development, is a crucial part of overall 
        program management and is especially relevant to 
        meeting cost and schedule goals. * * * If technology is 
        not mature, the DOD component shall use alternative 
        technology that is mature and that can meet the user's 
        needs.

    The committee believes that fixed-price contracts are 
preferable, if the Department has a firm grasp of the 
requirements and the technology to meet these requirements. A 
prudent application of technology readiness levels should 
enable the Department to lower risk and develop a better 
understanding of program costs. At the same time, the committee 
recognizes that this contract type will not be appropriate for 
all situations. Therefore, the provision would authorize the 
Secretary to make a determination on the use of different types 
of contracts in appropriate to the circumstances.
    For production programs, as for development programs, the 
contract type selected should reflect the level of risk in the 
program. A major defense acquisition program that meets the 
criteria in DOD Instruction 5000.2 for production programs 
should be a relatively low-risk program for both the Department 
and the contractor. Absent unusual circumstances, the contract 
type selected should reflect that level of risk.
    Finally, the committee notes that the reduction of 
manufacturing risks may be measured, consistent with the 
recommendations of the Defense Science Board and in accordance 
with industry standards, through the use of Manufacturing 
Readiness Levels (MRL's). Similarly, the system 
interoperability may be measured through Interoperability 
Readiness Levels (IRL's). The committee directs the Department 
to report to the congressional defense committees by no later 
than March 1, 2007, on the feasibility of incorporating MRL's 
and IRL's into DOD Instruction 5000.2 as explicit criteria for 
milestone decisions.
Availability of funds for performance-based logistics contracts for 
        weapons systems logistics support (sec. 808) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to use Operation and Maintenance (O&M) 
funds for Performance Based Logistics (PBL) contracts to 
finance costs associated with the implementation of engineering 
changes that result in a reduction of government O&M costs. By 
authorizing the use of O&M funds for these traditional 
investment costs, the contractor would have an incentive to 
make engineering changes that would actually result in a lower 
cost of operation, resulting in cost savings that would not 
otherwise be available.
    The provision would require the Secretary of the military 
department concerned to notify Congress not later than 30 days 
before entering into a performance-based logistics contract. 
That notification must include a statement that the procuring 
agency had demonstrated in a business case analysis that the 
proposed PBL contract's implementation of engineering changes 
would result in a reduction of O&M costs, including an estimate 
of the projected costs and savings along with an explanation of 
the basis for those estimates.
Quality control in procurement of ship critical safety items and 
        related services (sec. 809) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to prescribe in regulation a quality 
control policy for the procurement of ship critical safety 
items and the procurement of modifications, repair, and 
overhaul of such items. This provision would bring the quality 
control requirements for ship critical safety items and related 
services in line with the requirements for aviation critical 
safety items.
    The committee remains concerned by periodic reports about 
problems with the quality of critical parts for major weapon 
systems acquired by the Department of Defense. For this reason, 
the committee directs the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) to conduct a comprehensive review of the quality 
assurance and quality control systems used by the Department 
and its largest contractors. The GAO review should compare the 
systems used by the Department and its contractors to the 
quality control and quality assurance systems used by private 
sector companies who are considered to be industry leaders, and 
make such recommendations as the Comptroller General determines 
to be appropriate. The Comptroller General will submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees no later than April 1, 
2007, on the findings of the review.
Three-year extension of requirement for reports on commercial price 
        trend analyses of the Department of Defense (sec. 810) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
requirement for an annual report on price trend analyses for 
commercial items purchased by the Defense Logistics Agency and 
the military departments through 2009. The committee believes 
that aggressive price trend analysis can play an important role 
in ensuring that prices paid on Department of Defense contracts 
are fair and reasonable. This report is an important oversight 
tool in support of that goal.
Pilot program on time-certain development in acquisition of major 
        weapon systems (sec. 811) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program on the 
use of time-certain development in the acquisition of major 
weapon systems.
    In a January 2006 report to the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense, the assessment panel of the Defense Acquisition 
Performance Assessment (DAPA) Project concluded that the 
Department of Defense's failure to appropriately balance 
technology maturity, system capability, cost, and program risk 
before undertaking major defense acquisition programs has led 
to products that ``take tens of years to deliver and cost far 
more than originally estimated.''
    The panel concluded that a shift to time-certain 
development, with schedule as a key performance parameter, 
would help the Department address these problems. The report 
stated that:

          Time Certain Development enforces evolutionary 
        acquisition by making time the focus of the up front 
        requirement statement. Capabilities should be upgraded 
        over time as technologies mature and operational 
        requirements become clearer. Time Certain Development 
        differs from prior attempts at valuing time to market, 
        such as evolutionary acquisition and spiral development 
        in that a maximum number of years is mandated, the 
        start and end dates are defined, and the driving 
        processes (requirements, budget, source selection, 
        etc.) are revamped to support it.''

The committee concurs with the panel's recommendation that a 
disciplined approach to time-certain development should help 
reduce program risk, resulting in a less costly and time-
consuming process for the acquisition of major weapon systems.
    The committee also notes that the DAPA panel recommended 
that the military departments be authorized to create 
management reserves to support stable program funding by using 
expiring funds budgeted for termination liability to reduce the 
impact of unexpected technical upsets during program execution. 
The committee does not believe that there is sufficient 
discipline in the Department's budget, requirements, and 
acquisition processes to support the authorization of such 
accounts. However, this provision would authorize the 
establishment of a more limited special reserve account, 
similar to the accounts recommended by the DAPA panel, but 
limited to major weapon systems that are included in the pilot 
program for time-certain development under this section.

              Subtitle B--Defense Industrial Base Matters 

Removal of hand and measuring tools from certain requirements (sec. 
        821) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would remove hand 
and measuring tools from the requirement to buy certain 
articles from American sources. The committee is not aware of a 
current national security requirement to limit the production 
of hand and measuring tools to domestic sources.
Substitution of specialty metals with titanium and nickel under certain 
        requirements (sec. 822) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would specify 
that domestic source requirements for specialty metals be 
applied specifically to titanium and nickel. The committee 
understands the concerns about the domestic industrial base for 
specialty metals are specific to titanium and nickel.
Waiver authority for domestic source or content requirements (sec. 823) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense the authority to waive the application of 
statutory domestic source requirements and domestic content 
requirements, provided that: (1) the application of the 
requirements would impede the reciprocal procurement of defense 
items under a Memorandum of Understanding between the United 
States and another country; and (2) the other country does not 
discriminate against items produced in the United States to a 
greater degree than the United States discriminates against 
items produced in that country. The proposed waiver is 
identical to the standard previously adopted by the Congress 
for products covered by the domestic content restrictions in 
section 2534 of title 10, United States Code.
Repeal of requirement for identification of essential military items 
        and military system essential item breakout list (sec. 824) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
requirement for identifying essential military items on a 
military system essential item breakout list.
    The Department has indicated that the information required 
by section 813 of the National Defense Authorization Action for 
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) is of limited utility.
Consistency with United States obligations under trade agreements (sec. 
        825) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
that no provision of this Act, or any amendment made by this 
Act, shall apply if the Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with the Secretary of Commerce, the U.S. Trade Representative, 
and the Secretary of State, determines that the application of 
the provision would be inconsistent with international trade 
agreements of the United States.

                Subtitle C--Defense Contractor Matters 

Requirements for defense contractors relating to certain former 
        Department of Defense officials (sec. 841) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
contractors that receive defense contracts in excess of $10.0 
million, other than contracts for the procurement of commercial 
items, to report to the Department of Defense on an annual 
basis on certain former senior Department officials who receive 
compensation from the contractor. A former Department official 
who is identified in one contractor report would not have to be 
identified in subsequent annual reports. The Government 
Accountability Office reported that the monitoring of former 
Department employees who take positions with defense 
contractors is limited. The committee concludes that additional 
information is required to ensure the effectiveness of the 
Department's ethics program.
Lead systems integrators (sec. 842) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
participation of lead systems integrators (LSI) in the 
development or construction of any individual system or element 
of a systems of systems. The provision would also direct the 
Secretary of Defense to define the term ``lead systems 
integrator'' and to update regulations on LSIs taking into 
consideration the importance of LSIs in the production, 
fielding and sustainment of complex systems; the unique 
engineering skills of LSIs; and the management and 
organizational skills and capabilities of LSI. Finally, the 
provision would direct the Secretary to include a specification 
of various types of contracts and fee structures, including 
award and incentive fees, that are appropriate for use by LSIs.
    The committee remains concerned with organizational 
conflicts of interest, the potential for a company to end up in 
a situation whereby the company is essentially evaluating 
itself or its competitors in making contract awards. The 
potential for organizational conflicts of interest continues to 
grow as the Department of Defense contracts for more work 
relating to acquisition, engineering, planning, integrating, or 
managing a system of systems as a major defense acquisition 
program.
    Section 805 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) required the Secretary to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees, not 
later than September 30, 2006, on the use of LSIs in the 
acquisition of major systems. The report required by section 
805 directed that the Department include a detailed description 
of the actions taken, or to be taken, regarding ``the 
prevention of organization conflicts of interest arising out of 
any financial interest of lead systems integrators without 
system responsibility in the development or production of 
individual elements of a major weapons systems.''
    The committee understands that this report may be a work in 
progress. However, the committee believes that the financial 
interests of the Department and the taxpayer need to be 
protected now, not at some point in the future. In testimony 
before the Subcommittee on Airland of the Committee on Armed 
Services on March 1, 2006, the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) stated,
    ``And ideally, you'd want the LSI to be financially 
indifferent to the outcome of the program.'' The provision 
would address the immediate need to place limitations on the 
financial interest of LSIs in the acquisition process.
    In a December 2005 report, entitled ``DOD Has Paid Billions 
in Award and Incentive Fees Regardless of Acquisition 
Outcomes'', the GAO noted that the Department has paid out an 
estimated $8.0 billion in award fees to date on a set of 
contracts they studied for the report. The committee believes 
that the Department must review the types of contracts 
involving LSIs and large complex systems, and issue guidance 
regarding the use of award and incentive contracts when 
contracting with LSIs for complex systems.
Linking of award and incentive fees to acquisition outcomes (sec. 843) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to issue detailed implementation guidance, 
including definitions for performance outcomes, for appropriate 
use of award and incentive fee contracts. The guidance should: 
ensure new award and incentive fee contracts are linked to 
acquisition outcomes; provide instruction and establish 
standards on evaluation of contractor performance and 
appropriate award of fees; ensure no award fees are paid for 
poor performance; and provide specific direction for roll over 
of fees. The provision would also require performance measures 
to evaluate the effectiveness of award and incentive fees and 
mechanisms for sharing successful acquisition strategies. The 
provision would further require an independent evaluation of 
the impact of award fee payment decisions on contractor 
performance.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense issued 
an award fee contract guidance memo on March 29, 2006, in 
response to recommendations made by the General Accountability 
Office (GAO) in a report, entitled ``Defense Acquisitions: DOD 
Has Paid Billions in Award and Incentive Fees Regardless of 
Acquisition Outcomes,'' in December, 2005. During testimony 
before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of 
the Committee on Armed Services in April 2006, Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics Ken Krieg 
acknowledged that the new guidance is a first step in 
addressing ineffective use of performance contracts and that 
the Department must solve the strategic and tactical issues 
behind acquisition and contracting problems. The committee 
commends Department plans to provide senior-level strategic 
thinking to the manner in which the Department ``governs, 
manages and executes its activities.'' The committee believes 
that establishing some guidelines, standards and accountability 
in the use of award and incentive fee contracts, along with an 
evaluation of their strengths and weaknesses when effectively 
used will improve productive use of performance contracts.
Prohibition on excessive pass-through charges (sec. 844) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to modify Department of Defense 
regulations to prohibit excessive pass-through charges on 
contracts or subcontracts that are entered into, for or on the 
behalf of the Department. The provision would exempt contracts 
that are not in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold 
and fixed-price contracts that awarded on the basis of adequate 
price competition or are for the purchase of commercial items.
    The Subcommittee on Airland of the Committee on Armed 
Services has identified a potential problem with pass-through 
charges by contractors responsible for major defense 
acquisition programs. The subcommittee is particularly 
concerned by the possibility that the Department could be 
paying unnecessary pass-through charges to lead-system 
integrators on major weapon systems for which the integrator 
provides no value added, but that are acquired as a part of a 
system-of-systems.
    In addition, recent press articles have described a process 
in which work was passed down from the Army Corps of Engineers 
to a prime contractor, then to a subcontractor, and then to 
another subcontractor--with each company charging the 
government for profit and overhead--before finally reaching the 
company that would actually do the work. In one case, the Army 
Corps of Engineers reportedly paid a prime contractor $1.75 per 
square foot to nail plastic tarps onto damaged roofs in 
Louisiana. The prime contractor paid another company 75 cents 
per square foot to do the work; that subcontractor paid a third 
company 35 cents per square foot to do the work; and that 
subcontractor paid yet another company 10 cents per square foot 
to do the work. In a second case, the Army Corps of Engineers 
reportedly paid prime contractors $28 to $30 per cubic yard to 
remove debris. The companies that actually performed the work 
were paid only $6 to $10 per cubic yard. A representative from 
one of the companies was quoted as saying: ``Every time it 
passes through another layer, $4 or $5 is taken off the top. 
These others are taking out money, and some of them aren't 
doing anything.'' In testimony before the Subcommittee on 
Readiness and Management Support of the Committee on Armed 
Services on April 5, 2006, the Comptroller General, when asked 
his view on pass-through charges, stated that `` * * * one of 
the things that we need more visibility over is: How many 
layers, how many players, how many margins are in here?''.
    The committee believes that the Department needs a 
regulation that addresses excessive pass-through fees to ensure 
that authorized and appropriated funds are spent on developing 
and procuring capabilities, rather than paying for layers of 
contractors who provide no value-added.

Report on Department of Defense contracting with contractors or 
        subcontractors employing members of the Selected Reserve (sec. 
        845) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a study on actual or potential 
contractors or subcontractors who employ members of the 
Selected Reserve. The study should address the extent to which 
Department of Defense contractors employ members of the 
Selected Reserve; potential disadvantages to such contractors 
in competing for Department contracts if their employees are 
mobilized; and make recommendations for any appropriate action 
to provide such contractors with time or assistance in meeting 
contract deadlines. The provision would require the Secretary 
of Defense to submit a report on the study to Congress within a 
year after the date of enactment of this Act, and would repeal 
section 819 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), which provided 
authorization for the Secretary to use employment of Selected 
Reserve members by a contractor as an evaluation factor for 
award of contracts.

                  Subtitle D--Program Manager Matters 


Program Manager Matters (secs. 861-865) 

    The committee recommends five provisions under subtitle D 
that would provide for better management of Department of 
Defense acquisition programs by enhancing the role of program 
managers.
    The committee remains concerned by continued growth in the 
cost and time it takes to field major weapon systems. In 
January 2005, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
reported that the Department acquisition process ``consistently 
yields undesirable consequences--cost increases, late 
deliveries to the warfighter, and performance shortfalls--in 
weapon system programs.'' Similarly, a June 2005 memorandum 
from the Deputy Secretary of Defense concluded that ``Many 
programs continue to increase in cost and schedule even after 
multiple studies and recommendations that span the past 15 
years.''
    In response to a request from the Subcommittee on Readiness 
and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services, GAO 
reviewed best management practices of private sector companies. 
In a November 2005 report, entitled ``Best Practices: Better 
Support of Weapon System Program Managers Needed to Improve 
Outcomes,'' GAO concluded that leading private sector companies 
empower their program managers to execute their programs and 
hold them accountable for the results.
    By contrast, GAO found that the Department fails to give 
program managers the authority they need to execute acquisition 
programs and, as a result, is unable to hold them accountable. 
GAO determined that:

          [O]nce programs begin, the program manager is not 
        empowered to execute the program. In particular, 
        program managers cannot veto new requirements, control 
        funding, or control staff.

           *         *         *         *         *

          With so much outside their span of control, program 
        managers say that DOD is unable to hold them 
        accountable when programs get off track. Another reason 
        that it is difficult to hold program managers 
        accountable is that their tenure is relatively short. 
        The problems being encountered today may well be the 
        result of a poor decision made years ago by another 
        program manager.

    The program manager provisions (secs. 861-865) are designed 
to help address these problems by requiring the application of 
best practices from the commercial sector to Department 
acquisition programs.
    Section 861 would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a comprehensive strategy for enhancing the role of 
Department program managers in carrying out defense acquisition 
programs. The strategy should address a wide array of issues 
identified in the GAO report, including additional recruiting 
incentives, enhanced training and educational opportunities, 
increased emphasis on mentoring, identification of career 
paths, improved resources and technical support, better 
collection and dissemination of lessons learned, better access 
to information and data management tools, increased 
accountability for acquisition results, and enhanced monetary 
and nonmonetary incentives for program managers.
    Section 862 would address the tenure and accountability of 
program managers for the program development period. The 
provision would establish responsibilities of such program 
managers and require that they be assigned to a program until a 
business case has been completed and the program is ready for a 
Milestone B decision.
    Section 863 would address the tenure and accountability of 
program managers for the program execution period. The 
provision would require each such program manager to enter into 
a performance agreement with the milestone decision authority 
(MDA) that establishes the expected parameters of performance, 
including the commitment of the MDA that adequate funding and 
resources are available and will be provided and assurance of 
the program manager that the parameters are achievable. The 
provision would also require that program managers be given 
authority comparable to the authority given to private sector 
program managers and that they be assigned to a program until 
the delivery of the first production units, with a narrow 
waiver authority.
    Section 864 would address the related issue of contingency 
program management. Several senior officials responsible for 
the reconstruction of Iraq have indicated that the effort was 
hindered by deficiencies in the Federal Government's capability 
to manage large projects outside the United States. This 
provision would require the Department, in coordination with 
other relevant components of the Federal Government, to develop 
a comprehensive strategy to ensure the United States has the 
capability to deploy an expert force of appropriate size for 
rapid, independent management of large, complex programs in 
varied, potentially harsh environments.
    Section 865 would require the Comptroller General to submit 
to the congressional defense committees by February 1, 2007 a 
report on actions taken by the Secretary of Defense to comply 
with the requirements of the four sections.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters 


Clarification of authority to carry out certain prototype projects 
        (sec. 871) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160), as amended by section 
823 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2006 (Public Law 109-163), to allow the director of a defense 
agency to make the written determination necessary to exercise 
other transaction authority on a prototype project that is 
expected to cost the Department of Defense in excess of $20.0 
million, but not more than $100.0 million.

One-year extension of special temporary contract closeout authority 
        (sec. 872) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend by 1 
year authority under section 804 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) to 
allow the Department of Defense to settle contracts entered 
into prior to October 1, 1996, under specified conditions.

One-year extension of inapplicability of certain laws to contracting 
        with employers of persons with disabilities (sec. 873) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
1 year section 853 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) to 
ensure the continuation and completion of existing contracts, 
including any options, awarded under the Javits-Wagner-O'Day 
Act (41 U.S.C 46 et seq) and the Randolph-Sheppard Act (20 
U.S.C. 107 et seq) programs for the operation of military troop 
dining facilities, military mess halls, and other similar 
military dining facilities.

                       Items of Special Interest 


Application and interpretation of the Berry amendment

    Over the last several months, the Department of Defense has 
begun to insist that contractors on major weapon systems 
certify that specialty metals included in the components of 
such systems, including every nut, bolt, screw and wire, were 
made in the United States out of domestic materials. This new 
interpretation of the specialty metals provision of the so-
called ``Berry amendment'' (section 2533a of title 10, United 
States Code) has significantly slowed the acceptance of badly-
needed military systems and could soon make it difficult for 
operational units of the armed forces to deploy.
    The committee notes that the Berry amendment, by its terms, 
applies to the procurement of ``an item'', including 
``specialty metals.'' The committee understands that the 
Department has chosen to support the specialty metals 
industrial base by applying the provision to the acquisition of 
many items containing specialty metals. The specialty metals 
provision of the Berry amendment, by its terms, applies only to 
the purchase of specialty metals and not to the acquisition of 
major systems that include specialty metals or to subcontracts 
that are entered at various tiers under such contracts. 
However, the committee believes that the Department has ample 
flexibility to implement the provision in a manner that is 
consistent with the national security needs of the United 
States.
    For the last 30 years, the Department has taken appropriate 
advantage of this flexibility. The specialty metals provision 
of the Berry amendment was initially interpreted by the 
Department in a November 20, 1972, memorandum issued by then-
Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird. The Laird memorandum stated 
that:

          The bulk of these specialty metals which are used in 
        one form or another in myriad items purchased by the 
        Department of Defense are actually procured at the 
        subcontract level--often many subcontract tiers removed 
        from the prime contract--so as to make impracticable 
        any precise evaluation of all such purchases, even at 
        enormous expense in both money and time.
          It is apparent, from the legislative history of this 
        provision, that is was not intended that this 
        Department achieve or attempt to achieve the impossible 
        in its implementation. Rather, it is clear that its 
        purpose is to afford reasonable protection to the 
        specialty metals industry to help preserve our domestic 
        production capacity to satisfy mobilization 
        requirements, without forcing a massive disruption of 
        our existing procurement methods and programs. An 
        accommodation is therefore needed to give maximum 
        effect to this new requirement without losing sight of 
        other Congressional objectives that the Department of 
        Defense function in an efficient and economical manner 
        in meeting its mission.
          [For these reasons] this restriction will not be 
        applied to purchases under $2,500. To do so would 
        result in a massive and costly administrative burden, 
        essentially impossible of real accomplishment, with 
        apparently no more than a de minimis benefit to the 
        industry. Such a result could not have been intended by 
        the Congress.

    The Laird memorandum did not automatically apply the 
specialty metal provision of the Berry amendment to all 
Department systems. Rather, it authorized the Secretaries of 
the military departments to waive the applicability of the 
Berry amendment to the acquisition of specific weapon systems, 
upon a determination under the statute that the application of 
the restriction would preclude the procurement of a 
satisfactory quality and quantity of such systems, as and when 
needed.
    On this basis, the Department has, for more than 30 years, 
applied a rule of reason in implementing the specialty metals 
provision of the Berry amendment, consistent with the 
underlying intent of that provision, including the de minimis 
rule and waiver authority described in the Laird memorandum. 
This interpretation and exercise of administrative flexibility 
has enabled the Department to avoid the absurdity of denying a 
needed weapon system to our armed forces in the field because a 
single fastener contains the wrong specialty metal.
    The committee is concerned that the Department now appears 
to be backing away from this longstanding practice of 
implementing the specialty metals provision of the Berry 
amendment in a manner that provides needed flexibility in the 
acquisition of major weapon systems. The committee is not aware 
of any new industrial base requirements that would require the 
Department to apply more stringent domestic source restrictions 
to specialty metals at this time. For this reason, the 
committee urges the Department to review its policies with 
respect to the specialty metals provision of the Berry 
amendment to ensure that these policies do not unnecessarily 
restrict the Department's ability to rapidly and economically 
purchase needed equipment for the warfighter.

Brand-name specifications

    Part 11.105 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 
states that ``agency requirements shall not be written so as to 
require a particular brand name, product, or feature of a 
product, peculiar to one manufacturer, thereby precluding 
consideration of a product manufactured by another company.'' 
On April 11, 2005, the Administrator for Federal Procurement 
Policy issued a memorandum for Chief Acquisition Officers of 
federal agencies, expressing concern about the proliferation of 
brand-name specifications and directing agencies to strictly 
comply with the requirements of the FAR.
    The committee is aware of a particular problem with 
specifications for brand-name microprocessors that are 
associated with a single manufacturer. In some cases, such 
specifications appear to have had the unfortunate effect of 
precluding the use of newer and more advanced products 
available from the same or other manufacturers. In other cases, 
the use of brand-name specifications may unnecessarily limit 
competition--even if the specification permits the use of 
``brand-name or equal'' products.
    Because of the large volume of microprocessor procurements 
undertaken by the Department of Defense each year and the 
relatively small number of products available to meet those 
needs, it should be possible for the Department to develop 
model specifications for use by defense components that are 
based on performance benchmarks rather than brand-name 
specifications. The committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to submit a 
report to the Committee on Armed Services on the use of product 
model specifications rather than brand-names not later than 
February 1, 2007.

Clarification of rapid acquisition authority to respond to combat 
        emergencies

    The Department of Defense submitted a legislative proposal 
for fiscal year 2007 that would expressly add domestic source 
and content restrictions to the categories of statutes and 
regulations that may be waived by the Department, pursuant to 
section 811 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-136), 
when necessary to prevent combat fatalities.
    The statement of managers accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) 
determined that an identical provision was unnecessary, because 
domestic source and content restrictions are already waivable 
under section 811. The statement of managers stated that:

          The conferees note that the Senate provision adding a 
        new category of statutes and regulations that are 
        waivable to prevent combat fatalities was not 
        necessary, because the Department may already waive any 
        provision of law, policy, directive, or regulation 
        addressing the solicitation and selection of sources 
        pursuant to the authority in section 811 * * * for the 
        procurement of equipment urgently needed to eliminate a 
        combat deficiency that has resulted in combat 
        fatalities.

    The committee concludes that the Department already has the 
authority to waive any domestic source or content restriction 
imposed by law or regulation in connection with the procurement 
of equipment that is urgently needed to eliminate a combat 
deficiency that has resulted in combat fatalities.

Coal gasification report

    The administration's Clean Coal Power Initiative includes 
support for developing coal gasification technologies. These 
technologies have the potential to produce power from coal with 
significantly reduced effect on the environment, while reducing 
the United States' reliance on foreign sources of energy. At a 
time when the cost of petroleum-based fuels has increased 
considerably, the commercial development of a domestic industry 
to use coal to produce diesel, jet fuel, and other liquid fuels 
could have substantial benefit to satisfying the Department's 
energy requirements. The use of coal-to-liquid technology could 
provide a means of powering a range of military vehicles at a 
cost savings by providing an alternative to volatile oil 
prices.
    The committee notes that the statement of managers 
accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2006 directed the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
with the Secretary of Energy, to submit a report on the 
potential use of coal-to-liquid transportation fuels by the 
Department of Defense by no later than April 7, 2006. The 
committee urges the two Secretaries to complete and submit the 
required report in a timely manner. The report should address 
the potential costs and benefits to the Department of Defense 
of utilizing coal gasification technologies, including the 
Fischer-Tropsch process which converts the gas into a liquid 
hydrocarbon that resembles current petroleum products.
    In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to review the merits of specific contracting approaches to coal 
gasification technology projects, and to submit a report on the 
findings of the review to the congressional defense committees 
not later than March 1, 2007. This report shall include: (1) an 
assessment on whether longer-term contracts would be required 
to effectively implement such projects; (2) an assessment on 
whether energy savings performance contracts would be an 
appropriate contracting vehicle for such projects; and (3) a 
discussion of statutory and budgetary impediments, if any, that 
may prevent the Department from effectively implementing coal 
gasification technology projects and recommendations for new 
authorities necessary to enable the effective implementation of 
such projects.

Contracting with Federal Prison Industries

    The website for a major Army command recently posted a 
notice, entitled ``So, you want new furniture?'' The notice 
stated:

          UNICOR, which is the trade name for Federal Prison 
        Industries, is the mandatory source for furniture. That 
        means federal law prescribes the way we are to purchase 
        furniture. The government (including all IMPAC purchase 
        cardholders) must either (1) purchase furniture from 
        UNICOR, or (2) obtain a waiver from UNICOR before 
        purchasing furniture from any other source.

    This notice is incorrect. Congress eliminated FPI's 
mandatory source status with the enactment of section 811 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 
(Public Law 107-107) and section 819 of the Bob Stump National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-
314). Under these provisions, the Department may not purchase 
any FPI product or service unless a contracting officer of the 
Department determines that the product or service is comparable 
to products or services available from the private sector, and 
meets Department needs in terms of price, quality, and time of 
delivery. If Department officials believe that better products 
or services are available from the private sector, no FPI 
waiver is required. This determination is in the sole 
discretion of Department contracting officials.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to ensure that accurate 
information on legal requirements for the purchase of products 
and services that are available from Federal Prison Industries 
is provided to all military commands and defense agencies.

Past performance evaluations 

    Section 1091 of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 
1994 (Public Law 103-355) established the importance of past 
contract performance as an indicator of the likelihood that a 
vendor will successfully perform on a future contract. On this 
basis, Congress directed the Administrator for Federal 
Procurement Policy to establish guidance regarding the 
appropriate use of past performance to facilitate the 
consistent and fair evaluation of potential contractors. The 
required guidance is provided in subpart 42.15 of the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (FAR).
    The committee continues to believe that past performance 
information provides key decision-making support to contracting 
officials carrying out their source selection responsibilities. 
However, the committee is concerned by reports that some 
federal agencies may be requiring contractors to submit to or 
purchase third party performance evaluations as a prerequisite 
to consideration of contractor proposals. Such third party 
evaluations may not meet statutory and regulatory requirements. 
Past performance evaluations should focus on information that 
is relevant to future performance and offer vendors an 
opportunity to supplement or rebut information provided by 
other sources.
    The committee does not believe that it is appropriate to 
require potential contractors to pay third parties for the 
right to bid on federal contracts. Moreover, any past 
performance evaluation conducted for or on behalf of a federal 
agency must comply both with the requirements of section 6 of 
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 405) 
and subpart 42.15 of the FAR. The committee directs the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics 
to provide guidance to the military departments and defense 
agencies on the appropriate means of evaluating and considering 
past performance information, including the appropriate use, if 
any, of third party performance evaluation reports.
      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Subtitle A--Duties and Functions of Department of Defense Officers and 
                             Organizations 

United States Military Cancer Institute (sec. 901) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a United States Military 
Cancer Institute in the Uniformed Services University of the 
Health Sciences. The Center would be authorized to establish a 
data clearinghouse on the incidence of cancer among members and 
former members of the armed forces, and to conduct research 
that contributes to early detection and cancer among military 
personnel. The committee recognizes that the United States 
Military Cancer Institute is currently operated and funded by 
the Department of Defense. In the committee's view, this 
institution should be authorized in statute.
Senior acquisition executive for Special Operations within staff of the 
        Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low 
        Intensity Conflicts (sec. 902) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
senior acquisition executive position within the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense (ASD) for Special Operations and 
Low-Intensity Conflict (SO/LIC). The senior acquisition 
executive in ASD SO/LIC would assume service secretary-level 
responsibility for acquisition policy and oversight for SOCOM 
budget, operations, research, development, and procurement 
programs. The committee notes the importance of this position 
in light of past failures to effectively manage the Advanced 
SEAL Delivery System (ASDS) program by the U.S. Special 
Operations Command (SOCOM), the Navy, and the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense.
    The committee expects that the senior acquisition executive 
should be a member of the Senior Executive Service (SES). 
Further, the committee expects the Secretary of Defense to 
provide the SES allocation and such other staff and resources 
as are necessary to enable the senior acquisition executive to 
successfully accomplish the committee's intent.

                     Subtitle B--Space Activities 

Establishment of operationally responsive space capabilities (sec. 911) 

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
hybrid program office within the Department of Defense to 
demonstrate, acquire, and deploy, as soon as technologically 
possible, an effective capability for operationally responsive 
space (ORS) to support the warfighter.
    The committee is aware that the services and other agencies 
within the Department continue to pursue low-cost, quick-
response space capabilities for the warfighter, and that U.S. 
Strategic Command is in the process of developing requirements 
for such capabilities. In testimony before the Subcommittee on 
Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services in April 
2006, the U.S. Strategic Command's Joint Functional Component 
Commander responsible for space and global strike stated that 
the military would like to have ``a truly responsive capability 
to put assets into space, something that takes hours, not 
months, to launch; a satellite that can be put up quickly and 
then made to operate quickly.''
    However, the committee remains concerned that such 
activities lack focus and a sense of urgency. According to a 
March 2006 report on low-cost responsive tactical space 
capabilities, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found 
that the Department lacks a department-wide strategy for 
implementing ORS efforts, and recommended that the Secretary of 
Defense assign accountability for developing and implementing a 
department-wide strategy for ORS, and to identify corresponding 
funding.
    The provision would require the Secretary to submit to the 
congressional defense committees, not later than 180 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act, a plan for acquisition of 
operationally responsive space capabilities. The plan shall 
include: (1) an identification of all departments and agencies 
that have a role in ORS; (2) the capabilities required for ORS; 
(3) a schedule and associated costs for implementing the plan; 
and (4) an identification of the chain of command, reporting 
structure, acquisition policy, classification requirements, and 
additional acquisition authorities for the ORS Hybrid program 
office.
Extension of authority for pilot program on provision of space 
        surveillance network services to non-United States Government 
        entities (sec. 912) 
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through September 30, 2009, a pilot program that is determining 
the feasibility and desirability of providing space 
surveillance data support to non-United States Government 
entities. Section 913 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) authorized the 
Secretary of Defense to carry out a 3-year pilot program. 
Extending the pilot program would allow for continuation of the 
current service support while allowing the necessary time to 
fully determine the feasibility and desirability of providing 
space surveillance data support to non-United States Government 
entities.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters


Department of Defense policy on unmanned systems (sec. 921)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, to develop a Department-wide policy for 
research, development, test, and evaluation; procurement; and 
operation of unmanned systems. The provision would require a 
senior-level policy for establishing unmanned system mission 
requirements and a preference for the use of unmanned vehicles 
and devices in development of new defense systems. The policy 
required by the provision would also include: strategy and 
schedules for replacing manned systems with unmanned for 
selected routine and dangerous missions; joint development and 
procurement of unmanned systems and components; divestment of 
service unique unmanned systems in favor of joint systems; 
programs to address capability gaps and technical challenges; 
joint management and budgeting for unmanned systems; and 
integration of unmanned capabilities with manned systems.
    Congress emphasized the future potential for unmanned 
systems to perform dull, dangerous, and difficult missions in 
support of the warfighter by establishing goals for the use of 
unmanned air and ground combat vehicles in section 220 of the 
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398). Since that time, the 
proliferation and technical sophistication of unmanned vehicles 
and capabilities has resulted in removal of uniformed personnel 
from harm's way in the performance of tasks such as explosive 
ordnance investigation and disposal and surveillance and 
reconnaissance missions over hostile territory. The committee 
believes exploration of untapped capacity for battlefield 
successes utilizing unmanned systems will likely broaden and 
deepen the significant accomplishments achieved to date.
    Properly trained, equipped and highly dedicated personnel 
are the nation's most valuable military asset. The committee 
expects the Department to continue a long-standing commitment 
to the value of the American warfighter by asking ``why 
manned?'' when planning missions or considering new systems. 
Rapid deployment of vehicles such as the PackBot, Predator, and 
Remus demonstrate initial, impressive capabilities. The 
committee directs the Department to elevate planning for the 
long-term potential use of unmanned systems. Interoperability, 
survivability, commonality, sustainment, manufacturing, and 
training should be jointly examined for seamless integration 
between manned and unmanned system development, acquisition and 
operation in the air, on the ground and at sea.

Executive Schedule level IV for Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 
        Logistics and Materiel Readiness (sec. 922)

    The committee recommends a provision that would move the 
position of Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Logistics and 
Materiel Readiness from Executive Schedule level III to level 
IV. The proposed change would not be applicable to an incumbent 
in this position. The committee intends that, in view of the 
high priority for performance in the acquisition field, the 
position of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics shall remain at Executive Level II, 
and the position of Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology shall remain at Executive Schedule 
level III.

Three-year extension of joint incentives program on sharing of health 
        care resources by the Department of Defense and Department of 
        Veterans Affairs (sec. 923)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorization for the Department of Defense--Department of 
Veterans Affairs Joint Incentives Program until September 30, 
2010. The committee believes that the program, authorized in 
Section 721(d) of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314), has resulted in 
many worthy joint projects that increase the efficiency of the 
military health care system. The committee expects that the 
Secretary of Defense will comply with the statutory requirement 
for an annual contribution of a minimum of $15.0 million for 
the purposes of the Joint Incentives Program. To ensure that 
the Departments concerned have the opportunity to continue and 
expand efficiencies achieved through this program, the 
committee recommends a three-year extension of the joint 
incentives program.
                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

Transfer authority (sec. 1001)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
fiscal year 2007 transfer authority to the Department of 
Defense for amounts up to $4.0 billion for the transfer of 
funds authorized in division A of this Act to unforeseen higher 
priority needs in accordance with normal reprogramming 
procedures. The committee is concerned by the recent trend 
whereby reprogramming requests on important matters spend weeks 
or months in the Department approval process and are then 
presented to the Congress as urgent matters requiring action 
within a matter of days.
    In November 2005, the Army identified an overobligation of 
funds in its Reserve Personnel, Army, 05/05 appropriation, yet 
the Army and the Department waited until the account in 
question was depleted of funds in April 2006 to present the 
Congress with an urgent reprogramming request. In March 2005, 
another reprogramming request for funds to counter the 
improvised explosive device (IED) threat, FY06-07PA, followed a 
similar pattern. As the Department seeks increased flexibility 
from the Congress on the use of reprogramming authority, the 
Department must work with the congressional defense committees 
in a timely manner in order for the committees to appropriately 
perform their oversight responsibilities.
    Because of concerns the committee has over the current 
reprogramming process, the amount of reprogramming authority 
recommended is $1.0 billion lower than the President's budget 
request.
Authorization of supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2006 (sec. 
        1002)
    This provision would authorize emergency supplemental 
appropriations pursuant to an emergency supplemental 
appropriations act for fiscal year 2006.
Reduction in certain authorizations due to savings relating to lower 
        inflation (sec. 1003)
    The Department of Defense assumed an inflation rate of 2.2 
percent in its fiscal year 2007 budget submission. However, the 
Congressional Budget Office's January 2006 estimate of 
inflation for 2007 falls an additional 0.4 percentage points 
lower than the administration's estimate. The Committee on the 
Budget of the Senate reported in the Senate Concurrent 
Resolution of the Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 (S. Con. Res 18) 
that both the Office of Management and Budget and the 
Congressional Budget Office have continually overstated 
inflation. The savings resulting from lower-than-expected 
inflation for fiscal year 2007 is $951.5 million.
Increase in fiscal year 2006 general transfer authority (sec. 1004)
    This section would amend section 1001(a)(2) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
163) to increase the fiscal year 2006 transfer authority from 
$3,500.0 million to $3,750.0 million.
United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets in fiscal year 
        2007 (sec. 1005)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the U.S. contribution to NATO common-funded budgets for fiscal 
year 2007, including the use of unexpended balances from prior 
years. The resolution of ratification for the Protocols to the 
North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of Poland, 
Hungary, and the Czech Republic contained a provision (section 
3(2)(c)(ii)) requiring a specific authorization for U.S. 
payments to the common-funded budgets of the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization (NATO) for each fiscal year, beginning in 
fiscal year 1999, in which U.S. payments exceed the fiscal year 
1998 total.
    The committee notes the significant contribution NATO is 
making to international peace and stability. NATO has 
undertaken important out of area missions such as leadership of 
the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, and 
is considering additional out of area missions, to include an 
expanded role in Sudan's western Darfur province. NATO's 
expanding missions require larger budgets, and so the U.S. 
contribution to the NATO common-funded budgets can be expected 
to grow. The committee urges the Department of Defense to 
ensure that it requests sufficient funding in future years' 
budget requests to cover the anticipated increase in the United 
States financial contribution to NATO's common-funded budgets.
Modification of date of submittal of OMB/CBO report on scoring of 
        outlays (sec. 1006)
    This provision would change the date of the currently 
required report on the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) outlay estimates 
(section 226 of title 10, United States Code) from January 15 
to April 1 of each year. The committee is encouraged by the 
progress made by the OMB and CBO in reconciling differences in 
outlay estimates and expects that progress to continue. The 
date change reflects a more realistic time period for the two 
agencies to meet each year to discuss differences and report 
back to the congressional defense committees.
Prohibition on parking of funds (sec. 1007)
    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
any officer or employee of the Department of Defense from 
directing the allocation of funds in the President's budget or 
the supporting documents for such budget with the knowledge or 
intent that the funds would not be used for the purpose for 
which they are allocated. A violation of this prohibition would 
be subject to the same penalties as a violation of the Anti-
Deficiency Act, as codified in section 1341 of title 31, United 
States Code.
    In September 2003, the St. Petersburg Times reported 
allegations that the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) 
allocated $20.0 million to certain programs in the USSOCOM 
budget submission that was actually intended for other uses. 
The reports cited internal USSOCOM e-mails indicating that 
these funds had been ``parked'' at USSOCOM as a ``favor'' to 
the Department of Defense Comptroller, because the previous 
``agency they had it parked with had a problem and couldn't do 
it.''
    After a lengthy review of the matter, the Department's 
Inspector General confirmed that ``USSOCOM Comptroller 
personnel agreed to `park' $20.0 million'' in six USSOCOM 
programs. The Inspector General determined that this money was 
placed in USSOCOM's budget ``in an attempt to balance the 
Budget Estimate Submission with the top line dollar amount'' of 
the budget, with the understanding that it was likely to be 
reprogrammed for other purposes.
    According to the Inspector General, however, no witnesses 
could direct investigators to a regulation or policy that 
prohibited such ``parking'' of funds. In fact, a number of 
employees in the Department of Defense Comptroller's office 
told the Inspector General that the ``parking'' of money in 
Defense budgets is a common practice. As a result, the 
Inspector General concluded that no laws were broken, no rules 
were violated, and there was no impropriety in the ``parking'' 
of these funds.
    The committee believes that the President's budget and the 
supporting documents must accurately reflect the purposes for 
which funds are expected to be used. The practice of allocating 
funds for a particular purpose with the knowledge and intent 
that after those funds have been appropriated they will be 
reprogrammed for a different purpose, is not consistent with 
this principle. For this reason, the provision recommended by 
the committee would prohibit the practice of ``parking'' funds 
in the future.

                       Subtitle B--Naval Vessels


Repeal of requirement for 12 operational aircraft carriers within the 
        Navy (sec. 1011)

    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
the requirement for the naval combat forces of the Navy to 
include no fewer than 12 operational aircraft carriers.
    The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) Report determined 
that a naval force including 11 aircraft carriers meets the 
combat capability requirements of the National Military 
Strategy. In testimony before the Committee on Armed Services 
in March 2006, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) emphasized 
that the decision by the QDR followed a rigorous evaluation of 
future force structure requirements by the Navy, and that 11 
aircraft carriers are sufficient to ensure the Navy's ability 
to provide coverage in any foreseeable contingency with 
persistent combat power. The committee is further aware that 
advances in ship systems, aircraft, and precision weapons, 
coupled with fundamental changes to fleet maintenance and 
deployment practices implemented by the Navy, have provided 
today's aircraft carrier and associated air wings substantially 
greater strike capability and greater force availability than 
possessed by the fleet during previous quadrennial defense 
reviews.
    The Navy has reported on revisions to its method and 
frequency of deployments for vessels. Under the new concept, 
referred to as the ``Fleet Response Plan,'' the Navy has 
reduced forward presence requirements in order to increase 
surge capability in response to national security demands. 
Under this approach, with 12 aircraft carriers in the fleet, 
the Navy proposed to have six carrier strike groups available 
for a crisis response within 30 days and two more carrier 
strike groups available in 90 days, referred to as ``6 plus 
2.'' At a force structure of 11 aircraft carriers, this becomes 
``6 plus 1'' or ``5 plus 2,'' which the Navy determined 
supports the National Military Strategy with acceptable risk.
    In certain cases, the success of the Fleet Response Plan 
relies on the timeliness of the decision to surge-deploy the 
naval forces, and with smaller force levels and reduced forward 
presence, the Fleet Response Plan approach may increase risk if 
we do not have the level of insight into the threat necessary 
for timely action. Further, the Navy's long-term plan for 
aircraft carrier force structure declines to 10 carriers in 
2013, when the USS Enterprise is scheduled to retire. That 
carrier would be replaced by CVN-21 in 2015, which has yet to 
start construction. The Navy believes that they can manage this 
gap through a number of added measures, but if there are any 
delays in delivering CVN-21, this gap will increase.
    The committee maintains its concern, expressed in the 
Senate report accompanying S. 1042 (S. Rept. 109-69) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, 
regarding the declining size of the naval force and the 
reduction to the number of aircraft carriers. The committee 
agrees, however, with the Navy's determination that it is not 
feasible to maintain 12 operational aircraft carriers by 
restoring the USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) to a deployable, 
fully mission-capable platform. The committee believes that it 
is vital to the national security of the United States that a 
fleet of at least 11 aircraft carriers be maintained to support 
the National Military Strategy, and has taken extraordinary 
action to support the CNO's force structure plan by authorizing 
increased procurement for shipbuilding and, specific to 
aircraft carriers, by authorizing additional advance 
procurement and incremental funding for the construction of the 
first 3 CVN-21 class aircraft carriers.
    Further, recognizing the increased need for timeliness of 
surge operations that today's smaller force structure places on 
the Fleet Response Plan, the committee reaffirms the judgment 
that the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Clark, provided in 
testimony before the Committee on Armed Services in February 
2005, that the Atlantic Fleet should continue to be dispersed 
in two homeports.

Approval of transfer of naval vessels to foreign nations by vessel 
        class (sec. 1012)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 7037 of title 10, United States Code, to allow the 
transfer of a specified number of ships to a particular nation 
without identification of each specific vessel (hull number, 
ship name). This provision would continue to require that 
Congress authorize the release of the specific naval capability 
and technology (characterized by ship class) to specific 
countries.
    Section 7037 requires legislative approval for the transfer 
to other nations of specific naval vessels exceeding 3,000 tons 
or that are less than 20 years old. The committee is aware that 
the process for gaining congressional approval for ship 
transfer notionally commences 2 years prior to the actual 
decommissioning of the U.S. Navy vessel. The effect of changes 
to ship operational commitments leading up to decommissioning, 
the final assessment of material condition in conjunction with 
decommissioning, and other dynamics associated with ship 
transfer can result in a lost transfer opportunity if that 
vessel's decommissioning status changes and it must be replaced 
by another vessel of the same class as a transfer candidate. 
Further, the committee is aware that the U.S. Navy and 
potential customer navies place a priority on conducting ``hot 
ship'' transfers coincident with U.S. Navy decommissioning in 
order to avoid U.S. Navy costs for decommissioning preparation 
and lay-up, and customer navy costs for reactivation.

                    Subtitle C--Counterdrug Matters


Extension of availability of funds for unified counterdrug and 
        counterterrorism campaign in Colombia (sec. 1021)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorities provided in the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) 
that allows the Department of Defense to use funds appropriated 
for counterdrug activity to support Colombian efforts against 
terrorist organizations involved in narcotics activity in 
fiscal years 2007 and 2008. It also extends the limitation on 
the number of U.S. military personnel assigned to Colombia in 
support of Plan Colombia to 800 personnel, and the number of 
federally-funded contractor personnel employed in support of 
Plan Colombia to 600 personnel in fiscal years 2007 and 2008.

Extension of authority of Department of Defense to provide additional 
        support for counterdrug activities of other governmental 
        agencies (sec. 1022)

    The committee recommends a 5-year extension in the current 
authorities of the Department of Defense to assist the 
counterdrug activities of any other department or agency of the 
Federal Government or any other state, local, or foreign law 
enforcement agency through 2011.

Extension and expansion of certain authorities to provide additional 
        support for counterdrug activities (sec. 1023)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
current authorities of the Department of Defense to support the 
counterdrug activities of other countries through the end of 
fiscal year 2008. In addition, the provision would: (1) add 15 
countries to the list of countries eligible for support that 
are situated either along key drug smuggling routes or are 
facing an increasing threat of narco-terrorism; (2) expand the 
types of equipment and supplies that can be provided for 
counterdrug support, to include vehicles, aircraft, and 
detection, interception, monitoring, and testing equipment; and 
(3) double the funding limit for counterdrug support through 
fiscal year 2008 from $40.0 million to $80.0 million. The 
provision would direct the Secretary of Defense to seek the 
concurrence of the Secretary of State on matters of counterdrug 
support to foreign nations. The committee expects that the 
authority granted in this section will be administered in the 
spirit of maintaining current military parity between 
Azerbaijan and Armenia. The provision would further require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a comprehensive report on how 
these counter-drug funds were expended in each of these 15 
countries, not later than 60 days following the conclusion of 
each fiscal year for which this program is authorized.

          Subtitle D--Defense Intelligence and Related Matters


Two-year extension of authority to engage in commercial activities as 
        security for intelligence collection activities (sec. 1031)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
2 years the authority to conduct commercial activities 
necessary to provide security for authorized intelligence 
collection abroad.

Annual report on intelligence oversight activities of the Department of 
        Defense (sec. 1032)

    The committee recommends a provision that requires the 
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report to the 
congressional defense and congressional intelligence committees 
on intelligence oversight activities of the Department of 
Defense. The term ``intelligence oversight activities of the 
Department of Defense'' refers to any activity undertaken by an 
agency element or component of the Department of Defense to 
ensure compliance with regard to intelligence and intelligence-
related activities of the Department under law or any 
Presidential directive, or Executive Order, including Executive 
Order No. 12333.
    The report shall contain a description of any questionable 
activity that came to the attention of any General Counsel or 
Inspector General within the Department, or the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Intelligence, and a description of the actions 
taken with respect to such activity. The report shall also 
contain the results of oversight inspections and changes in the 
Department's directives and training programs.

Administration of pilot project on Civilian Linguist Reserve Corps 
        (sec. 1033)

    The committee recommends a provision that would transfer 
administration of the pilot project on Civilian Linguist 
Reserve Corps from the Director of National Intelligence to the 
Secretary of Defense. The Corps would be comprised of U.S. 
citizens fluent in foreign languages who would be available to 
provide translation services and related duties. The Director 
of National Intelligence entered into a contract with the 
Department of Defense for services to carry out the pilot 
project, as authorized under section 613 of the Intelligence 
Authorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 108-487). The Director of 
National Intelligence has expressed interest in transferring 
responsibility of the pilot project to the Department.

Improvement of authorities on the National Security Education Program 
        (sec. 1034)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1902(b)(2) of title 50, United States Code, to modify 
the service agreement associated with participation in the 
National Security Education Program. Under current law, 
participants in the program may perform federal service in a 
position of the Department of Defense or other entity of the 
intelligence community that is certified by the Secretary of 
Defense as appropriate to utilize the unique language and 
regional expertise acquired by the program participants. The 
provision would expand the entities in which mandated service 
could be performed to include the Department of Homeland 
Security or Department of State. The award recipients would be 
able to fulfill their service requirement in a position in the 
field of education in a discipline related to the study 
supported by the program, but only if no positions are 
available in federal agencies or offices covered under this 
section.
    The provision would further provide authority to the 
Secretary to hire a program participant in a position in the 
Department of Defense on a temporary, interim basis, for a 
period not to exceed 2 years, to expedite security clearances 
and other personnel processes, if there is no other permanent 
position available for the participant. The provision would 
also require the Secretary to submit a plan to Congress, not 
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for 
improving the recruitment, placement, and retention within the 
Department of Defense of individuals who receive assistance 
under the program and for improving the ability of the 
Department of Defense to meet its requirements to acquire 
individuals with critical foreign language skills and 
individuals who are regional experts.

   Subtitle E--Defense Against Terrorism and Related Security Matters


Enhancement of authority to pay monetary rewards for assistance in 
        combating terrorism (sec. 1041)

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the flexibility and responsiveness of the rewards protection 
program available to the Department of Defense for assistance 
in combating terrorism. The provision would (1) delegate 
approval authority to subcombatant commanders, like the 
Commander, Multi-national Forces-Iraq; (2) direct that 
delegated authority must be approved by the designated Under 
Secretary of Defense; and (3) increase the current maximum 
reward amount from $2,500 to $10,000.

Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies (sec. 1042)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
chapter 15 of title 10, United States Code, the so-called 
``Insurrection Act,'' to clarify and update the statute, and 
would make corresponding changes to other provisions of law. 
Chapter 15 contains a collection of statutes authorizing the 
use of the armed forces to put down an insurrection, enforce 
federal authority, or suppress conspiracies that interfere with 
the enforcement of federal or state law. The earliest of these 
dates to 1795, and others were enacted at the beginning of the 
Civil War (1861) and during Reconstruction (the so-called ``Ku 
Klux Act'' of 1871). While these statutes grant the President 
broad powers to use the armed forces in situations of public 
disorder, the antique terminology and the lack of explicit 
reference to such situations as natural disasters or terrorist 
attacks may have contributed to a reluctance to use the armed 
forces in situations such as Hurricane Katrina.
    The provision would amend section 333 of title 10, United 
States Code. As amended, section 333 would authorize the 
President, in any situation in which he determined that, as a 
result of a natural disaster, epidemic or other serious public 
health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other 
condition, domestic violence occurred to such an extent that 
the constituted authorities of the State or possession were 
incapable of maintaining public order, and the domestic 
violence obstructed the execution of the laws of the United 
States or impeded the course of justice thereunder, to use the 
armed forces, including the National Guard in federal service, 
to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United 
States. The committee emphasizes that this authority is 
temporary, to be employed only until the state authorities are 
again capable of maintaining order. The President is to notify 
Congress of his determination to exercise this authority as 
soon as practicable, and every 14 days thereafter for the 
duration of the exercise of the authority. The title of chapter 
15 is changed from ``Insurrection'' to ``Enforcement of the 
Laws to Restore Public Order'' to take account of the broader 
stated purposes of the chapter. The existing language of 
section 333, relating to suppression of insurrections, 
violence, or conspiracies that interfere with federal or state 
law, is retained.
    The provision also amends chapter 152 of title 10 to 
authorize the President, in any situation in which he 
determines to exercise the section 333(a)(1)(A) authority, to 
direct the Secretary of Defense to provide supplies, services, 
and equipment necessary for the immediate preservation of life 
and property. Such supplies, services, and equipment may be 
provided (1) only to the extent that the constituted 
authorities of the State are unable to provide them; (2) only 
until other departments and agencies of the United States 
charged with such responsibilities are able to provide them; 
and (3) only to the extent that their provision will not 
interfere with military preparedness or ongoing operations or 
functions. The authority under this section is not subject to 
the provisions of section 403(c) of the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
5170b(c)).
    A conforming amendment is made to section 12304(c) of title 
10, United States Code, to remove a restriction on the use of 
the Presidential Selected Reserve callup authority in chapter 
15 or natural disaster situations.

Treatment under Freedom of Information Act of certain confidential 
        information shared with State and local personnel (sec. 1043)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that sensitive but unclassified homeland security information 
in the possession of the Department of Defense that is shared 
with state and local personnel who are involved in the 
prevention of or response to terrorist activity does not become 
subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA)(5 U.S.C. 552) by virtue of such sharing.
    Section 892 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
482) requires the President to implement procedures under which 
federal agencies share relevant and appropriate homeland 
security information with each other, and with appropriate 
state and local personnel. Such information may be either 
formally classified or unclassified but of a sensitive nature. 
Any information shared with state and local officials is not 
subject to disclosure under state or local disclosure laws.
    Concern has been expressed over the necessity for the 
Department to share such information with first responders and 
others involved in defense against a terrorist attack. Much of 
this information came from entities outside the Department, 
such as universities, power companies, transportation agencies, 
and the like. Classification of such information raises obvious 
problems with respect to sharing it with state and local 
personnel. However, much of the information is exempt from 
disclosure under FOIA either as confidential business 
information or under other exemptions. This provision would 
make it explicit that sharing of unclassified but sensitive 
information for homeland defense purposes under section 892 
does not change the status of that information with respect to 
disclosure under FOIA.

 Subtitle F--Miscellaneous Authorities on Availability and Use of Funds


Acceptance and retention of reimbursement from non-Federal sources to 
        defray Department of Defense costs of conferences (sec. 1051)

    The committee recommends a provision that would create a 
statutory exception to the Miscellaneous Receipts Act (31 
U.S.C. 3302(b)) by authorizing the Department of Defense to 
accept and retain reimbursement from non-federal sources for 
its conference costs. The Secretary of Defense would be 
permitted to accept reimbursement into its applicable 
appropriation or account from which its conference costs were 
paid. The Secretary would also be allowed to employ general 
business practices when conducting conferences and symposiums.
    This provision would further require the Secretary of 
Defense, as part of the annual submission of budget 
justification materials, to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees on the use of the authority 
granted by this provision. The report should include: a listing 
of conferences held in the previous year(s), receipts and 
expenses, vendor fees collected, and a list of planned events 
for the upcoming fiscal year.
    Currently, the miscellaneous receipts statute effectively 
prohibits the Department from collecting conference fees from 
individual conference participants to defray the costs of the 
conference. The statute requires these collections to be 
deposited into the general Treasury and not into any 
appropriation available to the Department.
    The committee recognizes the business practice of employing 
conference planners to orchestrate the conference--often at no 
additional cost to the government. Conference planners are 
experts at conducting such events and, as such are best able to 
minimize costs, while allowing Department employees to focus on 
mission-related functions. When vendors participate in 
exhibitions, the conference planner can defray costs of the 
conference through exhibitor fees and advertising, thereby 
reducing the costs ultimately borne by the Department through 
the reimbursement of employees' conference fees.
    The committee expects that this provision would provide the 
necessary authority for the Department to collect conference 
fees from conference participants and use the amounts collected 
to pay the conference expenses, such as commercial conference 
space, audiovisual support, educational materials, authorized 
refreshments, speakers' fees, and advertising. The government 
would also be permitted to collect reasonable fees from vendors 
at government exhibitions.

Minimum annual purchase amounts for airlift from carriers participating 
        in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (sec. 1052)

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow the 
Department of Defense to guarantee higher minimum levels of 
business than are currently authorized by law to United States 
air carriers participating in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet. 
Awarding sufficient guaranteed amounts of the Department's 
peacetime business has been an effective incentive to convince 
air carriers to commit aircraft to the Civil Reserve Air Fleet 
program. This provision would authorize the Department of 
Defense to guarantee a minimum level of peacetime business for 
the Civil Reserve Air Fleet participants so that air carriers 
will commit a sufficient number of aircraft to the program to 
meet the Department's contingency transportation requirements. 
The guarantee would not be based on known requirements at the 
time of the award. The minimum guarantee of business would 
instead be based on the Department's forecast needs for the 
following year, but capped at a maximum of 80 percent of the 
annual average expenditures of peacetime airlift for the prior 
5-year period utilizing transportation funds already 
appropriated annually to the services.

Increased flexibility in the use of funds for Joint Staff exercises 
        (sec. 1053)

    The committee recommends a provision that would expand the 
flexibility of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to use 
funds earmarked for the Chairman's joint exercise program to be 
available for expenses relating to self-deploying watercraft 
under the jurisdiction of a military department; port 
facilities support activities; and prepositioned watercraft and 
lighterage for joint logistics and over the shore exercises in 
connection with such exercises. Currently, the Chairman's 
exercise transportation funds can only be used for strategic 
airlift and sealift of equipment and forces, port handling, and 
inland transportation.

                       Subtitle G--Report Matters


Report on clarification of prohibition on cruel, inhuman, or degrading 
        treatment or punishment (sec. 1061)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
President to prepare a report that sets forth unclassified 
legal opinions on whether certain interrogation techniques 
constitute cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or 
punishment, as defined in section 1403 (d) of the Detainee 
Treatment Act for 2005 of title XIV of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163). 
The report shall be transmitted to the congressional defense 
committees not later than 90 days after the enactment of this 
Act. The provision would also direct the President to ensure 
that these legal opinions be disseminated to all personnel of 
such departments and agencies of the Federal Government, and 
all contractors of such departments.
    In testimonies before Senate committees, senior military 
commanders, Judge Advocates General, and various civilian 
officials of the executive branch have given incomplete or 
varying answers to questions on what constitutes cruel, 
inhuman, or degrading treatment. This provision would ensure 
consistency on treatment of detainees for members of the armed 
forces engaged in detention and interrogation operations.

Reports on members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of the 
        Department of Defense serving in the Legislative Branch (sec. 
        1062)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a monthly report to the 
congressional defense committees if a member of the armed 
forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense, who 
has been assigned to the legislative branch as a detailee or as 
a legislative fellow, exceeds 1 year in such an assignment. The 
report would require information about the nature of the 
projects or tasks undertaken by the detailee or fellow and the 
anticipated date of completion. Additionally, the provision 
would require reporting if a military member receives such an 
assignment as the last tour of duty before retirement or 
separation from active duty. The committee believes that the 
Department has prescribed effective policies controlling the 
assignment of legislative fellows and detailees to the 
legislative branch, but that greater efforts are required to 
ensure compliance by the services and effective oversight 
within the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The committee 
believes that this reporting requirement should be terminated 
after a sufficient time has elapsed for evaluation of the 
reasons for extended details or fellowships and a determination 
that the professional qualifications and career progression of 
individual officers and civilian employees are not being 
adversely affected.

Additional element in annual report on chemical and biological warfare 
        defense (sec. 1063)

    Section 1701 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 50 U.S.C. 1522) 
authorized a separate program in research and development for 
chemical and biological warfare defense for the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), but directed that 
the DARPA director ``shall coordinate the activities under the 
program with those of the military departments and defense 
agencies.''
    In prior years, it appeared that the DARPA biological 
warfare defense program was not sufficiently coordinated with 
the military departments and defense agencies. The committee 
commends DARPA for its successful recent efforts to transition 
several technologies to the joint Department of Defense 
chemical and biological defense program, and to improve its 
coordination with, and support for, that program. The committee 
is interested in ensuring that the DARPA program remains 
effectively coordinated and integrated in the overall 
Department chemical and biological defense program.
    Therefore, beginning in fiscal year 2008, the committee 
directs the Department to include a description of any DARPA 
research and development efforts on chemical and biological 
warfare defense in the annual report on the Department chemical 
and biological defense program, as required by section 1703 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 
(Public Law 103-160; 50 U.S.C. 1523). The report should include 
a discussion of the coordination and integration of relevant 
DARPA work with the overall Department chemical and biological 
defense program, and the degree to which DARPA's work supports 
the Department's overall program.

Report on Local Boards of Trustees of the Armed Forces Retirement Home 
        (sec. 1064)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to report to Congress within 30 days of 
the date of enactment of this Act on the composition and 
activities of the Local Board of Trustees of the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home, as required by section 1516 of the Armed 
Forces Retirement Home Act of 1991 (Public Law 101-510). The 
committee expects the Chief Operating Officer to facilitate 
participation of the Local Board of Trustees in an advisory 
capacity as required by law in the evaluation of options for 
future development and improvement to the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home.

Repeal of certain report requirements (sec. 1065)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
requirement for certain personnel reports that are no longer 
necessary. These would include: (1) the annual report on 
aviation career incentive pay under section 301a of title 37, 
United States Code; (2) the annual report required by section 
1015 of title 37, United States Code, on the effects of certain 
recruitment and retention initiatives taken in fiscal year 
2000; (3) the report of the Secretary of Defense's 
recommendation on the need for Department of Defense review of 
proposed federal agency actions to consider possible impact on 
national defense; (4) the report on a pilot program to enhance 
military recruiting by improving military awareness of school 
counselors and educators; (5) the annual report on the 
activities of the Medical Informatics Advisory Committee and on 
coordination of informatics systems within the Federal 
Government; and (6) the reporting requirement associated with 
changes made by service academies in the amount of authorized 
charges or fees.

            Subtitle H--Technical and Conforming Amendments


Uniform definition of national security system for certain Department 
        of Defense purposes (sec. 1071)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify 
three sections of title 10, United States Code, to ensure the 
definition of national security system is consistent with the 
current definition in the Federal Information Security 
Management Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-347) and with the 
definition of information technology in 44 U.S.C. section 
3542(b)(2).

Conforming amendment relating to redesignation of Defense 
        Communications Agency as Defense Information Systems Agency 
        (sec. 1072)

    The committee recommends a provision that would update the 
definition of ``combat support agency'' in section 193 of title 
10, United States Code, by changing the ``Defense 
Communications Agency'' to the ``Defense Information Systems 
Agency.'' The Department of Defense officially renamed and 
rechartered the Defense Communications Agency as the Defense 
Information Systems Agency in June 1991 (title 32 of the U.S. 
Code of Federal Regulations part 362). This proposed correction 
would eliminate any continuing confusion between the retired 
agency name and the current name.

Technical amendment (sec. 1073)

    The Committee recommends a provision that would make 
technical and conforming changes in section 341(e) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public 
Law 109-163). This change corrects section 341(e) to exempt a 
pilot program for best-value selection of information 
technology services, authorized by section 336 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136), from a portion of the requirements of the public-private 
outsourcing competition process. The exempted portion of the 
public-private outsourcing competition process would require 
the continued performance of a function by Department of 
Defense employees, unless the difference in the cost of 
performance of that function is at least 10 percent of the 
personnel-related costs for that function or $10 million.

                       Subtitle I--Other Matters


National Foreign Language Coordination Council (sec. 1081)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
National Foreign Language Coordination Council to develop and 
monitor the implementation of a comprehensive national foreign 
language strategy. The strategy shall include: (1) an 
identification of priorities to expand foreign language skills 
in the public and private sectors; (2) recommendations for 
improving coordination of foreign language programs and 
activities among federal agencies, enhancing foreign language 
programs and activities, and allocating resources appropriately 
to maximize the use of resources; (3) effective ways to 
increase public awareness of the need for foreign language 
skills and career paths in the public and private sectors that 
can employ those skills; (4) recommendations for incentives for 
developing related educational programs, including foreign 
language teacher training; and (5) effective ways to coordinate 
public and private sector efforts to provide foreign language 
instruction and acquire foreign language and area expertise. 
The Council shall prepare and transmit to the President and the 
relevant committees of Congress the strategy not later than 18 
months after the date of enactment of this Act.
    The committee recognizes that deficits in foreign language 
and regional expertise undermine U.S. national security. On 
January 5, 2006, the President launched the National Security 
Language Initiative (NSLI) to increase the number of Americans 
learning critical foreign languages through new and expanded 
programs from kindergarten through university and into the 
workforce. The committee acknowledges that the NSLI is a 
positive step toward immediately expanding critical foreign 
language skills to strengthen national security. However, the 
committee believes that a longer term strategic effort is 
needed to increase language and cultural competency in the 
United States.

Support of successor organizations of the disestablished Interagency 
        Global Positioning System Executive Board (sec. 1082)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make a 
technical change to the Commercial Space Transportation 
Competitiveness Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-405) to reflect the 
subsequent disestablishment of the Interagency Global 
Positioning Executive Board and its replacement by a new 
organizational structure created by National Security 
Presidential Directive 39, entitled United States Space-based 
Position, Navigation, and Timing Policy.

Sense of Congress on the Quadrennial Defense Review (sec. 1083)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is 
a vital document in laying out the strategic military planning 
and threat objectives of the Department of Defense. The 
committee believes the QDR is critical to building the correct 
mix of military planning assumptions, defense capabilities, and 
the strategic focus of the armed forces of the United States.
    The committee notes the QDR is intended to provide more 
than an overview of global threats and the general strategic 
orientation of the Department. The committee reiterates that 
the QDR analysis and recommendations were not intended to be 
constrained by the Department's budget submission.
    The committee further believes that the QDR process would 
benefit from: (1) more specific guidance on the defense 
capabilities recommended in the QDR, including the numbers and 
types of systems or platforms required to achieve the strategic 
and war-fighting objectives; (2) an official ``red team'' 
assessment of the QDR assumptions, planning guidelines, and 
recommended capabilities, and having the red team provide its 
results to the Congress; and (3) a more comprehensive risk 
assessment from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that 
describes the additional capabilities needed to reduce the 
risks identified in his assessment.
    The committee has requested that the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) conduct an assessment on whether 
the 2006 QDR Report was consistent with congressional intent. 
The committee intends to review the QDR process and make any 
legislative changes that may be needed before the submission of 
the next QDR. The GAO assessment will represent one element of 
that review.
    The committee looks forward to working with the Department 
of Defense, the GAO, and outside experts in its review of the 
QDR process.

                       Items of Special Interest


Developing a new staff structure for combatant command headquarters

    Strengthening interagency operations is one of the major 
tenets of the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) Report. The 
QDR states that ``success requires unified statecraft: the 
ability of the U.S. Government to bring to bear all elements of 
national power and to work in close cooperation with allies and 
partners abroad.'' In the years since the passage of the 
Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986, ``jointness'' has promoted more 
unified direction and action of the armed forces. In recent 
months, senior military leaders, including combatant 
commanders, have emphasized the importance of interagency 
planning and coordination for interagency operations.
    The committee recognizes the importance of interagency 
operations and supports intiatives to strengthen interagency 
planning and coordination. Currently, interagency presence in 
the staffs of combatant commands is usually limited in number 
and serves primarily as a liaison from the parent organization 
to the combatant command.
    The committee believes there is benefit to increasing the 
size of the interagency presence in the staff of each command 
headquarters and fully embedding the interagency personnel in 
the combatant command structure. The committee also believes 
this may require a realignment or restucture of the basic staff 
components. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a study on the development of an integrated interagency 
structure or organization for combatant commands. The Secretary 
should submit a report to the congressional defense committees 
within 1 year after the enactment of this Act.

Distributed decision support system

    Commanders and staffs conducting military operations in the 
21st century will find themselves responsible for planning and 
executing tasks outside the scope of their military training 
and experience. Deploying or deployed commanders could be aided 
significantly by having more ready access to expertise and 
technology, either resident or non-resident in the Department 
of Defense or U.S. Federal Government, on an array of topics 
not normally included in a commander's professional military 
education. These commanders would benefit significantly from 
routine and readily available access to subject matter experts, 
centers of expertise, and tailored data. This distributed 
decision support system will require an agent to broker the 
expertise and a data mining, retrieval, and interface tool 
capable of performing data query, visualization, organization, 
statistical analysis, and posting.
    The committee recommends that the Department of Defense 
conduct a proof of concept demonstration that would develop a 
distributed decision support system to leverage available 
communications infrastructures to assemble an on-demand network 
of subject matter experts, specialized organizations, 
databases, and computing resources to assist joint force 
commanders and staffs in planning, decision-making, and complex 
problem solving. The committee does not intend that such a 
system would replace any existing system, but would augment the 
force with non-resident expertise to enhance dynamic plannng 
and decision-making. The committee recommends that the 
Department conduct the proof of concept demonstration in one 
combatant command area and submit a report to Congress no later 
than 6 months after the completion of the proof of concept 
demonstration.

Report on Special Operations Command UAV intelligence collection 
        requirements

    The committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (SO/LIC) to 
study and report on the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) 
intelligence collection requirements in future years for the 
U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), specifically the 
number of Predator UAVs needed as intelligence collection 
platforms in the future- years defense program.
    The Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of 
the Committee on Armed Services held a hearing on April 6, 
2006, with, among others, USSOCOM Deputy Commander, Vice 
Admiral Eric Olson. In that hearing, Admiral Olson indicated 
that his command was not slated to receive a sufficient 
quantity of Predator UAVs and ground sensors for intelligence 
collection capabilities according to the 2006 Quadrennial 
Defense Review (QDR) Report. Admiral Olson further informed the 
subcommittee that USSOCOM would be best served by a second 
squadron of 24 Predator UAVs, beyond the first squadron planned 
for in the QDR planning process. The Commander, USSOCOM has 
been designated as the lead combatant commander with the 
responsibility for the military engagement in the global war on 
terrorism.
    The committee believes that sufficient intelligence 
collection capabilities are critical to develop the actionable 
intelligence necessary to find, fix, and eliminate terrorist 
threats. The committee directs the Department to submit an 
unclassified, and if necessary classified, report to the 
congressional defense committees not later than 120 days after 
enactment of this legislation.
       TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL POLICY

Accrual of annual leave for members of the uniformed services on 
        terminal leave performing dual employment (sec. 1101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
military members on terminal leave, who are entitled to accrue 
leave authorized in section 5534a of title 5, United States 
Code, based on civilian federal employment, to accrue such 
leave while remaining in a terminal leave status.
Strategy for improving the senior management, functional, and technical 
        workforce of the Department of Defense (sec. 1102)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to include a strategy for the senior 
management, functional, and technical workforce of the 
Department in the Strategic Human Capital Plan as required by 
section 1122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163).
    The committee is aware that several of the military 
departments have initiated efforts to realign their senior 
civilian workforces to ensure that they are building the 
leaders the Department of Defense will need to meet future 
challenges. The committee's review of these efforts has 
identified a number of questions that merit further examination 
by the Department. For example:
          (1) The number of senior executives assigned to the 
        Department dropped dramatically in the 1990s, and has 
        not changed as the Department's budget and 
        responsibilities have increased since September 11, 
        2001. Does the Department have an adequate number of 
        senior executives to meet its responsibilities?
          (2) The Department has initiated a process of 
        military-to-civilian conversions to ensure that the 
        Department can make the best use of its soldiers, 
        sailors, airmen, and marines. How does the process of 
        military-to-civilian conversions impact the demands 
        placed on the Department's senior civilian workforce?
          (3) Congress has provided the Department a number of 
        different authorities to hire senior management, 
        functional, and technical personnel. Do these 
        authorities give the Department the authority and the 
        flexibility required to recruit and retain the 
        categories of senior management and technical personnel 
        that it needs?
          (4) Section 1125 of the National Defense 
        Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
        136) authorized increased pay for senior executives in 
        agencies (including the Department of Defense) that are 
        certified as having effective performance appraisal 
        systems. Comparable changes in the pay system and pay 
        levels were not made for senior scientific and 
        technical personnel serving in the Department. Should 
        some adjustment be made to ensure that the Department 
        can attract and retain highly-qualified senior 
        scientific and technical personnel?
    The provision is not intended to limit the ability of the 
Secretary to reexamine the structure and salary for all senior 
level employees, and make recommendations for change to the 
congressional defense committees as the Secretary believes are 
appropriate. The committee believes that this evaluation is 
critical to the future of the Department, and encourages the 
Department to begin the evaluation even before the enactment of 
this Act. The committee also urges the Department to develop a 
program which would expand joint capabilities at senior levels 
within the civilian workforce.

Authority to equalize allowances, benefits, and gratuities of personnel 
        on official duty in Iraq and Afghanistan (sec. 1103)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend to 
the heads of all agencies, for their civilian personnel serving 
in Iraq and Afghanistan, the same authority as the Secretary of 
State already has under section 413 and chapter 9 of title I of 
the Foreign Service Act (22 U.S.C. Sec. 4081 et seq.) with 
respect to allowances, benefits, and death gratuities for 
Foreign Service personnel. This authority would not derogate 
from any existing authority granted by law to an agency head.
    The heads of a number of U.S. agencies whose personnel 
traditionally serve abroad already have authority to grant to 
their personnel serving abroad allowances, benefits and death 
gratuities comparable to those granted by the Secretary of 
State to similarly-situated Foreign Service personnel serving 
abroad. For example, with respect to allowances and benefits, 
the Secretary of Defense has such authority for civilian and 
military defense attache personnel (10 U.S.C. Sec. 1605 and 37 
U.S.C. Sec. 431) and National Security Agency personnel (50 
U.S.C. Sec. 402 note); the Secretary of the Treasury has such 
authority with respect to Treasury international affairs 
personnel (31 U.S.C. Sec. 325); the Secretary of Agriculture 
has such authority with respect to agricultural attache 
personnel (7 U.S.C. Sec. 1766c); the Secretary of 
Transportation has such authority with respect to personnel 
with aviation powers and duties (49 U.S.C. Sec. 322(d)(6)); and 
the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency has such 
authority with respect to Central Intelligence Agency personnel 
(50 U.S.C. Sec. 403e(b)(1)). Similarly, for Central 
Intelligence Agency and certain Department of Defense personnel 
(10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1475, 1478, and 1489; 50 U.S.C. 
Sec. 403k), agency heads may provide death gratuities 
comparable to those afforded with respect to Foreign Service 
personnel (22 U.S.C. Sec. 3973).
    The committee believes that the missions in Iraq and 
Afghanistan requires coordinated and integrated action among 
all federal departments and agencies. In recent months, General 
Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General 
John P. Abizaid, Commander, United States Central Command, have 
emphasized the importance of strengthening interagency 
coordination in Iraq and Afghanistan. In his 2006 posture 
statement to the Committee on Armed Services, General Abizaid 
stated that ``We need significantly more non-military personnel 
. . . with expertise in areas such as economic development, 
civil affairs, agriculture, and law.''
    Strengthening interagency operations has also become a 
principal theme in the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) 
Report. The QDR aptly states that ``success requires unified 
statecraft: the ability of the U.S. Government to bring to bear 
all elements of national power at home and to work in close 
cooperation with allies and partners abroad.'' In the years 
since the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986, 
``jointness'' has promoted more unified direction and action of 
our armed forces. The committee believes that the time has come 
for similar changes to take place elsewhere in the Federal 
Government.

                        Item of Special Interest


Highly qualified experts

    Section 9903 of title 5, United States Code, provided the 
Department of Defense new authority to hire up to 2,500 
appropriately qualified experts from outside the civil service 
to oversee and direct its reform process, without going through 
normal hiring processes. The committee is concerned that only 
12 of the 2,500 high-qualified experts have been hired. The 
committee is also concerned that the Department has imposed 
restrictions on the use of the new authority that were not 
included in the legislation, such as prohibiting highly 
qualified experts from participating in policy or decision-
making and limiting the delegation of authority for hiring to 
certain senior level Department officials. The committee has 
also been informed that the Department has implemented the new 
hiring authority in an unnecessarily bureaucratic manner.
    As a result, Department reform activities remain severely 
understaffed and highly dependent on contractors to perform 
critical acquisition and financial management functions.
    For example, the committee has learned that bureaucratic 
impediments have prevented the Business Transformation Agency 
(BTA), which was established by the Deputy Secretary of Defense 
on October 7, 2005, to address pervasive problems in the 
Department's business systems, from filling a significant 
number of critical positions despite having documented 
requirements and funding for those positions.
    In a letter to the Committee on Armed Services dated March 
24, 2006, the Deputy Secretary of Defense acknowledged that the 
guidelines and policy concerning the highly qualified expert 
authority were too restrictive and implementation of the 
authority has yielded few results. The committee understands 
that work is underway to revise the guidance, and strongly 
urges the Department to promptly issue improved guidance, 
consistent with the authorizing statute, in order to produce 
the intended results for the highly qualified expert authority.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the congressional defense committees no later than June 15, 
2006, on steps that the Department has taken and a schedule for 
additional steps the Department plans to take to:
          (1) address unnecessary restrictions in the 
        guidelines for hiring Highly Qualified Experts;
          (2) eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic barriers in 
        the hiring process;
          (3) strengthen recruiting efforts; and
          (4) ensure that the BTA is fully staffed and able to 
        meet its important mission.
              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

                      Subtitle A--General Matters

Expansion of humanitarian and civic assistance to include 
        communications and information capacity (sec. 1201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 401, title 10, United States Code, to expand the 
authority of the Secretary of Defense to provide humanitarian 
and civic assistance in conjunction with military operations to 
include information and communications technology as necessary 
to provide basic information and communications services.
    The committee acknowledges that rudimentary construction 
and repair of information and communications technology 
facilities should be considered a fundamental element of 
humanitarian and civic assistance. The committee, however, 
expects that humanitarian and civic assistance carried out in 
conjunction with military operations will promote: (1) the 
security interests of both the United States and the country in 
which the activities are to be carried out; and (2) the 
specific operational readiness of the U.S. armed forces who 
participate in humanitarian and civic activities. Further, the 
assistance shall complement, and may not duplicate, any other 
form of foreign assistance that may be provided to the country 
by the United States.
Modification of authorities relating to the Regional Defense 
        Counterterrorism Fellowship Program (sec. 1202)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2249c of title 10, United States Code, to change the 
title of the ``Regional Defense Counterterrorism Fellowship 
Program'' to the ``Regional Defense Combating Terrorism 
Program.'' The provision would also increase the amount of 
authorized annual funding for the program from $20.0 million to 
$25.0 million.
    The committee recognizes the critical need to provide 
education and training opportunities to our allies in the 
global war on terror and further notes the importance of the 
Regional Defense Combating Terrorism Program as an integral 
part of that effort.
    The committee expects the Department of Defense to continue 
to ensure that the program conforms to the spirit of statutory 
guidelines governing the administration of related programs.
Logistic support of allied forces for combined operations (sec. 1203)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State, permanent authority to use up to $100.0 million from 
operation and maintenance funds in any fiscal year to provide 
logistic support, supplies, and services to allied forces 
participating in combined operations with the armed forces of 
the United States. The provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense to make a determination that the allied forces to be 
provided the logistic support, supplies, and services are 
essential to the success of the combined operations, and that 
the allied forces would not be able to participate in the 
combined operations without the provision of the logistical 
support, supplies, and services. The provision would also 
authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide up to an 
additional $5.0 million from operation and maintenance funds in 
any fiscal year to provide logistic support, supplies, and 
services to allied forces participating in combined operations 
with the armed forces of the United States solely for the 
purposes of enhancing the interoperability of the logistical 
support systems of the allied forces with the logistical 
support systems of the United States in order to facilitate 
combined operations.
Exclusion of petroleum, oil, and lubricants from limitations on amount 
        of liabilities the United States may accrue under acquisition 
        and cross-servicing agreements (sec. 1204)
    The committee recommends a provision that would exclude the 
acquisition of petroleum, oil, and lubricants from the monetary 
limitations placed on acquisitions made under Acquisition and 
Cross-servicing Agreements (ACSA) with foreign allies. The ACSA 
limitations have not been raised for over 10 years. The rising 
cost of and demand for petroleum, oil, and lubricants make it 
reasonable to exclude these items from the ACSA monetary caps, 
which were intended to place a reasonable, but not overly 
restrictive, limit on the value of acquisitions that could be 
made through ACSA agreements.
Temporary authority to use acquisition and cross-servicing agreements 
        to loan significant military equipment to foreign forces in 
        Iraq and Afghanistan for personnel protection and survivability 
        (sec. 1205)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Defense temporary authority to treat significant 
military equipment as logistical support, supplies, and 
services under subchapter I of chapter 138 of title 10, United 
States Code, authorizing the use of Acquisition and Cross-
Servicing Agreements. The provision would permit this authority 
to be used only for purposes of providing for the use of such 
equipment by military forces of foreign nations participating 
in combined operations with U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan 
if the Secretary, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State, determines in writing that it is in the national 
security interest of the United States to provide for the use 
of such equipment for that purpose. The provision would limit 
the duration of the loan of equipment under this authority to 1 
year, and would require that the equipment be used by foreign 
military forces solely for personnel protection or to aid in 
the personnel survivability of such forces. The provision would 
stipulate that the provision of equipment under this authority 
shall be subject to the Arms Export Control Act and any other 
export control regime under law relating to the transfer of 
military technology to foreign nations.
    The provision would require the Secretary of Defense, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to submit semi-annual 
reports to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives, the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on International 
Relations of the House of Representatives. The reports would 
include for each exercise of this authority: a copy of the 
written determination; a statement of each recipient of 
equipment under this authority; a statement of the type, 
quantity and value of the equipment supplied under this 
authority; and the terms and duration of the loan of the 
equipment. This authority would expire on September 30, 2008.
    The committee notes that this authority is intended to 
permit the temporary loan of equipment such as armored HMMWVs 
or HMMWVs with add-on armor kits, counter-improvised explosive 
device equipment, and defusing equipment to our coalition 
partners in Iraq and Afghanistan so that they can be better 
protected against improvised explosive devices and other 
weapons they are encountering in those theaters.
Modification of authorities relating to the building of the capacity of 
        foreign military forces (sec. 1206)
    The committee recommends a provision that would modify 
section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) by permitting the 
Secretary of Defense to use funds available for operation and 
maintenance to conduct or support the activities authorized 
under that section, and by extending the duration of the 
authority provided in that section through September 30, 2008.
    The provision would also provide new authority to the 
Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State, to authorize any commander of a geographic combatant 
command to respond to unanticipated changes in a security 
environment within that commander's area of responsibility 
(AOR) to build the capacity of the national military forces of 
a country within that AOR in order for that country to conduct 
counterterrorist operations or participate in or support 
military and stability operations. The provision would require 
that a program constructed under this authority promote 
observance of and respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms, and respect for legitimate civilian authority within 
the country concerned. A program constructed under this 
authority could include the provision of equipment, supplies, 
and training. The provision would allow the Secretary of 
Defense to use funds available for operation and maintenance 
for fiscal years 2007 and 2008, up to $200.0 million in a 
fiscal year for this purpose. Of that amount, no more than 
$50.0 million may be available for any one geographic combatant 
commander in a fiscal year. This authority could not be used to 
provide assistance that is otherwise prohibited by any 
provision of law, nor could it be used to provide assistance to 
any foreign nation that would otherwise be prohibited from 
receiving such assistance. The provision would further require 
the Secretary of Defense to prescribe guidance for programs 
constructed under this authority. That guidance shall require a 
combatant commander to formulate any program under this 
authority for a country jointly with the U.S. Ambassador or 
Chief of Mission to that country, and to coordinate with the 
U.S. Ambassador or Chief of Mission to that country in 
implementing any program under this authority. The provision 
would further require the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
with the Secretary of State, to provide a notification to 
specified congressional committees no later than 15 days after 
the initiation of activities in a country under this authority. 
This authority would expire on September 30, 2008.
    The provision would also provide the Secretary of Defense 
new authority to authorize a geographic combatant commander to 
respond to urgent and unanticipated humanitarian relief or 
reconstruction requirements in a foreign country within the 
commander's AOR if the commander determines that the provision 
of such assistance will promote the security interest of the 
United States and of the country to which such assistance would 
be provided. The provision would permit such assistance to be 
provided without regard to chapters 137, 140, or 141 of title 
10, United States Code, or any other provision of law that 
would otherwise prohibit, restrict, or limit the provision of 
such assistance. Assistance provided under this authority could 
include: construction, reconstruction or repair of municipal, 
educational, cultural or other local facilities; reconstitution 
or improvement of utilities or other local infrastructure; and 
provision of any other goods and services necessary to respond 
to urgent and unanticipated humanitarian relief or 
reconstruction requirements. The provision would prohibit this 
authority from being used in Iraq or Afghanistan. The provision 
would limit the amounts available for this authority to 
$200,000 in any country in a fiscal year. Funding for the 
exercise of this authority would come from funds available for 
operation and maintenance for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. The 
provision would further require the Secretary of Defense to 
prescribe guidance for the provision of assistance under this 
authority. That guidance shall include a requirement that any 
assistance to a country be provided only with the concurrence 
of the U.S. Ambassador or Chief of Mission to that country. The 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to provide the 
guidance, and any modification of that guidance, to the 
congressional defense committees. The provision would further 
require the Secretary of Defense, no later than November 1, 
2007 and 2008, to submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the provision of assistance under this 
authority in the preceding fiscal year. The report shall 
include the source of funds used to provide assistance, 
identification of each country to which assistance was 
provided, and for each country, the type and amount of 
assistance provided. This authority would expire on September 
30, 2008.
    The committee underscores that the authorities provided in 
this section are provided in the spirit of a pilot program. The 
committee intends to review carefully how these authorities are 
implemented so as to have a basis for determining whether and, 
if so, in what precise manner, to reauthorize these or provide 
other authorities after the conclusion of the pilot program. 
Important factors in the committee's future consideration of 
these matters will be the report that is to be provided under 
section 1206, and the record of implementing these authorities 
that is built by the Department of Defense and the geographic 
combatant commanders over the next 2 years. The committee 
strongly discourages further modifications to these authorities 
until a track record implementing the pilot program authorized 
in this section has been developed. The committee believes it 
will be important to demonstrate through experience that these 
expanded authorities can and will be exercised consistent with 
the effective coordination of U.S. foreign policy writ large.
Participation of the Department of Defense in multinational military 
        centers of excellence (sec. 1207)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
during fiscal year 2007 the Secretary of Defense, with the 
concurrence of the Secretary of State, to permit the 
participation of Department of Defense civilian and military 
personnel in multinational military centers of excellence for 
the purpose of enhancing the ability of participating nations 
to engage in joint exercises or coalition or international 
military operations, or to improve their interoperability. The 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to enter into 
memoranda of understanding, with the concurrence of the 
Secretary of State, that would govern the terms of the 
Department's participation in such centers. The provision would 
permit the Secretary of Defense to use up to $3.0 million from 
funds available for operation and maintenance in fiscal year 
2007 to pay the U.S. share of the expenses of such centers in 
which the Department participates, and to pay for the salaries 
and expenses of the Department personnel participating in such 
centers. The provision would further authorize the use of 
Department facilities and equipment to support such centers 
that are hosted by the Department. The provision would require 
the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees no later than October 31, 
2007, on the use of this authority, including a detailed report 
on the centers and activities in which the Department 
participated, and the cost of that participation.
    The provision would define a center of excellence as an 
entity sponsored by one or more nations that is accredited and 
approved by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 
Military Committee as offering recognized expertise and 
experience to personnel participating in the activities of such 
entity for the benefit of NATO.
    The committee notes that it requires further information 
regarding the Department's expressed interest in expanding the 
authority beyond NATO-approved centers of excellence.

Distribution of education and training materials and information 
        technology to enhance interoperability (sec. 1208)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to provide electronically-distributed 
learning content and associated information technology for the 
education and training of military and civilian personnel of 
friendly foreign governments and personnel of internationally-
recognized non-governmental organizations to enhance allied and 
friendly military capabilities for multinational operations, 
including joint exercises and coalition operations. The 
provision would require the concurrence of the Secretary of 
State if the activity proposed to be undertaken is not 
authorized by another provision of law. The provision would 
further require that the provision of learning content and 
information technology under this authority shall be subject to 
the Arms Export Control Act and any other export control regime 
under law relating to the transfer of military technology for 
foreign nations.
    The provision would also require the Secretary to: develop 
and issue guidance on the procedures for the use of this 
authority; submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees on that guidance no later than 30 days after it is 
issued; and submit any modifications of the guidance to the 
congressional defense committees. The committee recommends that 
the guidance include procedures for vetting by the Department 
of State and/or the U.S. country team of the proposed 
recipients of any materials or information technology to be 
provided under this authority. The provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report to the 
congressional defense committees on the use of the authority 
during the preceding fiscal year. The authority would expire on 
September 30, 2008.

                       Subtitle B--Report Matters


Report on increased role and participation of multinational partners in 
        the United Nations Command in the Republic of Korea (sec. 1221)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of 
State, to submit a report within 180 days of enactment of this 
Act to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations 
of the Senate and the Committee on International Relations of 
the House of Representatives on an increased role and 
participation of multinational partners in the United Nations 
Command in the Republic of Korea. The report shall include: (1) 
a list of the nations that are current members of the United 
Nations Command and a detailed description of the role and 
participation of each member nation in the responsibilities and 
activities of the United Nations Command; (2) a detailed 
description of efforts being taken by the United States to 
encourage enhanced participation in United Nations Command 
responsibilities and activities by the member nations; (3) a 
discussion of whether and how United Nations Command members 
might be persuaded to deploy military forces in peacetime to 
the Republic of Korea to bolster the deterrence mission of the 
United Nations Command; (4) an assessment of how the military 
and political requirements for U.S. military forces in the 
Republic of Korea might be affected were multinational partners 
in the United Nations Command to increase their contribution of 
military forces stationed in the Republic of Korea; and (5) an 
assessment of whether and how the contribution of additional 
military forces to the United Nations Command in the Republic 
of Korea by a multinational partner might affect that partner's 
approach to facilitating a diplomatic resolution of the nuclear 
challenge posed by the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. 
The report should be submitted in unclassified form, but may 
include a classified annex.

Report on interagency operating procedures for stabilization and 
        reconstruction operations (sec. 1222)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
President to develop a plan to establish interagency operating 
procedures for federal agencies to plan and conduct 
stabilization and reconstruction operations. The provision 
would require the President to prepare and transmit to Congress 
a report on the plan not later than 6 months after the date of 
enactment of this Act.
    The report shall include: (1) a delineation of roles, 
responsibilities, and authorities of federal agencies involved 
in support of stabilization and reconstruction operations; (2) 
a description of the operational processes for setting policy 
direction to guide agency operational planning and making 
funding decisions for programs, overseeing policy 
implementation, integrating all programs and activities of 
designated federal agencies into an implementation plan, 
interfacing and integrating civilian and military planning 
efforts for stabilization and reconstruction operations, 
providing guidance to field-level personnel on program 
direction and priorities, and monitoring field implementation 
of assistance programs; (3) a description of available 
capabilities and resources of each federal agency that could be 
used in support of stabilization and reconstruction activities 
and identification of additional resources needed; (4) a 
description of how the capabilities and resources of federal 
agencies will be coordinated among the federal agencies; (5) a 
description of existing, or planned, protocols between federal 
agencies on the utilization and allocation of assets in field 
operations; (6) recommendations for improving interagency 
training, education, and simulation exercises in order to 
adequately prepare civilian and military personnel in federal 
agencies to perform stabilization and reconstruction 
activities; (7) a discussion of statutory and budgetary 
impediments, if any, that prevent civilian agencies of the 
Federal Government from fully and effectively participating in 
stabilization and reconstruction activities, and 
recommendations for new authorities necessary to enhance the 
ability of the executive branch to conduct stabilization and 
reconstruction activities; and (8) guidance on implementation 
of the plan.
    Since 1945, the U.S. military has undertaken numerous 
stabilization and reconstruction operations and related 
missions, with varying degrees of success and each operation 
generally wider in scope and more ambitious in intent than the 
last. In the post-Cold War era, the United States led six major 
operations, including in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, and 
now in Afghanistan and Iraq. In each of these recent and 
current operations, the United States Government has lacked a 
standard, integrated approach to the planning and conduct of 
interagency operations, with each new administration issuing 
new guidance on how to manage complex operations and creating 
new arrangements to coordinate civil-military operations. This 
ad hoc approach has hindered the effective performance of the 
United States in achieving its national security objectives.
    In response to recent operational experiences, the 
administration has taken a number of steps to improve the 
United States performance in contingency operations. In 2004, 
the administration created the Office of the Coordinator for 
Reconstruction and Stabilization within the Department of State 
to coordinate and strengthen efforts of the United States 
Government to prepare, plan for, and conduct interagency 
operations. In 2005, the President issued National Security 
Presidential Directive-44, entitled ``Management of Interagency 
Efforts Concerning Reconstruction and Stabilization,'' to 
improve coordination, planning, and implementation for 
reconstruction and stabilization assistance. Additionally, the 
Department of Defense issued Directive number 3000.05, entitled 
``Military Support for Stability, Security, Transition, and 
Reconstruction Operations,'' making stability operations a core 
military mission comparable to combat operations.
    The committee commends the administration for taking these 
steps to strengthen interagency operations. The committee, 
however, believes that the United States government should 
develop a standardized approach to the planning and conduct of 
interagency operations to ensure a coherent and unified United 
States Government response to contingency operations.
  TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER 
                              SOVIET UNION

Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and funds (sec. 
        1301)
    The committee recommends a provision that would define the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs; define the funds 
as those authorized to be appropriated in section 301 of this 
Act; and authorize the CTR funds to be available for obligation 
for three fiscal years.
Funding allocations (sec. 1302)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$372.1 million, the amount included in the budget request, for 
the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program. This provision 
would also authorize specific amounts for each CTR program 
element; require notification to Congress 30 days before the 
Secretary of Defense obligates and expends fiscal year 2007 
funds for a purpose other than the purposes described in each 
of the CTR program elements; and provide limited authority to 
exceed the amount authorized for a specific CTR program 
element.
Extension of temporary authority to waive limitation on funding for 
        chemical weapons destruction facility in Russia (sec. 1303)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
through December 31, 2011, the President's authority to waive, 
on an annual basis for each calendar year, existing 
certification requirements before obligating or expending funds 
for the construction of the Shchuch'ye chemical weapons 
destruction facility in Russia.
  TITLE XIV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION IRAQI 
                 FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM

Overview
    The committee recommends a supplemental authorization of 
$50.0 billion in funds to be appropriated for fiscal year 2007 
to support operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war 
on terrorism. The committee notes that the President's fiscal 
year 2007 budget request included a $50.0 billion supplemental 
fund in anticipation of additional needs in Iraq, Afghanistan, 
and the global war on terrorism. Providing authorization of 
these funds in advance of need ensures our troops in the field 
will be given adequate resources to meet ongoing demands of 
current military operations and any emergent needs of the 
ongoing global war on terrorism.
Summary table of authorization
    The following table summarizes authorizations included in 
this title for ongoing operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the 
global war on terrorism for fiscal year 2007.


Purpose (sec. 1401)
    This section would establish this title as an authorization 
of appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 
2007, in addition to the amounts otherwise authorized in this 
Act, of $50.0 billion to be available for activities in support 
of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on 
terrorism.
Army procurement (sec. 1402)
    This section would authorize an additional $1.8 billion for 
fiscal year 2007 Army procurement.
Marine Corps procurement (sec. 1403)
    This section would authorize an additional $319.8 million 
for fiscal year 2007 Marine Corps procurement.
Air Force procurement (sec. 1404)
    This section would authorize an additional $51.8 million 
for fiscal year 2007 Air Force procurement.
Operation and maintenance (sec. 1405)
    This section would authorize an additional $32.2 billion 
for fiscal year 2007 operation and maintenance programs.
Defense Health Program (sec. 1406)
    This section would authorize an additional $960.2 million 
to the Defense Health Program for operation and maintenance for 
fiscal year 2007.
Military personnel (sec. 1407)
    This section would authorize an additional $7.3 billion for 
fiscal year 2007 to the Department of Defense for military 
personnel.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (sec. 1408)
    This section would authorize an additional $2.1 billion for 
fiscal year 2007 for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device 
Defeat Fund. The funding provided for the Joint Improvised 
Explosive Device Defeat Fund would ensure the rapid development 
and deployment of intelligence; tactics, techniques and 
procedures; training; and the associated procurement of 
equipment to counter improvised explosive devices in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.
Classified programs (sec. 1409)
    This section would authorize an additional $3.0 billion for 
fiscal year 2007 for classified programs.

Iraq Freedom Fund (sec. 1410)

    This section would authorize an additional $2.2 billion for 
an Iraqi Freedom Fund to be available until expended for 
activities in support of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and 
the global war on terrorism. These funds would be available for 
transfer to other accounts in this title, subject to a 5 day 
prior notification to the congressional defense committees.

Treatment as additional authorizations (sec. 1411)

    This section designates that the authorization of 
appropriations in this title are in addition to the amounts 
otherwise in this Act.

Transfer authority (sec. 1412)

    This section would provide fiscal year 2007 transfer 
authority of $2.5 billion to the Department of Defense for the 
authorizations contained in this title.

Availability of funds (sec. 1413)

    This section would require that the funds provided in this 
title be made available for obligation by the end of the second 
quarter of fiscal year 2007.

                              Budget Items


UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters

    The budget request included $740.4 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Army, for UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters. The 
committee notes that the budget request contained no funding 
for UH-60M helicopter battle losses in the U.S. Central Command 
area of operations. Additional funding for five UH-60M Black 
Hawk helicopters has been included on the Chief of Staff of the 
Army's fiscal year 2007 unfunded priority list. The committee 
recommends an increase of $71.0 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Army, for UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters, for a 
total authorization of $811.4 million.

CH-47F cargo helicopters

    The budget request included $622.1 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Army, for CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications. 
The committee notes that the budget request contained no 
funding for CH-47D cargo helicopter battle losses in the U.S. 
Central Command area of operations. The committee also notes 
that the CH-47D cargo helicopter is no longer in production. 
Additional funding for 11 new-build CH-47F cargo helicopters as 
replacement for CH-47D cargo helicopter battle losses has been 
included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 
unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an increase of 
$333.1 million in Aircraft Procurement, Army, for new-build CH-
47F cargo helicopters, for a total authorization of $955.2 
million.

Patriot missile defense system

    The budget request included $489.1 million in Missile 
Procurement, Army (MPA) for 108 Patriot PAC-3 missiles; and 
$70.0 million in MPA for Patriot modifications in MPA. The 
Patriot ballistic missile defense system demonstrated its worth 
during Operation Iraqi Freedom by intercepting all nine Iraqi 
short-range ballistic missiles that were engaged by Patriot. 
The committee notes that the predominant foreign ballistic 
missile threat to U.S. forces is from short-range ballistic 
missiles, and the U.S. Central Command recommends the 
acceleration of upgrades for Patriot and additional PAC-3 
missile production.
    The committee recommends an increase of $400.0 million in 
MPA to support the upgrade of Patriot battalions to the 
configuration-3 capability. This upgrade would significantly 
extend the defensive range and capability of over 2,000 Patriot 
PAC-2 missiles now in the inventory. Additional funding for 
these Patriot PAC-3 upgrades has been included on the Chief of 
Staff of the Army's unfunded priorities list. The committee 
also recommends an increase of $50.0 million in MPA for 
purchases of 16 additional PAC-3 missiles in fiscal year 2007, 
in response to calls from combatant commanders for more Patriot 
missiles to keep pace with the threat.

M1A1 Abrams integrated management and tank urbanization upgrade kits

    The budget request included $364.9 million in Procurement 
of Weapons and Tracked Combat, Army, but no funding for the 
M1A1 Abrams Integrated Management (AIM) program or tank 
urbanization survival kits (TUSK).
    The committee understands that the Army has decided to 
``pure fleet'' Army tanks in two configurations, Abrams M1A2 
System Enhancement Package (SEP) tanks and M1A1 AIM tanks. 
Although numerous improvements have been made to the M1A1 tank, 
it retains its analog backbone and will not be interoperable 
with the M1A2 SEP without further improvements to the M1A1 AIM 
tank configuration. The committee notes that the M1A1 AIM 
program appears to be funded in the future years defense 
program (FYDP) and encourages the Army to retain M1A1 AIM tanks 
in base budget requests. The Secretary of the Army will submit 
a report to the congressional defense committees, no later than 
March 15, 2007, that provides an explanation of how heavy 
brigades in the active and Reserve components will achieve 
interoperability on the battle field. The report will detail 
the specific equipment required for interoperability, the 
quantities required by brigade combat teams, and the costs 
associated with this equipment.
    TUSK components are add on kits for M1A1 and M1A2 series 
tanks to increase crew survivability in urban environments. The 
Army requires 505 TUSK to meet the operational needs of the 
combatant commanders.
    Additional funding for the M1A1 AIM program and TUSK has 
been included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal year 
2007 unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an 
increase of $136.5 million for M1A1 AIM tanks and $77.9 million 
for TUSK, in Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat 
Vehicles, Army, for a total authorization of $579.3 million.

High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles

    The budget request included $582.6 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled 
Vehicles (HMMWV), including $428.9 million for the procurement 
of the M1151 and M1152 HMMWV variants with armor. The committee 
supports the Army's decision to transition from the up-armored 
HMMWV variant to a more versatile M1151/M1152 HMMWV variant 
with removable armor. However, the committee also understands 
that the Army Component Commander of the U.S. Central Command 
(CENTCOM) has determined that all Level II HMMWVs in the 
CENTCOM area of operations will be upgraded to the Level I 
configuration. The requirement was validated on February 24, 
2006. The Army has funded 16,129 of the 18,669 requirement. 
Additional funding for HMMWVs has been included on the Chief of 
Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 unfunded priority list. 
The committee recommends an increase of $508.0 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for the procurement of up-armored HMMWVs or 
M1151/M1152 HMMWV variants with armor, for a total 
authorization of $1,090.6 million.

Heavy expanded mobile tactical truck extended service program

    The budget request included $220.4 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for the heavy expanded mobile tactical truck 
(HEMTT) extended service program (ESP). HEMTT-ESP is the 
primary source of M1120A2R1 HEMTT Load Handling System (LHS) 
variants, which reduce the logistics footprint on the 
battlefield to support the Army's evolving transportation-
based, just-in-time supply system. Additional funding for HEMTT 
has been included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal 
year 2007 unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an 
increase of $125.0 million in Other Procurement, Army for 
HEMTT-ESP, for a total authorization of $345.4 million.

Land mobile radios

    The budget request included $33.8 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for base support communications, but no 
funding for land mobile radios. Lessons learned from the 
natural disasters of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 
2005 indicate that the Department has an immediate need for a 
handheld radio capability which allows interoperability with 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other civilian 
agencies. Additional funding for land mobile radios has been 
included on the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 
unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an increase of 
$30.0 million in Other Procurement, Army, for land mobile 
radios, for a total authorization of $63.8 million.

Profiler

    The budget request included $2.1 million in Other 
Procurement, Army, for the Profiler meteorological system. The 
committee notes that the budget request contained no funding 
for the Profiler system for units deploying to the U.S. Central 
Command area of operations. The Profiler system is the only 
system capable of providing accurate meteorological data used 
in calculations for accurate delivery of precision munitions. 
Additional funding for 17 Profiler systems has been included on 
the Chief of Staff of the Army's fiscal year 2007 unfunded 
priority list. The committee recommends an increase of $23.6 
million in Other Procurement, Army, for the Profiler system, 
for a total authorization of $25.7 million.

Assault Amphibious Vehicle/7A1 product improvement program

    The budget request included $12.5 million in Procurement, 
Marine Corps, for the Assault Amphibious Vehicle 7A1 Product 
Improvement Program (AAV7A1 PIP). Title IX of the Defense 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-148) 
appropriated $80.6 million for the AAV7A1 PIP. The Department 
of Defense requested $58.1 million for the AAV7A1 PIP in the 
Department of Defense Emergency Supplemental Request for Fiscal 
Year 2006. The Marine Corps provided information that indicated 
there is a $22.5 million unfunded requirement that could not be 
executed in fiscal year 2006 but could be executed in fiscal 
year 2007. The committee recommends an increase of $22.5 
million in Procurement, Marine Corps for AAV7A1 PIP, for a 
total authorization of $35.0 million.

High mobility artillery rocket system re-supply system armor

    The budget request included $57.5 million in Procurement, 
Marine Corps, for the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System 
(HIMARS) but no funding for HIMARS re-supply system (RSS) 
armor. Armoring of the HIMARS RSS not only supports a key 
performance parameter of a Joint Requirements Oversight Council 
requirement but also provides enhanced personnel survivability 
for Marines operating the HIMARS RSS. Additional funding for 
the procurement of HIMARS RSS armor has been included on the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps's fiscal year 2007 unfunded 
priority list. The committee recommends an increase of $85.3 
million in Procurement, Marine Corps for HIMARS RSS armor, for 
a total authorization of $142.8 million.

Gunner protection kits

    The budget request included no funding in Procurement, 
Marine Corps, for gunner protection kits for High Mobility 
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV) and Medium Tactical 
Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) vehicles. The Marine Corps has 
developed armor kits which provide protection for Marines 
exposed in unprotected turrets while traveling in HMMWV or in 
unprotected truck beds in MTVRs. These gunner protection kits 
include side and door armor, underbelly armor, transparent 
armor, fuel tank fire suppression kits, and rear door armor. 
The committee recommends an increase of $100.0 million in 
Procurement, Marine Corps, for armor kits, for a total 
authorization of $100.0 million.

Family of explosive ordnance demolition equipment

    The budget request included $14.8 in Procurement, Marine 
Corps, for explosive ordnance demolition systems, but no 
funding for the procurement of assault breacher vehicles, 
Cougar hardened engineer vehicles, or Buffalo armored vehicles.
    The Assault Breacher Vehicle (ABV) is a single platform 
that provides deliberate and in-stride obstacle and minefield 
breaching capability to the Ground Combat Element of the Marine 
Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF). The committee understands that 
the ABV is currently in the System Development and 
Demonstration Phase, with plans for a full-rate production 
decision in fiscal year 2007. The Marine Corps acquisition 
objective is for 33 vehicles but only 24 vehicles are funded. 
Additional funding for the procurement of three ABVs has been 
included on the Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 
2007 unfunded priority list.
    The Cougar and Buffalo vehicles have proven to meet the 
Marine Corps' immediate need for hardened engineer and 
explosive ordinance disposal (EOD) vehicles with a V-shaped 
hull designed to withstand both anti-personnel and anti-tank 
mine blasts and a nuclear, biological and radiological over-
pressure system.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million for 
ABVs and $100.0 million for the procurement of Cougar and 
Buffalo armored vehicles, in Procurement, Marine Corps for a 
total authorization of $126.8 million.

Up-armored high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles

    The budget request included $11.3 million in Other 
Procurement, Air Force, for up-armored high mobility 
multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV). The committee notes that 
the Air Force has a new requirement for 1,041 up-armored HMMWVs 
because of additional mission requirements. Specifically, Air 
Force security teams have an immediate requirement for 205 up-
armored HMMWVs to support security and counter-improvised 
explosive device missions in the U.S. Central Command area of 
operations. Additional funding for 205 up-armored HMMWVs has 
been included on the Chief of Staff of the Air Force's fiscal 
year 2007 unfunded priority list. The committee recommends an 
increase of $51.8 million in Other Procurement, Air Force, for 
additional up-armored HMMWVs, for a total authorization of 
$63.1 million.

Abrams M1A1 Abrams Integrated Management program

    The budget request included $974.4 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA), for Land Forces Depot Maintenance, 
including $56.0 million for the Abrams M1A1 Abrams Integrated 
Management (AIM) program. This program upgrades the 
capabilities of the Abrams tank, and is an integral part of the 
Army modularity transformation process. The committee 
recommends an increase of $231.0 million in OMA, to support 
M1A1 AIM tanks for three more Brigade Combat Teams, in order to 
accelerate the Army's transformation to a modular combat force.

Navy flying hour program

    The budget request included $31,331.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), including $3,587.8 million for 
Mission and Other Flight Operations. The budget request is 
insufficient to support the Training and Readiness T-rating 
goals of 2.3 for the Navy and 2.0 for the Marine Corps tactical 
aviation. The committee recommends an increase of $75.0 million 
in OMN for the Navy flying hour program to increase the Navy 
and Marine Corps tactical Aviation T-ratings to the Training 
and Readiness goals.

Aviation depot maintenance

    The budget request included $31,331.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), including $902.9 million for 
Aircraft Depot Maintenance. Naval aircraft are in high demand 
around the world, and supporting critical combat operations in 
Iraq and Afghanistan. To maintain necessary operational 
availability, both for current operations, and for unforseen 
requirements, maintenance on naval aircraft must keep pace with 
operational demands. The committee recommends an increase of 
$174.0 million in OMN for aviation depot maintenance.

Ship operations

    The budget request included $31,331.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), including $3,166.9 million for 
Mission and Other Ship Operations. The budget request is 
insufficient to support the goal of 51 steaming days per 
quarter while deployed. The committee recommends an increase of 
$121.0 million in OMN, to increase the number of deployed 
steaming days per quarter to 51. The committee is disappointed 
that the Navy did not properly fund one of its most basic 
operational requirements, and expects the Navy to provide 
adequate funding to support its required deployments in future 
budget requests.

Ship depot maintenance

    The budget request included $31,331.0 million in Operation 
and Maintenance, Navy (OMN), including $3,722.7 million for 
ship depot maintenance. As the number of ships in the Navy 
continues to decrease, the demands on the remaining ships will 
increase, resulting in increased maintenance. Required 
maintenance must be conducted on the remaining ships to ensure 
the Navy can meet any unexpected threats that may arise around 
the world. The committee recommends an increase of $145.0 
million in OMN for ship depot maintenance.

Marine Corps depot maintenance funding

    The budget request included $424.3 million in Operation and 
Maintenance, Marine Corps (OMMC), for depot maintenance 
activities, but included insufficient funds to perform depot 
maintenance for all Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV) and M1A1 
Abrams tanks identified on the Marine Corps' mandatory 
Operation Iraqi Freedom principal end item rotation plan. The 
committee recommends an increase of $106.0 million in OMMC for 
depot maintenance of AAVs and M1A1 Abrams tanks.

Joint improvised explosive device defeat defense fund

    In the Senate Appropriations Committee Defense Subcommittee 
(SAC-D) markup of the Department of Defense Emergency 
Supplemental Request for Fiscal Year 2006, the SAC-D 
recommended the initiation of a Joint Improvised Explosive 
Device Defeat Fund (JIEDDF) to provide adequate funding and 
management flexibility to the Department in developing and 
fielding the necessary tactics, equipment, and training to 
defeat improvised explosive devices (IED).
    The budget request included no funding for the development 
or procurement of IED countermeasures. Over the past two years, 
the Committee has worked closely with the Department and the 
Joint IED Defeat Task Force (JIEDDTF) to provide the authority 
and funding for the Department to deal with the IED threat. The 
committee supported the Secretary of Defense's decision to 
elevate the position of the director of the JIEDDTF and to make 
a permanent organization to ``expand upon existing efforts to 
ensure innovative solutions across ground, air, maritime and 
special operations domains by integrating technology and 
training with battlefield tactics, techniques and procedures, 
while leveraging outside sources for rapid acquisition of 
technical solutions.'' The committee understands that the new 
organization, named the Joint IED Defeat Office (JIEDDO) will 
also provide for governmentwide coordination of resources and 
analysis.
    The committee supports the Department and the JIEDDO in 
their pursuit of measures to defeat IEDs and expects the JIEDDO 
to not only use all the resources available within the 
Department of Defense but also reach out to the private sector 
to find technical solutions to countering the IED threat, 
giving equal opportunity to big as well as medium and small-
sized firms that desire to participate. Additionally, the 
committee believes that more non-technical means should be 
employed to defeat IEDs.
    Discussions with the JIEDDO indicate that the JIEDDO 
anticipates the organization will require $2.1 billion for the 
rapid development and deployment of intelligence; tactics, 
techniques and procedures (TTP); training; and the associated 
procurement of equipment to counter IEDs. The committee 
recommends that $2.1 billion be authorized for the JIEDDF.
            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

Explanation of funding tables
    Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military 
construction projects of the Department of Defense. It includes 
funding authorizations for the construction and operation of 
military family housing and military construction for the 
Reserve components, the defense agencies, and the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment 
program. It also provides authorization for the base closure 
accounts that funds military construction, environmental 
cleanup and other activities required to implement the 
decisions in base closure rounds.
    The following tables provide the project-level 
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized 
in Division B of this Act and summarize that funding by 
account.
    The budget request for fiscal year 2007 included 
authorization of appropriations for military construction and 
housing programs totaling $16,698,423,000. Of this amount, the 
budget request included authorization of appropriations for 
$5,626,223,000 to implement the results of the 2005 Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) round. The amount 
authorized for appropriation is included in the following table 
in a line designated ``Base Realignment & Closure V''.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations 
for military construction and housing programs totaling 
$17,098,423,000. The total amount authorized for appropriations 
reflects this committee's commitment to continue a strong 
investment in the recapitalization of facilities and 
infrastructure in the Unites States, while continuing to invest 
prudently in overseas installations that are identified in the 
Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy released by the 
President in September, 2004 as enduring installations with 
firmly defined, long-term operational missions. Of the $400.0 
million added to the budget request for military construction, 
the committee recommends authorization of appropriation of 
$363.5 million for projects which will recapitalize existing 
deteriorated facilities identified by military installation 
commanders as urgent unfunded priorities. The committee 
strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the 
level of future investment in military installations meets 
goals established by the Department for rates of 
recapitalization and sustainment.


Costs to implement the decisions of the 2005 Defense Base Closure and 
        Realignment round

    The budget request for fiscal year 2007 includes $5.6 
billion to carry out military construction and environmental 
activities related to the decisions in the 2005 Defense Base 
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round. This amount is in 
addition to $1.5 billion, which was authorized in fiscal year 
2006. The Secretary of Defense included in the justification 
data to support the request a budget plan to implement the BRAC 
2005 round with a one-time cost of over $18.4 billion between 
fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2011. The plan includes an 
additional $9.5 billion to be spent for recurring costs related 
to operations and maintenance and military personnel. The 
Secretary is required by law to complete all installation 
closures and realignments no later than September 15, 2011.
    The Secretary submitted the BRAC 2005 investment plan with 
the caveat that ``the out-year program does not fully reflect 
the expected costs for the remainder of the BRAC implementation 
period.'' The Department of the Army included in its 
justification data accompanying the 2007 budget request for 
BRAC 2005 an assessment that the requirements currently 
identified by the Army to implement its recommendations will 
cost $5.7 more than the $9.5 billion budgeted by the Department 
of Defense for the Army. In subsequent testimony to Congress, 
Army representatives estimated that the shortfall may be as 
high as $8 billion. The Department of the Air Force has 
identified a similar problem in which currently identified 
requirements are estimated to cost $1.8 billion more than 
currently budgeted by the Department of Defense.
    The committee is extremely concerned that the Department 
proposes to address the BRAC 2005 shortfalls by pursuing two 
courses of action which may result in long-term detrimental 
impact to the operational capability of all military units, 
regardless of whether these units were affected by BRAC 2005.
    The first course of action, currently underway in the 
military departments, is to ``scrub'' requirements generated 
from the military units affected by BRAC in order to carry out 
the minimal number of construction projects required to meet 
the needs of the department. In many cases, the military unit 
being moved to another installation may not have the same 
quality and availability of facilities, infrastructure and 
training areas comparable to what was available at their 
original location.
    The second course of action will be to use funds currently 
planned by the military departments for military construction 
projects not associated with BRAC 2005 to make up the shortfall 
in BRAC plans. This proposal would result in the deferral of 
critical recapitalization and modernization projects at 
military installations not impacted by BRAC. The committee has 
consistently supported the Department's goal to request 
authorization of appropriations for military construction, 
facility restoration, and modernization in the fiscal year 2008 
budget at a level that will equate to a recapitalization rate 
of 67 years. This goal must not be sacrificed due to the lack 
of an adequate budget for BRAC 2005 activities.
    The committee finds neither of these courses of action to 
be an acceptable solution. The committee expects that the 
Secretary of Defense will fully budget for all activities 
required to carry out BRAC 2005 and will not assume risk or 
reduce the operational capability of military units in carrying 
out the decisions.

2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment accounts authorized for 
        appropriations in 2006

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
(Public Law 109-163) included authorization of appropriations 
of $1,504.5 million to carry out military construction, 
environmental activities and certain operating expenses related 
to the results of the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
(BRAC) round. Section 2404(c) of the aforementioned Act 
required the Secretary of Defense to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report describing the 
specific programs, projects, and activities for which the 
authorized amounts would be used.
    The Department of Defense imposed a 1 percent reduction 
upon the appropriation for the BRAC account, which resulted in 
an amount of $1,489.4 million being available for obligation.
    On February 10, 2006, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics submitted to the 
committee a report detailing the planned expenditures of funds 
to support implementation of the Department of Defense's BRAC 
requirements.
    The planned expenditures included $1,160.3 million to 
initiate planning, design, and construction of facilities; 
$82.3 million for activities required by the National 
Environmental Policy Act and other environmental actions; 
$193.8 million to carry out personnel permanent changes of 
station (PCS), transportation of personnel property, 
sustainment of real property, and BRAC program management; and 
$52.6 million for the procurement of collateral equipment, 
information technology systems, training, and other transition 
support services.
    The following table provides the projects and other 
activities which were identified by the Department to be 
carried out by each service using amounts made available in 
fiscal year 2006.
    The committee continues to review the justification for the 
construction projects and other BRAC V activities within these 
accounts to ensure amounts authorized for this program are used 
solely to carry out the decisions of the 2005 BRAC round.


2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment accounts

    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $5,626.2 million for fiscal year 2007 to carry out military 
construction, environmental activities and certain operating 
expenses related to the results of the 2005 Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment (BRAC) round.
    The following table provides the projects and other 
activities identified by the Department of Defense to be 
carried out with amounts authorized for appropriation within 
each Service's BRAC V account.
    The budget request did not account for savings to be 
realized from the cancellation of construction projects 
authorized in previous years. Specifically, the committee was 
notified on March 8, 2006 by the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Health Affairs of the intent to cancel a project at Fort 
Belvoir, Virginia, authorized in the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. The Secretary noted 
that these savings would be transferred into the BRAC account 
to satisfy BRAC requirements. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a decrease of $99.3 million to the authorization of 
appropriations for defense agencies for BRAC 2005 to account 
for the savings.
    The committee continues to review the justification for the 
construction projects and other BRAC V activities within these 
accounts to ensure amounts authorized for this program are used 
solely to carry out the decisions of the 2005 BRAC round.


Short title (sec. 2001)

    The committee recommends a provision that would cite 
Division B of this Act as the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007.
                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $2,059.8 million for military construction and $1,271.8 
million for family housing for the Army in fiscal year 2007.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations 
for $2,180.8 million for military construction and $1,271.8 
million for family housing for fiscal year 2007.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Army construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is the binding list of 
the specific projects authorized at each location.
Family housing (sec. 2102)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction and planning and design of family housing 
units for the Army for fiscal year 2007. It would also 
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, 
including housing management offices and housing maintenance 
and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
improvements to existing Army family housing units for fiscal 
year 2007.
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
specific appropriations for each line item contained in the 
Army's military construction and family housing budget for 
fiscal year 2007. This provision would also provide an overall 
limit on the amount the Army may spend on military construction 
projects.

                       Items of Special Interest

Planning and design, Army
    The committee directs that the amount of $1.0 million, 
added to the authorization of appropriation for planning and 
design for the Army, be used to start design of a military 
construction project to construct a Joint Asymmetrical Warfare 
Group headquarters, operational, and training complex at Fort 
A.P. Hill, Virginia.
    The committee also directs that the amount of $500 
thousand, added to the authorization of appropriation for 
planning and design for the Army, be used to design a military 
construction project to install a ground water treatment system 
at Hawthorne Army Depot, Nevada.
Management of military programs in the United States Army Corps of 
        Engineers
    The committee notes that the Commander of the United States 
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) recently implemented a 
reorganization of the responsibilities within the 45 districts 
in USACE to establish ``centers of standardization.'' These 
centers would facilitate the consolidation of design 
requirements from the USACE's military customers for specific 
types of facilities, such as dining facilities and dormitories, 
to one or a few districts in order to improve efficiency. The 
centers would then be able to carry out large contracts to 
construct multiple facilities of similar design, potentially 
saving the USACE's customers millions of dollars in lower bids 
and material costs.
    The committee also notes that this consolidation, as well 
as other innovations such as state-of-the-art computer-aided 
design programs, increased use of pre-manufactured building 
systems, and expanded reliance on design-build and delivery 
order acquisition contracts, should decrease, within both the 
districts and the divisions, the overhead costs required to 
provide design and construction management services to USACE 
customers. The USACE has estimated cost savings of 15 percent 
and a time savings of 30 percent, which equates to lower 
overall overhead costs.
    The committee is aware that USACE currently is conducting 
an internal assessment of the technical capabilities and core 
competencies required to sustain an acceptable level of 
readiness and responsiveness in support of national security 
objectives around the world, including disaster response, as 
well as enhancing reliability in the performance of civil works 
and military missions. This internal assessment will include an 
analysis of how the sustainment of core capabilities and 
manpower are funded by fees paid by USACE customers for 
services in civil and military programs.
    The committee expects that the USACE's assessment of 
sustained capabilities, when combined with an analysis of 
efficient business processes, should yield a comprehensive 
strategy for an effective and value-driven balance of resource 
management to assist in the development of future budgets. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Commander, United States 
Corps of Engineers to submit to the congressional defense 
committees by December 31, 2006 a report containing the 
following information:
          (1) a list of districts, identifying the centers of 
        standardization and types of facilities to be 
        specialized at each district;
          (2) a description of the results and recommendations 
        of the internal assessment conducted by USACE;
          (3) a description of the core capabilities identified 
        by the USACE to be sustained;
          (4) a business plan detailing the investment required 
        to sustain the core capabilities and the sources of the 
        funds;
          (5) an estimate of the savings to be achieved by the 
        implementation of more efficient methods of design, 
        construction and contract management to satisfy 
        customer requirements; and
          (6) an estimate of how the savings will be realized, 
        how much will be saved annually, and how the savings 
        will be passed on to military customers.
                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1,162.0 million for military construction and $814.2 
million for family housing for the Navy in fiscal year 2007.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$1,268.8 million for military construction and $803.6 million 
for family housing for fiscal year 2007.
    The committee also recommends a decrease of $10.6 million 
to the authorization of appropriations of the housing 
operations and maintenance leasing account to reflect the 
justification data submitted with the budget request.
Land Acquisition, Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort, South Carolina
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $7.3 million for the first phase of a military construction 
project to acquire land interests in approximately 600 acres in 
areas surrounding MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina. The Department 
of the Navy has proposed that $18.2 million for the second 
phase of this project would be included in the budget request 
for Fiscal Year 2008. The Navy proposes to acquire land 
interests in order to protect the installation from 
encroachment by ensuring properties in the local community 
within certain Air Installation Compatible Land Use Zones 
(AICUZ) established around the installation would be used for 
purposes compatible with military operations. The AICUZ program 
was initially established by the Department of Defense in 
response to the Noise Control Act of 1972 to promote an 
environment free from noise that jeopardizes public health or 
welfare.
    The justification data accompanying the budget request for 
the project stated, ``The once vacant farmlands surrounding 
MCAS Beaufort are being converted to high density development 
without local government land use and zoning control oversight 
needed to plan for and permit development that is compatible 
with high performance aircraft operations. The weak county 
`Airport Overlay Zoning District' zoning ordinance did not 
prevent the recent development of incompatible Vivian's Island 
within the AICUZ.'' The justification data also stated that, in 
deciding whether to purchase protective easements for property 
versus fee simple acquisitions of deeds for properties, 
``historically, it has shown that in the Beaufort area, 
easements generally run 80% of the fee value. Should easements 
quotes be this high, fee purchase is advised.''
    The committee notes that encroachment of local community 
development upon military operations is a prevalent problem at 
many installations. In response, the Department of Defense has 
promulgated a policy of working with local communities to adopt 
local zoning ordinances to protect military operations by 
precluding incompatible property use. The Department of 
Defense's Office of Economic Adjustment has a Joint Land Use 
Study (JLUS) program established to assist military 
installation commanders and local community leaders deal with 
urban encroachment. The Department has, in the past, strongly 
discouraged the acquisition of real property that did not 
support a valid military requirement. On November 17, 2002, The 
Deputy Secretary of Defense reaffirmed the existing moratorium 
on land acquisitions to ensure that an interest in land would 
be acquired by the Services only where there is a clearly 
demonstrated need. The committee notes that the Department of 
the Navy has not obtained a waiver from the Department of 
Defense to use military construction funds to purchase property 
in the AICUZ at MCAS Beaufort.
    The committee is aware of the proactive efforts currently 
underway within the local community and the State of South 
Carolina to address encroachment at MCAS Beaufort through the 
development of a State sponsored JLUS that will include 
proposals for annexation of county land to the City of 
Beaufort. This initiative offers the Department of the Navy the 
opportunity to review existing local ordinances with new local 
government representatives and to work towards more cooperative 
agreements on local zoning policies.
    The committee supports the Department's policy of pursuing 
all possible means to address encroachment before granting a 
waiver to the Department's moratorium on the acquisition of 
land interests. This policy ensures that the Department of 
Defense does not rely on taxpayer funds to purchase property it 
does not need, or for which a better solution exists to satisfy 
the requirement. The decision to purchase property in the AICUZ 
at MCAS Beaufort may undermine the Department's efforts to 
encourage local communities to address encroachment with zoning 
ordinances. Communities will have less incentive to adopt 
protective measures knowing that they can potentially avoid 
difficult and politically-charged land-use decisions by relying 
instead on the Federal Government to purchase property.
    Therefore, the committee recommends deferring the 
authorization of appropriations of $7.3 million for military 
construction for the Navy at MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina, 
until the Secretary of Defense certifies that all possible 
options to prevent incompatible development in the vicinity of 
MCAS Beaufort have been fully pursued, including using the 
authorities granted by Section 2684a of title 10, United States 
Code, and the Secretary has granted a waiver to the moratorium 
to the acquisition of land interests for the use of military 
construction funds. The committee strongly supports the efforts 
of the Department of the Navy to work with the local community 
to ensure encroachment does not hinder safe aircraft operations 
at this critical Marine Corps installation.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Navy construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is the binding list of 
the specific projects authorized at each location.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction and planning and design of family housing 
units for the Navy for fiscal year 2007. It would also 
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, 
including housing management offices and housing maintenance 
and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
improvements to existing Navy and Marine Corps family housing 
units for fiscal year 2007.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
specific appropriations for each line item in the Navy's 
military construction and family housing budget for fiscal year 
2007. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount 
the Navy may spend on military construction projects.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2006 
        projects (sec. 2205)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2201 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (division B of Public Law 109-163) to change 
project authorizations for Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, 
California, and Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia.
                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1,156.1 million for military construction and $1,938.2 
million for family housing for the Air Force in fiscal year 
2007.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations of 
$1,257.3 million for military construction and $1,938.2 million 
for family housing for fiscal year 2007.
    The committee also recommends deferring the authorization 
of appropriations of $28.0 million to construct the first phase 
of utility infrastructure and road expansions at Anderson Air 
Force Base, Guam. The committee is concerned that force 
structure requirements for all military services on Guam have 
not been finalized. Furthermore, the Department of Defense does 
not have a masterplan that incorporates all proposed 
infrastructure and facility projects and investments required 
to support new missions on Guam, including the relocation of 
7,000 U.S. Marines from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam. The committee 
notes that recent estimates of the costs to relocate U.S. Air 
Force and Marine forces to Guam may exceed $11.0 billion. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report detailing planned 
investments in projects for facilities and infrastructure by 
both the U.S. and Japan for new missions on Guam before 
submitting future budget requests for amounts required for 
military construction.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 
        2301)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Air Force construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is 
the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.
Family housing (sec. 2302)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction and planning and design of family housing 
units for the Air Force for fiscal year 2007. It would also 
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, 
including housing management offices and housing maintenance 
and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
improvements to existing Air Force family housing units for 
fiscal year 2007.
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
specific appropriations for each line item in the Air Force's 
budget for fiscal year 2007. This section would also provide an 
overall limit on the amount the Air Force may spend on military 
construction projects.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2006 project 
        (sec. 2305)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2301 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (division B of Public Law 109-163) to decrease 
a project authorization for MacDill Air Force Base, Florida.

                        Item of Special Interest

Change of project title at Cape Canaveral, Florida
    The committee agrees to change a project title for the Air 
Force at Cape Canaveral, Florida in the table, ``Military 
Construction Authorizations for Fiscal Year 2006'' contained in 
the statement of managers accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) 
from ``Satellite Processing Operations Support Facility'' to 
``Satellite Alert Facility.''
                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

Summary
    The budget request included authorization of appropriations 
of $1,208.2 million for military construction and $57.3 million 
for family housing for Defense agencies in fiscal year 2007.
    The committee recommends authorization of appropriations 
for $1,344.7 million for military construction and $57.3 
million for family housing for fiscal year 2007.
    The budget request also included authorization of 
appropriations of $191.2 million to carry out environmental 
activities on military installations affected by the rounds of 
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) conducted in 1991, 1993, 
and 1995. The budget request included authorization of 
appropriations of $5,626.2 million to carry out military 
construction, environmental activities and certain operating 
expenses related to the decisions of the 2005 BRAC round.
    The budget request did not account for savings to be 
realized from the cancellation of construction projects 
authorized in previous years. Specifically, the committee was 
notified on March 8, 2006 by the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Health Affairs of the intent to cancel a project to 
construct a hospital at Fort Belvior, Virginia, authorized in 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005. The Secretary noted that these savings would be 
transferred into the BRAC account to satisfy BRAC requirements. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $99.3 million 
to the authorization of appropriations for defense agencies for 
BRAC 2005 to account for the savings.
    The budget request included $130.9 million to carry out 
construction activities in support of the chemical 
demilitarization program at Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado and 
Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky. The committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million to authorization of appropriations 
for Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky to accelerate construction 
activities at the plant.
    The committee acknowledges that the Department of Defense's 
Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program will 
develop and implement new cost and schedule baselines in 2007 
for the destruction of the chemical weapons stockpile. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit the 
revised ACWA baselines, as well as updated military 
construction project data, costs, and timelines at Pueblo 
Chemical Depot and Blue Grass Army Depot to the congressional 
defense committees with the budget request for fiscal year 
2008.
    The committee recommends a decrease to the authorization of 
appropriations for military construction for the National 
Security Agency of $4.5 million to upgrade Supervisory Control 
and Data Acquisition system servers, workstations, and 
associated software at Fort Meade, Maryland, as these computer 
system upgrades are not consistent with the use of funds for 
military construction and should be funded through 
appropriations for procurement or operations and maintenance.
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2401)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
defense agency construction projects for fiscal year 2007. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is 
the binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.
Family housing (sec. 2402)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
new construction and planning and design of family housing 
units for defense agencies for fiscal year 2007. It would also 
authorize funds for facilities that support family housing, 
including housing management offices and housing maintenance 
and storage facilities.
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2403)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to carry out energy conservation 
projects.
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2404)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
specific appropriations for each defense agency military 
construction program for fiscal year 2007. This provision also 
would provide an overall limit on the amount that may be spent 
on such military construction projects.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2006 
        projects (sec. 2405)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006 (division B of Public Law 109-163) to increase 
project authorizations for the National Security Agency for 
Augusta, Georgia; Kunia, Hawaii; and Menwith Hill, United 
Kingdom.
   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

Summary
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriation of $221.0 million for the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program for fiscal year 
2007. The committee recommends an authorization of 
appropriation of $206.0 million for fiscal year 2007, due to 
the availability of unobligated amounts available from 
appropriations in prior fiscal years.
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to make contributions to the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program 
in an amount equal to the sum of the amount specifically 
authorized in section 2502 of this title and the amount of 
recoupment due to the United States for construction previously 
financed by the United States.
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations of $206.0 million for the United States' 
contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 
Security Investment Program for fiscal year 2007.
            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

Summary
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $858.8 million for military construction in 
fiscal year 2007 for National Guard and Reserve facilities.
    The committee recommends authorizations of appropriations 
for fiscal year 2007 of $1,049.3 million to be distributed as 
follows:

        Account                                                 Millions
Army National Guard...........................................    $524.0
Air National Guard............................................     242.1
Army Reserve..................................................     189.8
Air Force Reserve.............................................      44.9
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve................................      48.5
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total.....................................................   1,049.3

Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2601)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
appropriations for military construction for the Guard and 
Reserve by service component for fiscal year 2007. The state 
list contained in this report is the binding list of the 
specific projects authorized at each location.

                        Item of Special Interest


Planning and design, Air National Guard

    The committee directs that the amount of $1.8 million, 
added to the authorization of appropriation for planning and 
design for the Air National Guard, be used to complete design 
of a military construction project to replace the jet fuel 
storage complex at Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan.
        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by 
        law (sec. 2701)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
the expiration date for authorizations for military 
construction projects, repair of real property, land 
acquisition, family housing projects, contributions to the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization infrastructure program, and 
National Guard and Reserve military construction projects as 
October 1, 2009, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing 
funds for military construction for fiscal year 2010, whichever 
is later. This expiration would not apply to authorizations for 
projects for which appropriated funds have been obligated 
before October 1, 2009, or the date of enactment of an act 
authorizing funding for military construction for fiscal year 
2010, whichever is later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2004 projects (sec. 
        2702)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorizations for certain fiscal year 2004 military 
construction projects until October 1, 2007, or the date of 
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction 
for fiscal year 2008, whichever is later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2003 projects (sec. 
        2703)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authorizations for certain fiscal year 2003 military 
construction projects until October 1, 2007, or the date of 
enactment of an act authorizing funds for military construction 
for fiscal year 2008, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2704)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, and XXVI of this Act 
shall take effect on October 1, 2006, or the date of enactment 
of this Act, whichever is later.
                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing 
                                Changes

Three-year extension of temporary, limited authority to use operation 
        and maintenance funds for construction projects outside the 
        United States (sec. 2801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2808 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) to extend for three years 
the temporary authority provided to the Secretary of Defense to 
use funds appropriated for operations and maintenance to carry 
out construction projects intended to satisfy certain 
operational requirements in support of a declaration of war, 
national emergency, or other contingency.
    The committee notes that the Secretary has used this 
temporary authority sparingly and has not requested a waiver to 
exceed the annual statutory limits of the authority. The 
committee also notes that military construction projects to 
support the Combatant Commander's urgent requirements in the 
Global War on Terrorism have been included in requests for 
supplemental appropriations. Finally, the Secretary has a 
permanent authority provided by Congress in Section 2808 of 
title 10, United States Code, to undertake military 
construction projects not otherwise authorized by law in 
support of the armed forces in the event of a declaration of 
war or a national emergency.
    Therefore, the committee supports an extension of the 
limited authority to provide military commanders flexibility to 
quickly carry out military construction to satisfy temporary, 
operational requirements at installations that are not planned 
to have an enduring presence of U.S. armed forces.
Authority to carry out military construction projects in connection 
        with industrial facility investment program (sec. 2802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to carry out a military construction 
project not previously authorized, using funds appropriated or 
otherwise made available for that purpose, to carry out 
activities to re-engineer industrial processes related to 
section 2474(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code. The 
provision would also authorize the Secretary to credit 
appropriations made under this authority to the amount required 
under section 2208 of title 10, United States Code, as amended 
by section 361 of this Act, for capital investment budgets for 
public depots.
    The committee notes that, at the present time, military 
construction projects intended to improve industrial processes 
must compete for scarce resources within each military 
department with other construction requirements to support new 
weapon systems, readiness and training, improvements to the 
quality of life for military personnel and their families, and 
other equally important requirements. While generally 
supporting the priorities established by the Department of 
Defense for military construction investments, the committee 
notes that every opportunity to realize immediate and 
substantial savings from a process improvement at an industrial 
facility has a positive impact on force readiness and 
operations.
    This provision would grant the Secretary the authority to 
establish an ``Industrial Facilities Investment Program,'' and 
to request an annual appropriation for unspecified military 
construction projects to respond to emerging requirements 
identified by a military department to improve industrial 
processes. The committee intends that the program would provide 
the Secretary the flexibility to invest in construction 
projects which would result in significant savings in terms of 
working capital funds, man-hours, down-time for major weapon 
systems, and efficient processes at the Department's industrial 
facilities. The committee expects the Secretary to be able to 
quantify the estimated savings from each project carried out 
under this authority.
Modification of notification requirements related to cost variation 
        authority (sec. 2803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2853(c) of title 10, United States Code, to modify the 
requirement for the Secretary of a military department to 
notify the congressional defense committees of a variation in 
the cost of a military construction contract and to wait 21 
days before carrying out the project. The provision would 
authorize the Secretary to carry out a project at a cost less 
than the appropriated amount immediately, and to notify the 
congressional committees within 14 days after the date funds 
are obligated in connection with the military construction 
project or the military family housing project.
Consideration of local comparability of floor areas in construction, 
        acquisition, and improvement of military unaccompanied housing 
        (sec. 2804)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2856 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretaries of the military departments to ensure that the 
floor areas of unaccompanied housing does not exceed the floor 
areas of similar housing in the local private sector. This 
provision is intended to remove an unequal treatment for the 
determination of maximum net allowable square footage between 
unaccompanied housing acquired through traditional military 
construction and unaccompanied housing acquired under the 
alternative authority for acquisition and improvement of 
military housing granted by subchapter IV of Chapter 169 title 
10, United States Code.
Increase in thresholds for unspecified minor military construction 
        projects (sec. 2805)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2805(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, by raising 
the threshold of the cost of a construction project authorized 
by this section from $1.5 million to $2.5 million. This 
provision would also raise the threshold of the cost of a 
construction project intended solely to correct a deficiency 
that is life-threatening, health-threatening, or safety-
threatening from $3.0 million to $4.0 million.
    The committee notes that the Government Accountability 
Office, in a report released in February 2004 entitled ``Long-
term Challenges in Managing the Military Construction 
Program,'' estimated that construction costs for the military 
have increased by an average of 41 percent since the thresholds 
amended in this provision were last adjusted.
Inclusion of military transportation and support systems in energy 
        savings programs (sec. 2806)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2865 of title 10, United States Code, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to designate energy performance goals 
consistent, where appropriate, with the Energy Policy Act of 
2005 (Public Law 109-58). The provision would also expand the 
application of the section to include the consideration of 
alternate energy initiatives for vehicles and military support 
equipment. The provision would also grant the Secretary the 
authority to consider longer positive net present value returns 
for certain equipment upgrades supporting industrial processes. 
The committee notes that recent technological advancements 
offer the opportunity for the Department of Defense to invest 
in resources which would conserve energy in military 
operations, in addition to traditional improvements to facility 
systems, utilities, and infrastructure. These new technologies, 
such as alternative fuel vehicles and more efficient engines, 
have the potential to save the Department substantial operation 
and maintenance funds in the current environment of relatively 
high energy prices.
    The committee also recognizes that certain upgrades and 
improvements to large equipment items and systems supporting 
industrial facilities and processes offer a substantial return 
on investment over the life-cycle of the item or system, but 
not within ten years. The committee intends for the Secretary 
to have the discretion to assess these proposed investments 
with a more realistic positive net present value requirement.
Repeal of authority to convey property at closed or realigned military 
        installations to support military construction (sec. 2807)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 2869 of title 10, United States Code authorizing the 
Secretary of a military department to transfer property at 
military installations that have been closed or are subject to 
closure to persons who, in exchange, construct or provide 
family housing, unaccompanied housing, and military 
construction activities.
    The committee notes that only one military department 
satisfied the minimum requirement directed by Section 2869(c) 
of title 10, United States Code, to use the conveyance 
authority at least once before December 3l, 2004. The committee 
also notes that the Department of Defense has not provided to 
the congressional defense committees in the previous two years 
a plan for the use of the authority pursuant to section 
2869(f)(2) of title 10, United States Code. Furthermore, the 
committee acknowledges that the burdensome annual reporting 
requirement in the section does not warrant the limited 
additional authority and the substantial effort by the 
Secretary to carry out a transaction using the authority.
    The committee is aware of the difficulty in the evaluation 
of fair market value and best offers in proposals that exchange 
new construction for land, which may expose the military 
departments to increased liability and resultant claims during 
the solicitation and bid process. Therefore, the committee 
encourages the Secretaries of the military departments to 
continue to receive, as compensation for the disposal of excess 
land resulting from base closures, amounts in cash which can 
then be used to accelerate the completion of environmental 
requirements at closed installations.
Repeal of requirement to determine availability of suitable alternate 
        housing for acquisition in lieu of construction of new family 
        housing (sec. 2808)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal 
section 2823 of title 10, United States Code, which requires 
the Secretaries of military departments to consult with the 
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on the 
availability of suitable alternate housing before entering into 
contracts to construct authorized family housing units in the 
United States. This cumbersome requirement curtails the ability 
of the Department of Defense to carry out housing construction 
programs of vital interest to military members and their 
families. Furthermore, due to the current requirements for 
military housing, this requirement has not yielded any type of 
agreement for the use of alternative HUD housing in over ten 
years.
Updating foreign currency fluctuation adjustment for certain military 
        family housing leases in Korea (sec. 2809)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2828 of title 10, United States Code to modify the 
adjustments made by a secretary of a military department to 
maximum lease amounts for family housing in Korea to account 
for foreign currency fluctuations.
    The Committee notes that section 2801 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-
314) amended section 2828 of title 10, United States Code to 
authorize the secretaries of military departments to lease an 
additional amount of family housing units in Korea at an 
increased maximum amount of $35,000 per unit per year. This 
authority was granted in addition to an existing authority for 
the secretary concerned to lease a certain number of family 
housing units at $25,000 per unit per year, which was provided 
by Congress in 1987. Both authorities were accompanied by 
direction from Congress to the secretary concerned in section 
2828 of title 10 to adjust the statutory maximum amounts 
annually to account for foreign currency fluctuation and 
changes to the consumer price index.
    Congress clearly intended the legislative provision in 2003 
to provide the secretary concerned with an increased maximum 
lease authority equal to $10,000 more per unit per year than 
was then currently authorized by statute for a certain number 
of family housing units in Korea. Therefore, any adjustments 
for foreign currency fluctuation and the consumer price index 
made by the secretary concerned to either of the maximum lease 
amounts should reflect the intent of Congress.
Pilot projects for acquisition or construction of military 
        unaccompanied housing (sec. 2810)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2881a of title 10, United States Code, to extend the 
expiration date of the authorization for the pilot projects for 
unaccompanied housing privatization from September 30, 2007 to 
September 30, 2009. This provision would also reduce from 90 
days to 30 days the period for certain notification periods to 
Congress. The committee expects that the Secretary of the Navy 
will carry out all three authorized pilot projects within the 
revised time period granted by this provision and will submit a 
report as required by section 2881a before requesting that 
Congress provide authority for additional projects.
Certification required for certain military construction projects (sec. 
        2811)
    The committee recommends a provision that would restrict 
the obligation of funds for military construction projects that 
would provide training in urban operations, including urban 
assault courses, range complexes, shoot houses, and combined 
arms training facilities, beginning in fiscal year 2007. The 
provision would require the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Personnel and Readiness), after consultation with the 
Commander, United States Joint Forces Command, to certify to 
the congressional defense committees that the Secretary of 
Defense has approved a strategy for training and facility 
construction for operations in urban terrain, that each such 
project has been evaluated and determined to be consistent with 
that strategy, and that each such project has incorporated 
appropriate capabilities for joint and interagency use in 
accordance with that strategy, before construction of such 
projects may proceed. The certifications could be provided for 
one or more projects at a time.
    The committee is concerned that the Department has yet to 
complete this strategy. The committee first requested a report 
describing the requirements for such facilities four years ago 
in the report (S. Rept. 107-151) accompanying S. 2514, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. The 
conferees reaffirmed the need for a strategy to guide the 
investment in facilities supporting urban operations in the 
statement of managers (H. Rept. 109-360) accompanying the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public 
Law 109-163). The committee notes that the Department's 
increased emphasis on urban operations requires a comprehensive 
strategy for resource management and effective investments in 
ranges and infrastructure to support combined arms, joint, and 
interagency training for all sizes and types of military units.
Modification of land acquisition authority, Perquimans County, North 
        Carolina (sec. 2812)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2846 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107) as amended 
by section 2865 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2005 (division B of Public Law 108-375) to 
increase, from 840 acres to 1,550 acres, the amount of acreage 
that the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to acquire.
Naming of Research Laboratory at Air Force Rome Research Site, Rome, 
        New York, in honor of Sherwood L. Boehlert, a Member of the 
        House of Representatives (sec. 2813)
    The committee recommends a provision that would designate 
an engineering center at the Air Force Rome Research Site in 
Rome, New York as the Sherwood L. Boehlert Engineering Center.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

Consolidation of easement provisions (sec. 2821)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2668 of title 10, United States Code to consolidate and 
clarify authorities available to the Secretaries of the 
military departments to grant real property easements. This 
provision would also redesignate section 2668 as section 2672 
and would repeal section 2669 of title 10, United States Code.
Authority to grant restrictive easements for conservation and 
        environmental restoration purposes (sec. 2822)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to grant restrictive 
easements on real property transferred by deed to limit future 
uses of the property. Such restrictive easements would be 
authorized to ensure preservation of the property for 
conservation purposes and to ensure the continued effectiveness 
of any environmental remedy on the property. The provision 
would authorize granting a conservation easement to State or 
local governments, or qualified organizations, with their 
consent. The provision would not authorize granting a 
conservation easement unless the secretary concerned determines 
that conservation of the property can not be effectively 
achieved through the application of state law by units of the 
State or local government without such an easement; that the 
jurisdiction that encompasses the property authorizes such 
easements; and that the secretary concerned can give or assign 
a third party the responsibility for enforcing such an 
easement. The provision would also authorize the secretary 
concerned to grant an environmental easement to a State or 
local government, with their consent, to ensure the future 
effectiveness of an environmental remedy. This provision would 
not alter the established base closure disposal process.
Consolidation of provisions relating to transfers of real property 
        within the Department of Defense and to other Federal agencies 
        (sec. 2823)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2696 of title 10, United States Code to consolidate and 
clarify the requirement for the Secretary of Defense to screen 
for use by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies 
proposed transfers or conveyances of real property currently 
deeded to the Department of Defense. The provision would also 
incorporate into section 2896 the existing requirement, with a 
certain exception, for the Secretary of Defense to notify the 
Attorney General of the availability of excess Department of 
Defense real property for correctional facilities purposes.
Authority to use excess property as exchange under agreements to limit 
        encroachments on military training, testing, and operations 
        (sec. 2824)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary concerned to use land that is determined to be 
excess to the needs of the Department of Defense in an exchange 
under an agreement with eligible third parties under section 
2684a of title 10, United States Code. Such agreements are 
authorized to create buffer zones to address the use or 
development of real property in the vicinity of a military 
installation to prevent encroachment, or to preserve habitat 
that may eliminate or relieve current or anticipated 
environmental restrictions on military training, testing, or 
operations. The provision would authorize the exchange of 
excess land for non-federal land located within the same State 
as the installation that is the subject of the agreement. The 
provision would broaden the type of consideration that may be 
used as part of an agreement with eligible third parties under 
section 2684a to include appropriated funds, excess lands, or a 
combination of the two.
Modification of utility system authority and related reporting 
        requirements (sec. 2825)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2688 of title 10, United States Code, to modify the 
authority provided to the Secretary of a military department. 
The provision would authorize the secretary to enter in a 
contract for utility services for a period not to exceed 50 
years without the requirement to assess the relative cost of a 
10 year lease period. The provision would also modify the 
requirement for the secretary of a military department to 
submit to the congressional defense committees certain data 
before carrying out utility system conveyances under the 
authority of the section. The provision would remove the 
requirement for the Secretary concerned to incorporate within 
an economic analysis an estimated margin of error of the costs 
resulting from conveyance or continued ownership by the 
government.
    The committee acknowledges that the two requirements 
removed by this provision would pose an unnecessary burden on 
the Secretary concerned, without any substantive effect on the 
Secretary's decision to carry out transactions using the 
authority provided by Congress.
Increase in authorized maximum lease term for certain structures and 
        real property relating to structures in foreign countries (sec. 
        2826)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2675 of title 10, United States Code, to increase from 
five years to ten years the maximum time period authorized for 
the lease of a structure required for a military purpose other 
than family housing in a foreign country. This provision would 
grant the Secretary of a military department more flexibility 
to enter into lease agreements containing more favorable terms 
for the government.
Modification of land transfer authority, Potomac Annex, District of 
        Columbia (sec. 2827)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2831 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) to authorize the 
Secretary of the Navy to convey, without consideration other 
than certain reimbursement requirements, to the United States 
Institute of Peace (USIP) administrative jurisdiction over one 
acre and two buildings located thereon, known as building 6 and 
building 7, in addition to the 3 acres originally authorized.
    The committee understands that this additional 
authorization would have no negative impact on the Navy's plan 
to transfer the remainder of the Potomac Annex to another 
federal agency as a result of a decision in the 2005 Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment round.
    The committee supports the efforts of the USIP to create a 
national center for professional education and training in 
conflict management and peacebuilding. This center would be 
sited in buildings 6 and 7, adjacent to the future site of the 
USIP campus. The committee notes the important work being done 
by the USIP to educate and train individuals from military 
departments, federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, 
international organizations, foreign governments, and the 
domestic and foreign private sectors in the skills necessary to 
prevent conflicts, manage and resolve active conflicts, and 
support post-conflict peacebuilding operations. The committee 
believes the USIP can make a positive contribution toward 
professionalizing the field of conflict management and 
peacebuilding through establishment and adoption of common 
concepts, development and propagation of best practices, and 
promotion of shared doctrine and training. Such education and 
training is critical for U.S. military and civilian personnel 
who could be deployed on new and challenging stabilization 
missions in the future.

                Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment

Defense Economic Adjustment Program: research and technical assistance 
        (sec. 2831)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2391 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to award grants, conclude cooperative 
agreements, and supplement other federal funds for research and 
technical assistance. This provision would allow the Department 
of Defense's Office of Economic Adjustment to obtain research 
and technical assistance without the need to carry out the 
requirement through other federal agencies.

Extension of eligibility for community planning assistance related to 
        certain military facilities not under Department of Defense 
        jurisdiction (sec. 2832)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2391 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to award grants, conclude cooperative 
agreements, and supplement other federal funds for the purpose 
of addressing encroachment by civilian communities upon State-
owned and operated National Guard facilities used by the armed 
forces.
    The committee notes that the unrestricted development of 
private property adjacent to military training areas continues 
to have a detrimental impact on the safe training operations. 
This provision would allow the Department of Defense's Office 
of Economic Adjustment to expand their current program of 
working with local communities to develop joint use land 
studies and other activities at federal installations to 
include opportunities to address concerns at State-owned 
military reservations which are used by all branches of the 
armed forces.

Modification of deposit requirement in connection with lease proceeds 
        received at military installations approved for closure or 
        realignment after January 1, 2005 (sec. 2833)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2667(d) of title, 10, United States Code, to authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to deposit lease proceeds received as 
a result of 2005 base realignment and closure decisions into 
the Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005. This 
provision would provide an authority consistent with previous 
base realignment and closure rounds.

                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances


Land conveyance, Radford Army Ammunition Plant, Virginia (sec. 2841)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, without consideration, to 
the Commonwealth of Virginia, a parcel of property consisting 
of approximately 80 acres located at the Radford Army 
Ammunition Plant, Radford, Virginia for the purpose of 
establishing a veterans cemetery operated by Commonwealth. This 
provision would also authorize the Secretary to include a 
reversionary clause in the terms of the conveyance, in the 
event the property conveyed was not used in accordance with the 
purpose stated in the authorization.

Modifications to land conveyance authority, Engineering Proving 
        Grounds, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (sec. 2842)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2836 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107) to 
authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out an alternate 
agreement with the Commonwealth of Virginia for the design and 
construction of a parkway portion as part of the conveyance of 
two parcels of real property totaling 182 acres at the 
Engineering Proving Grounds, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The 
provision would require the Commonwealth to pay all costs for 
the design and construction of the parkway portion in the 
alternate agreement. The provision would require the 
Commonwealth to acquire all property not under the jurisdiction 
of the Secretary required to design and construct the parkway 
portion in the alternate agreement. The provision would also 
amend the authority for the Secretary to receive consideration 
from the Commonwealth for real property conveyed under the 
section to include receipt of funds to construct a security 
barrier at the Engineering Proving Grounds.
    With the pending arrival of over 12,000 personnel and their 
families to Fort Belvior as a result of decisions in the 2005 
Defense Base Closure and Realignment round, the committee 
expects the Secretary to work with the Commonwealth to expedite 
the design and construction of this parkway extension. Because 
this Parkway portion will be vital to the transportation 
requirements of military operations and the local community, 
the committee has included in the recommended provision the 
authority for the Secretary of the Army to consider the use of 
the Defense Access Roads program to carry out the design and 
construction of the parkway portion.

Land conveyance, Omaha, Nebraska (sec. 2843)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretaries of the Army and the Navy to convey to the 
Metropolitan Community College area four parcels of property 
consisting of approximately 12 acres currently under the 
control of the Army and Navy Reserve at the Fort Omaha campus 
of the College in Omaha, Nebraska for educational purposes. 
This provision would require the Secretaries concerned to 
receive as consideration fair market value, which may be 
provided in the form of reduced tuition rates for the military 
personnel attending the college. The committee intends for the 
Secretaries concerned to enter into an agreement with the 
college that would enhance the cooperation between the two 
parties to provide educational opportunities for military 
personnel as well as providing continued military access to the 
college to support recruiting and retention efforts.

                       Items of Special Interest


Electronic access to data related to 2005 Defense Base Closure and 
        Realignment Round

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
maintained a comprehensive electronic data base containing 
information used by the Department to support recommendations 
to the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) 
Commission. This database, accessible through the internet, 
continues to serve the general public as a valuable tool during 
the current phase of implementation of the BRAC decisions by 
providing data, cost estimates, and analysis conducted by the 
Department. Of particular importance is the continued access to 
the Cost of Base Realignment Actions (COBRA) data used by the 
Department to support their recommendations. With the recent 
disclosure by the Department that the actual costs to implement 
the BRAC 2005 decisions may substantially exceed COBRA 
estimates, public access to COBRA data is essential to 
facilitate an understanding of the model. The committee also 
notes that the Department conducted a thorough and exhaustive 
security review in May 2005 to ensure all information contained 
on the website was unclassified and did not pose a threat to 
military personnel, installations, or operations.
    The Department has also assumed maintenance of the 
electronic database established by the 2005 BRAC Commission to 
provide a public record of all data received, meetings held, 
and other information obtained during the course of the 
Commission's activities. This database continues to serve the 
general public as a vital source of information and history of 
the Commission's work during BRAC 2005.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to maintain, and provide public access to both the BRAC 2005 
Department's website and the BRAC Commission website with, at a 
minimum, all information contained on the site, and in 
associated electronic links, as of May 1, 2006. The committee 
encourages the Secretary to continue to add information to the 
site related to economic assistance for affected communities, 
pertinent re-use manuals, and other useful information for the 
implementation of BRAC 2005 decisions.

Facilities for Headquarters, United States Southern Command

    The headquarters (HQ) for United States Southern Command 
(USSOUTHCOM), with 750 personnel, relocated from Panama into a 
leased facility in Miami, Florida in September 1997. By 2004, a 
series of leases for the HQ building, support facilities, 
buffer land, and family housing to support 2,464 USSOUTHCOM HQ 
personnel were being carried out at a total annual cost of 
approximately $6.0 million.
    The committee notes that the current facility complex 
housing USSOUTHCOM HQ is not adequate to support assigned 
personnel. The facilities are undersized, separated from each 
other, and do not meet Department of Defense standards for 
force protection and anti-terrorism measures. Despite the 
Department of Defense's goal to reduce leased space during the 
2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) round, the 
Department did not make a recommendation to the BRAC Commission 
to relocate USSOUTHCOM HQ onto a military installation, 
consistent with other BRAC recommendations for leased space.
    In September 2004, the State of Florida offered to 
construct a new headquarters facility to meet USSOUTHCOM's 
specific requirements, and to lease it to the Department of 
Defense for ten years with four ten-year renewal options. The 
Department is currently in the process of working with the 
General Services Administration (GSA) to assess a proposal 
being developed by the State. GSA intends to enter into the 
lease with the State and then to sublet the new facility to the 
Department of Defense. The committee anticipates that the offer 
to lease facilities on State-owned land that is essentially 
``rent free'' could result in significant savings in the annual 
lease cost.
    The Committee expects the Department of Defense, as with 
any proposal for the lease of facilities, to perform an 
analysis using estimates of cumulative net present value to 
demonstrate that the lease, in comparison to both traditional 
military construction with government ownership on a military 
installation, and continuation of the current lease 
arrangement, is the most economical method to satisfy the 
military requirement. The committee notes that this analysis 
would be consistent with the Department's deliberations during 
BRAC 2005 assessing commercial leases versus the costs of 
military construction of facilities on military installations, 
noting the advantages gained for security, force protection, 
and the availability of support services.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit to the congressional defense committees, before 
entering into a lease agreement for new USSOUTHCOM HQ 
facilities, a report with the following information:
          (1) a review of the personnel authorizations and 
        functions to be located in the new USSOUTHCOM HQ;
          (2) the costs and benefits of extending the current 
        lease with or without an expansion of facilities on the 
        existing leased parcels or adjacent parcels;
          (3) the costs and benefits of acquiring the current 
        leased facility;
          (4) the costs and benefits of the lease of facilities 
        from the State of Florida through the General Services 
        Administration, to include all anticipated recurring 
        operating and maintenance expenses;
          (5) the costs and benefits for the construction and 
        government ownership of new facilities meeting 
        USSOUTHCOM HQ requirements; and
          (6) the costs and benefits of constructing the 
        facilities necessary to locate USSOUTHCOM Headquarters 
        at Homestead Air Reserve Base, taking into account the 
        existing facilities and services at that base.
    The report shall include an economic analysis of the 
estimated cumulative net present value over a 30-year period 
for each of the options listed above.

National Guard Training Site, Camp Atterbury, Indiana

    The committee notes that the Adjutant General of the State 
of Indiana has identified a requirement related to the 
transportation infrastructure for the National Guard training 
area at Camp Atterbury, Indiana to expand the rail out-load 
capability. The expansion of the rail out-load capability would 
require the use of property currently under the control of the 
Fish and Wildlife Service as part of the Federal Aid in 
Wildlife Restoration Act program.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to work 
with the Military Department of the State of Indiana and the 
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service to transfer administrative 
jurisdiction of over 1,605 acres surrounding the current 
railhead at Camp Atterbury from the Fish and Wildlife Service 
of the Department of the Interior to the Military Department of 
the State of Indiana in order to expand the transportation 
infrastructure at Camp Atterbury.
 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND 
                          OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

Overview
    Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for atomic energy 
defense activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
2007, including: the purchase, construction, and acquisition of 
plant and capital equipment; research and development; nuclear 
weapons; naval nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration 
and waste management; operating expenses; and other expenses 
necessary to carry out the purposes of the Department of Energy 
Organization Act (Public Law 95-91). This title authorizes 
appropriations in four categories, which are: (1) National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA); (2) defense 
environmental cleanup; (3) other defense activities; and (4) 
defense nuclear waste disposal.
    The budget request for atomic energy defense activities at 
the Department totaled $15.8 billion, a 2.5 percent decrease 
below the fiscal year 2006 appropriated level. Of the total 
amount requested:
          (1) $9.3 billion is for NNSA, of which
                  (a) $6.4 billion is for weapons activities,
                  (b) $1.7 billion is for defense nuclear 
                nonproliferation activities,
                  (c) $795.1 million is for naval reactors, and
                  (d) $386.6 is for the Office of the 
                Administrator;
          (2) $5.4 billion is for defense environmental 
        cleanup;
          (3) $717.8 million is for other defense activities; 
        and
          (4) $388.1 million is for defense nuclear waste 
        disposal.
    The budget request also included $6.1 million within energy 
supply.
    The committee recommends $15.7 billion for atomic energy 
defense activities at the Department, a decrease of $96.8 
million below the budget request.
    Of the amounts authorized, the committee recommends:
          (1) $9.3 billion for NNSA, of which
                  (a) $6.5 billion is for weapons activities, 
                an increase of $47.5 million above the budget 
                request;
                  (b) $1.7 billion is for defense nuclear 
                nonproliferation activities, the amount of the 
                budget request;
                  (c) $795.1 million is for naval reactors, the 
                amount of the budget request; and
                  (d) $356.6 million is for the Office of the 
                Administrator, a decrease of $30.0 million 
                below the budget request;
          (2) $5.4 billion for defense environmental cleanup 
        activities, an increase of $40.0 million above the 
        budget request;
          (3) $624.5 million for other defense activities, a 
        decrease of $93.3 million below the budget request; and 
        (4) $333.1 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, 
        a decrease of $55.0 million below the budget request.
    The committee recommends no funds for energy supply, a 
reduction of $6.1 million.
    The following table summarizes the budget request and the 
authorizations:


                 Subtitle A--National Security Programs


National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
total of $9.3 billion for the Department of Energy in fiscal 
year 2007 for the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) to carry out programs necessary to national security.

Weapons activities

    The committee recommends $6.5 billion for weapons 
activities, an increase of $47.5 million above the budget 
request. The committee authorizes the following activities: 
$1.4 billion for directed stockpile work; $1.9 billion for 
campaigns; $1.7 billion for readiness in the technical base; 
$209.3 million for secure transportation asset; $135.4 million 
for nuclear weapons incidence response; $780.2 for safeguards 
and security; $291.2 million for facilities and infrastructure 
recapitalization; and, $17.2 million for environmental projects 
and operations.

Directed stockpile work

    The committee recommends $1.4 billion for directed 
stockpile work, the amount of the budget request. The directed 
stockpile account supports work directly related to weapons in 
the stockpile, including day-to-day maintenance as well as 
research, development, engineering, and certification 
activities to support planned life extension programs. This 
account also includes fabrication and assembly of weapons 
components, feasibility studies, weapons dismantlement and 
disposal, training, and support equipment.

Campaigns

    The committee recommends $1.9 billion for campaigns, the 
amount of the budget request. The campaigns focus on science 
and engineering efforts involving the three nuclear weapons 
laboratories, the Nevada Test Site, and the weapons production 
plants. Each campaign is focused on a specific activity to 
support and maintain the nuclear stockpile without full-scale 
underground nuclear weapons testing. These efforts form the 
scientific underpinning of the Department's certification that 
the stockpile remains safe, secure, and reliable.
    The committee notes that the work breakdown structure, and 
budget and reporting system for the campaigns, while perhaps 
appropriate during the early years of the stockpile stewardship 
program, have become less representative of the work now being 
conducted within each campaign. The committee is concerned that 
the current work breakdown structures for each campaign are not 
clear, and in some cases obscure the content and objectives of 
each campaign. At a minimum, this lack of clarity diminishes 
the capability of both the Department and the Congress to 
perform effective oversight.
    The effort by the Department during fiscal years 2005 and 
2006 to revamp the work breakdown and budget structure for the 
advanced simulation and computing campaign will, in the 
committee's opinion, substantially improve the tracking of 
progress and make more clear the contribution of each 
participant in the campaign to the overall objectives of the 
campaign. The committee encourages the Department to undertake 
similar efforts to improve the work breakdown and reporting 
systems for other campaigns.

Readiness in the technical base

    The committee recommends $1.7 billion for readiness in the 
technical base and facilities (RTBF), an increase of $21.7 
million above the budget request. This account funds facilities 
and infrastructure in the nuclear weapons complex to ensure the 
operational readiness of the complex and includes construction 
funding for new facilities.
    The $21.7 million in additional funds should be used to 
address additional deferred maintenance and infrastructure 
needs. Specifically, this amount consists of $11.7 million 
additional for operations of facilities to be used for critical 
infrastructure and nuclear safety upgrades at the Pantex Plant 
including replacement of nuclear facility hoists and high 
pressure fire loop lead-ins. The committee further recommends 
$10.0 million in additional construction funding for the Highly 
Enriched Uranium Materials Facility (HEUMF), Project 01-D-124, 
at the Y-12 National Security Complex. The committee is aware 
that the Department may need to revise the compliance approach 
for HEUMF to withstand attacks postulated under the design 
basis threat and that these changes will have a significant 
impact to design and construction of the HEUMF. The committee 
notes that the Department is completing a detailed analysis of 
these changes and intends to provide the results to the 
committee before the end of fiscal year 2006. When this 
analysis is completed, the committee expects the Department to 
be able to estimate the final total project cost.

Secure transportation asset

    The committee recommends $209.3 million for the secure 
transportation asset, the amount of the budget request. The 
secure transportation asset is responsible for transportation 
of nuclear weapons, weapons materials and components, and other 
materials requiring safe and secure transport. The committee 
commends the secure transportation asset and its federal agents 
for increasing the number of secure convoys in recent years, 
under constrained funding. The committee is aware that workload 
requirements for the secure transportation asset will escalate 
significantly if the Department proceeds with the consolidation 
of its nuclear materials and urges the Department to budget 
adequate funding to undertake this important activity.

Safeguards and security

    The committee recommends $780.2 million for weapons 
safeguards and security, an increase of $25.8 million above the 
budget request. This amount includes additional funding of 
$11.8 million for security upgrades at the Pantex Plant and 
$14.0 million for security upgrades at the Y-12 National 
Security Complex above the budget request.
    The committee is encouraged by those aspects of the NNSA's 
transformation plans for the nuclear weapons complex that would 
result in the storage of special nuclear material at fewer NNSA 
sites. The committee is concerned with the lack of results 
coming from the Department's nuclear materials consolidation 
coordinating committee. The Department has been analyzing 
consolidation opportunities since 2002, but has yet to 
consolidate the storage of any materials or to issue 
recommendations to do so. While the Department continues to 
analyze this issue, the nation continues to invest significant 
resources to upgrade security at nuclear facilities which may 
be de-inventoried over the next decade. The committee believes, 
however, that NNSA has the opportunity, under its 
transformation initiative, to make real progress in the 
consolidation of nuclear materials at NNSA sites and encourages 
NNSA in these efforts. The committee understands, however, that 
to be fully successful NNSA and the Department must work 
together.

Facilities and infrastructure

    The committee recommends $291.2 for the Facilities and 
Infrastructure Recapitalization Program (FIRP), the amount of 
the budget request. FIRP is a capital renewal and 
sustainability program which was established to reduce the 
approximately $2.4 billion backlog of NNSA deferred maintenance 
which developed during the 1980s and 1990s. The fiscal year 
2007 budget request for FIRP, coupled with the funding profile 
in the Future Years Nuclear Security Program (FYNSP), reflects 
the Department's commitment to achieving the FIRP objective in 
a timely manner. The committee acknowledges that past levels of 
appropriated funding have been insufficient to allow the 
completion of FIRP by the statutory sunset. The committee has 
recommended a provision to extend FIRP by two years elsewhere 
in this title.

Environmental projects and operations

    The committee recommends $17.2 million for environmental 
projects and operations, the amount of the budget request. The 
committee has not supported previous initiatives to transfer 
responsibility for environmental cleanup from the Environmental 
Management program to the NNSA. The Environmental Management 
program was created expressly to address the Department's 
environmental legacies.
    The committee is cautiously supporting the creation of the 
environmental projects and operations account with the 
understanding that its purpose is narrowly confined to long 
term stewardship activities such as groundwater monitoring, 
reporting and liaison requirements with states and other 
regulators, and surveillance of contaminated, decommissioned 
buildings which have not yet been demolished by the 
Environmental Management program. The committee will review the 
effectiveness of this approach in future years.

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program

    The committee recommends $1.7 billion for the Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Program, the amount of the budget 
request. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 
has management and oversight responsibilities for the 
nonproliferation programs of the Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation Program. The committee recommends funding for 
these programs, as follows: $268.9 million for nonproliferation 
and verification research and development; $127.4 million for 
nonproliferation and international security; $413.2 million for 
international nuclear materials protection and cooperation; 
$206.7 million for elimination of weapons-grade plutonium 
production; $638.0 million for fissile materials disposition, 
of which $3.6 million is to begin procurement of enriched 
Boron-10 from domestic sources; and $106.8 million for the 
global threat reduction initiative.
    The committee notes its serious concerns regarding the 
Russian and United States Fissile Materials Disposition 
Programs. These concerns are discussed in detail elsewhere in 
this report.
    Separately, the committee notes that the enriched Boron-10 
isotope is critical to the process of fabricating weapons-grade 
plutonium into mixed-oxide fuel. The committee believes the 
Department of Energy should have a secure and steady supply of 
Boron-10 for the plutonium disposition program as well as for 
other purposes. The committee expects that beginning the 
initial buy of Boron-10 in fiscal year 2007 will help ensure a 
stable domestic supply at favorable rates for the duration of 
the plutonium disposition program, assuming the program goes 
forward as currently planned. The committee urges the Secretary 
to undertake discussions with the commercial nuclear power 
industry to establish a plan for a stable supply of Boron-10.

Naval Reactors

    The committee recommends $795.1 million for Naval Reactors, 
the amount of the budget request.

Office of the Administrator

    The committee recommends $356.6 million for program 
direction for the NNSA, a decrease of $30.0 million below the 
budget request. This account provides program direction funding 
for all elements of NNSA, except for the Naval Reactors program 
and the secure transportation asset. The committee notes that 
the current level of federal staffing of the NNSA is 
approximately 1,860 full-time equivalent employees. Under the 
budget request, NNSA federal staffing would grow to 1,943 
federal employees. The committee does not support growing the 
federal payroll for a program which is not likely to experience 
significant growth over the period of the FYNSP. The committee 
has, however, recommended funds sufficient for the 
implementation of government-wide cost of living increases and 
escalation in the cost of health and pension benefits for 
current NNSA payroll.

Defense environmental clean-up (sec. 3102)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
total of $5.4 billion for the Department of Energy in fiscal 
year 2007 for environmental clean-up activities, an increase of 
$40.0 million above the budget request.
    The committee recommends no funds for the new ``project 
management agent'' requested in the budget for the Waste 
Treatment and Immobilization Plant project, resulting in a 
recommended decrease for this project of $10.0 million. The 
project structure for environmental clean up of the high-level 
waste tanks currently involves three federal offices 
(Department of Energy Headquarters, the Department's Office of 
River Protection, and the Department's Richland Operations 
Office) and two government contractors (one to operate the tank 
waste system and one to construct the Waste Treatment and 
Immobilization Plant). The Department has failed to convince 
the committee that adding a project management agent with 
unspecified advisory duties is needed or will benefit this 
already complex project. The committee recommends, instead, 
that $10.0 million be added to tank farm activities at Hanford 
for the management of the 177 tanks containing over 50 million 
gallons of the most toxic waste in the Department's custody.
    The committee also recommends a reduction of $40.0 million 
in program direction. The Department is experiencing 
significant challenges in managing its largest construction 
projects within the environmental management program. In the 
committee's view, the Department has been too eager to adopt 
cosmetic fixes such as adding new layers of contractors, 
consultants, and other advisors. These actions, while in some 
cases helpful and appropriate, are no substitute for better 
management of projects by the Department's own federal 
workforce.
    The Department has nearly 300 federal employees at its 
Washington, DC Headquarters working exclusively on the 
Environmental Management program and has a total of over 1500 
federal employees on the program nationwide. The committee 
agrees that the Department is deficient in project management 
and certain contracting and technical skills, but believes the 
Department must first analyze its capability to reassign, 
retrain or rebalance within its current 1500 employees prior to 
requesting funds for consultants or additional federal 
employees. The committee is unpersuaded that the Department has 
analyzed how it can help itself, first, and urges the 
Department to undertake such an evaluation.
    The committee recommends additional funding of $80,000,000 
above the budget request for 2012 and 2035 completion projects 
and tank farm activities at the Savannah River Site.

Other defense activities (sec. 3103)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$624.5 million for the Department of Energy for other defense 
activities, $93.3 million below the budget request.

Security and safety performance assurance

    The committee recommends $298.5 million for security and 
safety performance assurance, the amount of the budget request.

Environment, safety and health

    The committee recommends $80.8 million for environment, 
safety and health, the amount of the budget request.

Office of Legacy Management

    The committee recommends $167.9 million for the Office of 
Legacy Management, the amount of the budget request, and $123.2 
million above the fiscal year 2006 appropriated level. The 
Office of Legacy Management is responsible for ensuring pension 
and benefit continuity to the Department's former contractor 
work force. This workforce was formerly employed at seven of 
the Department's sites at which clean up has now been 
completed. As additional sites are cleaned up and closed down, 
and their benefit programs transferred to the Office of Legacy 
Management, the budget for the Office of Legacy Management is 
expected to increase sharply. The committee encourages the 
Department to avail itself of the ready expertise existing in 
the private sector specializing in administering health and 
pension benefit programs instead of ``reinventing the wheel'' 
inside the Department.

Nuclear energy

    The committee recommends $75.9 million for nuclear energy, 
the amount of the budget request.

Defense related administrative support

    The budget request included $93.3 million for defense 
related administrative support. The committee recommends no 
funds for these activities. The committee views these 
administrative support activities as inherently part of the 
nondefense activities of the Department and resists their 
categorization as defense-related. The committee does not 
support the use of atomic energy defense funds for nondefense 
activities.

Office of Hearings and Appeals

    The committee recommends $4.4 million for the Office of 
Hearings and Appeals, the amount of the budget request.

Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3104)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$333.1 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a decrease 
of $55.0 million below the budget request. The committee notes 
that the Department of Energy is currently unable to provide a 
predicted timetable for either the submittal to the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission of a license application for the geologic 
repository or a prediction of when a repository might begin 
operating. In light of this uncertainty, the committee believes 
certain transportation activities such as the procurement of 
long lead transportation hardware and the implementation of 
emergency preparedness grant programs along predicted shipping 
routes are premature and unwarranted in fiscal year 2007.

Energy supply

    The budget request included $6.1 million for infrastructure 
security and energy restoration within the Department of 
Energy's energy supply and conservation account. The committee 
recommends no funds for these activities. The budget request 
describes these activities as: assisting states with energy 
security activities and energy disruption plans; conducting 
energy security exercises with state and local governments; 
and, partnering with industry to facilitate in-depth 
vulnerability assessments for critical energy assets in the 
oil, gas, and electricity sectors. These responsibilities 
constitute a coordinated function between the Departments of 
Energy and Homeland Security related to civilian energy 
infrastructure and, in the committee's view, have little, if 
anything, to do with the atomic energy defense activities of 
the Department of Energy. The committee does not support using 
atomic energy defense funds for nondefense activities.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters


Notice and wait requirement applicable to certain third party financing 
        arrangements (sec. 3111)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Energy to notify the congressional defense 
committees 30 days prior to entering into certain alternative 
financing arrangements. The Department of Energy has referred 
to such arrangements as alternative financing, third party 
financing, public-private partnership, privatization, or 
private capital arrangements. Such arrangements share the 
common element that they are conducted without the traditional 
Congressional line-item authorization required for construction 
projects.
    The committee is aware that the Department is developing an 
internal policy to guide the use of such financing arrangements 
within the Department and by its contractors on behalf of the 
Department. The committee directs the Secretary to provide this 
policy guidance to the congressional defense committees as soon 
as it is issued for use within the Department.
    The committee is concerned that alternative financing 
arrangements not be seized upon by elements of the Department 
or its national laboratories as a ``quick fix'' for the 
Department's infrastructure needs. While such arrangements may 
have the potential to be an appropriate means of meeting the 
Department's mission needs, such arrangements must stand up to 
rigorous review and analysis, must not obscure accurate budget 
depiction, and must provide a clear financial advantage to the 
taxpayer. The committee believes that cases capable of 
satisfying these criteria will likely be exceedingly rare.

Utilization of international contributions to the Global Threat 
        Reduction Initiative (sec. 3112)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Energy authority to accept international 
contributions to the following programs of the Global Threat 
Reduction Initiative: the International Radiological Threat 
Reduction subprogram; the Emerging Threats and Gap Materials 
subprogram; the Reduced Enrichment for Research and Test 
Reactors subprogram; the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return 
subprogram; the Global Research Reactor Security subprogram; 
and the Kazakhstan Spent Fuel subprogram. The provision would 
permit the Secretary to: (1) enter into agreements, with the 
concurrence of the Secretary of State, with any person, foreign 
government or international organization for this purpose; and 
(2) use such contributions without further authorization or 
appropriation. The provision would require the Secretary to 
notify the congressional defense committees: (1) of the receipt 
of any international contributions for this program within 30 
days of their receipt; and (2) of the intended use of any funds 
received 30 days before they may be utilized. The provision 
would also require the Secretary to submit an annual report to 
the congressional defense committees on the receipt and 
utilization of amounts received pursuant to this authority for 
each fiscal year. The provision would require that any funds 
not used within five years be returned to the contributor. The 
authority provided by this provision would expire on December 
31, 2013.

Utilization of international contributions to the Second Line of 
        Defense Core Program (sec. 3113)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide the 
Secretary of Energy authority to accept international 
contributions to the Second Line of Defense Core Program. The 
provision would permit the Secretary to: (1) enter into 
agreements, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, 
with any person, foreign government or international 
organization for this purpose; and (2) use such contributions 
without further authorization or appropriation. The provision 
would require the Secretary to notify the congressional defense 
committees: (1) of the receipt of any international 
contributions for this program within 30 days of their receipt; 
and (2) of the intended use of any funds received 30 days 
before they may be utilized. The provision would also require 
the Secretary to submit an annual report to the congressional 
defense committees on the receipt and utilization of amounts 
received pursuant to this authority for each fiscal year. The 
provision would require that any funds not used within five 
years be returned to the contributor. The authority provided by 
this provision would expire on December 31, 2013.
    The committee notes that this authority is intended for the 
Second Line of Defense Core Program, and is specifically not 
intended for the Megaports program.

Extension of Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program 
        (sec. 3114)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program (FIRP) 
for two years, until September 30, 2013. The committee 
acknowledges that appropriated funding levels have been 
insufficient to address the full scope of deferred maintenance 
targeted for elimination under the program by the current 
termination date of September 30, 2011. The committee urges the 
Department to put forward its best efforts to complete the 
program within the two-year extension provided.

Two-year extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific, 
        engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 3115)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 4601(c)(1) of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 
2701(c)(1)) to extend excepted service authority for an 
additional two years, until September 30, 2008. The committee 
notes that the current excepted service authority has given the 
Department of Energy hiring flexibility in appointing 
scientific, engineering, and technical personnel. The committee 
intends for the Department to use this authority to continue 
building the technical expertise and credibility of the 
Department.

Extension of deadline for transfer of lands to Los Alamos County, New 
        Mexico, and of lands in trust for the Pueblo of San Ildefonso 
        (sec. 3116)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 632 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, 
the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998 
(Public Law 105-119) to extend the deadline for completing 
certain land transfers by the Secretary of Energy to Los Alamos 
County, New Mexico and to the Secretary of the Interior of 
lands to be held in trust for the Pueblo of San Ildefonso. The 
provision would extend the deadline for these transfers by five 
years, until November 26, 2012, to allow additional time to 
complete environmental restoration activities which are 
required under the provision being amended.

Limitation on availability of funds for Waste Treatment and 
        Immobilization Plant (sec. 3117)

    The budget request for defense environmental cleanup 
included $690.0 million for the Waste Treatment and 
Immobilization Plant [Project 01-D-416]. The committee 
recommends a provision that would prohibit the Secretary of 
Energy from obligating or expending more than a percentage of 
the amount authorized to be appropriated for the Waste 
Treatment and Immobilization Plant prior to performing certain 
actions. Prior to obligating or expending more than 30 percent 
of the funds authorized to be appropriated, the Secretary of 
Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees 
proof of certification of the earned value management system 
used to track and report project costs. Prior to obligating or 
expending more than 60 percent of the funds authorized to be 
appropriated, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees the final seismic and ground 
motion criteria approved by the Secretary, and directed by the 
contracting officer, to be used in the final design of the 
Pretreatment and High-Level Waste facilities of the Waste 
Treatment and Immobilization Plant.
    The Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant project is the 
largest and most complex nuclear-chemical plant project ever 
undertaken in the United States, and arguably, the world. Since 
April of 2003, cost estimates for this project have spiraled 
from $5.8 billion to the current estimate of over $14.0 
billion. The Department has directed a number of reviews into 
the causes of this escalation. The results of these reviews 
have been provided to the committee and are the basis of the 
committee's action in the recommended provision. At their most 
fundamental level, the committee believes the root causes of 
the cost escalation to be threefold: (1) fundamental project 
management inadequacies on the part of the Department of 
Energy; (2) technical uncertainties raised by outside reviewers 
which have been neither definitively accepted nor rejected by 
the Department, clouding the project in hesitation and delay; 
and (3) cost escalation which is inherent in any undertaking of 
this magnitude but for which the Department and its contractor 
failed to provide adequate contingency and advance planning.
    The committee is disappointed that the Department would 
undertake the largest project in its history without having a 
certified earned value management system in place. The ``After 
Action Fact-Finding Review'' prepared at the Department's 
request and issued in January of 2006, found that the project 
``submitted cost and schedule data into the Headquarters'' 
Project Assessment and Reporting System that were virtually 
useless and, indeed, misleading.'' The committee understands 
that the Department plans to certify the earned value 
management system for the project by the end of calendar year 
2006. The committee recommends this provision in order to focus 
the Department's commitment to achieving that goal.
    The committee is also concerned over the Department's 
failure to arrive at final seismic and ground motion criteria 
against which the facilities of the Waste Treatment and 
Immobilization Plant will be designed. The Department has 
undertaken the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant as a 
concurrent design-construct project. Design of the facility 
occurs slightly ahead of, but nearly apace with, construction 
of the facility. In April of 2005--after three years of 
dialogue with the Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board 
regarding the appropriateness of the seismic criteria applied 
in the existing design, the necessity of drilling boreholes to 
validate the criteria, and the need for additional analysis--
the Department stated that it had accepted the Board's 
recommendations and approved new interim seismic criteria for 
the project. The Department directed the project contractor to 
adopt the interim seismic criteria and stop impacted 
construction activities.
    The committee is concerned that the Department, since 
adopting the interim seismic criteria, has lost focus on the 
necessity of developing final criteria. Planned borehole 
drilling to validate the interim criteria has not been 
initiated, planned for, or affirmatively decided upon. 
According to the Department's ``After Action Fact-Finding 
Review'', the additional engineering effort to validate the 
design and construction against the interim criteria will add 
an estimated $258.0 million in direct costs. Additionally, 
because this effort effects activities on the project's 
critical path, the cost of schedule delay has added another 
$500.0 million to the project costs. The committee believes 
that the outlay of funds for design and construction will 
continue to be an ``at risk'' expenditure as long as the 
project proceeds without the establishment of final seismic 
criteria. For this reason, the committee has recommended a 
provision requiring the establishment of such criteria.
    The committee notes that the shared services, referred to 
as the ``hotel load'' of the project, which include project 
overhead and ongoing costs associated with project management 
and support, continue as a fixed cost to the project and the 
taxpayer whether or not meaningful engineering and construction 
progress is taking place. According to the Department's ``After 
Action Fact-Finding Review'', by shifting work downstream 
beyond July of 2011, the project adds approximately $15.0 
million to $20.0 million each month to the cost, over and above 
the actual construction. In other words, each month's 
construction of $55.0 to $60.0 million that is shifted later in 
the schedule pays a premium of 25 to 35 percent in additional 
hotel load. The committee is concerned that these economic 
facts, when coupled with the ongoing delay caused by a lack of 
risk-informed decision making, may eventually imperil the 
continued will and ability of Congress to fund this project to 
completion. The committee believes that the citizens of the 
State of Washington deserve the timely cleanup of the Hanford 
site for which they have waited so long. The committee intends 
for the recommended provision to drive the Department to take 
actions which are both fundamental and neglectfully overdue.

Limitation on availability of funds for implementation of the Russian 
        Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition Program (sec. 3118)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the obligation of fiscal year 2007 funds to implement the 
Russian Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition Program, other 
than continuation of the research and development associated 
with the Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor (GT-MHR), until 30 
days after the Secretary of Energy provides to the 
congressional defense committees written recommendations 
regarding whether and in what manner the program should 
proceed. The provision would require the recommendations to 
include: a description of the disposition method Russia has 
agreed to use; a description of the assistance the United 
States plans to provide under the program; an estimate of the 
total cost and schedule of the U.S. assistance to the program; 
and an explanation of how parallelism is to be defined for 
purposes of the program and whether such parallelism can be 
achieved if the U.S. mixed-oxide (MOX) plutonium disposition 
program continues on the current planned schedule without 
further delays.
    The committee notes its growing concerns regarding the 
fissile materials disposition program. Under the agreement, the 
United States and Russia each agreed to dispose of 34 metric 
tons of surplus weapons-grade plutonium, and both countries 
planned to dispose of the plutonium by fabricating it into 
mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel for use in existing nuclear reactors. It 
has been both executive branch policy and a condition of the 
Congress that the U.S. and Russian programs would proceed in 
parallel. This program was delayed for more than two years as 
the United States and Russia negotiated an agreement on 
liability protections for U.S. contractors associated with the 
project. While a liability agreement was finally reached last 
fall, it has not yet been signed, and Russian officials have 
stated that the agreement will require ratification by the 
Russian Duma. Even more troubling is the possibility that now 
Russia may no longer support the use of MOX fuel for the 
plutonium disposition program, and the Department of Energy is 
beginning to explore alternative disposition paths with Russia. 
Uncertainties concerning Russia's level of commitment raise 
real questions about the viability and future direction of the 
Russian Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition Program, and of 
the continued relationship of that program to the U.S. Surplus 
Fissile Materials Disposition Program, given that these two 
programs are required to proceed in parallel. In light of these 
circumstances, the committee believes it is necessary to 
receive the recommendations required by this provision before 
fiscal year 2007 funds are obligated for the Russian Surplus 
Fissile Materials Disposition Program.

Limitation on availability of funds for construction of MOX Fuel 
        Fabrication Facility (sec. 3119)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the obligation of fiscal year 2007 funds for construction of 
the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility until 30 days after the 
Secretary of Energy provides to the congressional defense 
committees: (1) an independent cost estimate for the United 
States Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition Program and 
facilities; and (2) a written certification that the Department 
of Energy (DOE) intends to use the MOX Fuel Fabrication 
Facility for U.S. plutonium disposition regardless of the 
future direction of the Russian Surplus Fissile Materials 
Disposition Program.
    The committee notes its growing concerns regarding the 
fissile materials disposition program. Under the agreement, the 
United States and Russia each agreed to dispose of 34 metric 
tons of surplus weapons-grade plutonium, and both countries 
planned to dispose of the plutonium by fabricating it into 
mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel for use in existing nuclear reactors. It 
has been both executive branch policy and a condition of the 
Congress that the U.S. and Russian programs would proceed in 
parallel. This program was delayed for more than two years as 
the United States and Russia negotiated an agreement on 
liability protections for U.S. contractors associated with the 
project. Now there are questions as to whether Russia still 
supports the use of MOX fuel for the plutonium disposition 
program, and the Department of Energy is beginning to explore 
alternative disposition paths with Russia. Uncertainties 
concerning Russia's level of commitment to the program raise 
real questions about the viability and future direction of the 
Russian Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition Program, and of 
the continued relationship of that program to the U.S. Surplus 
Fissile Materials Disposition Program, given that these two 
programs are required to proceed in parallel.
    The committee is further concerned that the U.S. MOX 
program has experienced significant cost overruns and schedule 
delays, irrespective of the problems with the Russian program. 
A December 2005 audit by the DOE Inspector General (IG) 
concluded that while the original 2002 budget estimate for the 
U.S. MOX facility was $1.0 billion, the total cost is now 
estimated at around $3.5 billion, and the plant will not begin 
producing MOX until 2015, six years later than originally 
planned. The IG audit was highly critical of DOE's management 
of the MOX program, asserting that weaknesses in project 
management and limited administration of the program 
contributed to cost growth.
    In light of these developments, the committee believes it 
is necessary to have an independent cost estimate for the 
program, and a certification from the Secretary that the 
Department will use the MOX facility for plutonium disposition 
regardless of the future direction of the Russian program, 
before fiscal year 2007 funds are obligated for construction of 
the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility.

Technical correction related to authorization of appropriations for 
        fiscal year 2006 (sec. 3120)

    The committee recommends a provision that strikes the 
amount ``$9,196,456'' and inserts ``$9,196,456,000'' in section 
3101(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163).

                       Items of Special Interest


The role of the Kansas City Plant in the nuclear weapons program

    The committee acknowledges the unique role of the 
Department of Energy's Kansas City Plant within the nuclear 
weapons complex. The mission of the Kansas City Plant is to 
provide procurement, production, and life-cycle support of the 
non-nuclear components for the nation's nuclear weapons 
stockpile. The Kansas City Plant provides 85 percent of the 
components of a nuclear warhead while consuming 6 percent of 
the Department's weapons activities budget.
    Under the Stockpile Stewardship Program, the Kansas City 
Plant makes an essential contribution to the life extension of 
each nuclear weapon. The Kansas City Plant supports 120 
distinct technologies and processes across 42 product lines, 
including precision assembly and packaging of specialty 
mechanisms and microelectronics, micro initiation systems, 
specialty materials, and leading edge technologies like high-
speed optical-electronic telemetry systems. The Kansas City 
Plant is rapidly becoming the only domestic source for many of 
the non-nuclear technologies needed to support the nuclear 
weapons complex. The committee believes the Kansas City Plant 
is therefore a unique national asset providing one-of-a-kind 
technical expertise to the National Nuclear Security 
Administration and its national laboratories.

Transparency in budgeting for security requirements

    The committee notes that the costs of providing security 
for the atomic energy defense activities of the Department of 
Energy and of providing appropriate safeguards for the 
Department's nuclear materials will exceed $1.3 billion in 
fiscal year 2007. These costs have increased significantly in 
response to the threat environment of recent years. To provide 
greater clarity and exert greater control over these costs, the 
Department elected to segregate its security costs into a 
separate budget line. This segregation of costs has allowed the 
committee to examine more directly the adequacy of the 
Department's security expenditures.
    By the end of calendar year 2008, the Department intends to 
bring its nuclear facilities into compliance with the design 
basis threat established in December 2004. In light of this 
goal, the Department should continue to segregate security 
costs within the budget requested for fiscal year 2008 so that 
the committee may have a transparent view of the security 
expenditures needed to achieve that compliance.
          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Authorization (sec. 3201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$22.3 million for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 
(the Board), the amount of the budget request. The committee is 
frustrated with the apparent lack of a process to allow for 
timely resolution of technical issues between the Board and the 
Department of Energy. The Department is now in a period of 
renewed construction activity for complex nuclear and nuclear-
chemical facilities. The committee is aware of technical 
differences of opinion between the Board and the Department 
which remain unresolved, years after first being raised. The 
resulting technical uncertainty has an adverse effect on 
project schedules and costs. In some cases, issues raised 
during pre-conceptual design remain unresolved well into 
construction. The committee recognizes that because the role of 
the Board is advisory, the Secretary of Energy is not required 
to adopt all of the Board's recommendations. Nevertheless, the 
Secretary should have a well-reasoned and technically 
defensible basis, if he elects to proceed contrary to the 
Board's view. In the committee's opinion, both the Department 
and the Board would benefit from a more structured process for 
issue resolution which would allow issues to be raised, 
evaluated, and adjudicated at logical points in the design and 
construction process.
    The committee understands that the Department and the Board 
are engaged in discussions to develop a process to provide for 
more timely identification and resolution of technical 
differences over design standards and other issues at the 
Department's nuclear facilities. The committee directs the 
Board and the Department to report jointly to the congressional 
defense committees on the results of the ongoing efforts to 
improve the timeliness of issue resolution, including 
recommendations, if any, for legislation that would strengthen 
and improve technical oversight of the Department's nuclear 
design and operational activities. Until such time as this 
report is submitted, the committee directs the Board to provide 
to the congressional defense committees quarterly reports to 
identify and report the status of significant unresolved 
issues.

                        LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

                      Departmental Recommendations

    By letter dated April 3, 2006, the General Counsel of the 
Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the Senate 
proposed legislation ``To authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 2007 for military activities of the Department of Defense, 
to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2007, 
and for other purposes.'' The transmittal letter and proposed 
legislation were officially referred as Executive Communication 
6284 to the Committee on Armed Services on April 3, 2006.
    Executive Communication 6284 is available for review at the 
committee.

                            Committee Action

    The Committee ordered reported a comprehensive original 
bill and a series of original bills for the Department of 
Defense, military construction and Department of Energy 
authorizations. There was one recorded vote during the course 
of the markup. The vote, which occurred on the motion to report 
out the comprehensive original bill and the series of original 
bills, was unanimous, 24-0. This roll call vote has been made 
public and is available at the committee.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget 
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not 
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included 
in material presented during floor debate on the legislation.

                           Regulatory Impact

    Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the 
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds 
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National 
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2007.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law 
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in 
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the 
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such 
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and 
reduce the expenditure of funds.

                   ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR CORNYN

    While the Committee has produced a good bill that will 
support members of our military and their families, I strongly 
oppose the Committee's recommendation to delay by one year 
production of the Joint Strike Fighter. I share my colleagues' 
commitment to acquisition reform and am pleased that the 
Committee bill contains many provisions to improve our 
acquisition process. We must get acquisition costs under 
control if we are going to be able to procure the weapons 
systems our nation needs to meet the threats of the 21st 
century. However, I am deeply concerned that the Committee's 
recommendation will undermine the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) 
program in terms of cost increases and schedule slips.
    I fully recognize that the JSF program is the largest 
acquisition program in the history of the Department of 
Defense. There are legitimate questions regarding the level of 
concurrency between R&D and procurement in this program that 
have been subject to criticism by the GAO. The Committee 
recommendations closely follow those from a recent GAO report 
on the Joint Strike Fighter, but I would also note that the GAO 
recommendations have not been subject to a business-case 
analysis. In fact, implementation of the GAO recommendations 
could likely cost more and further delay the program.
    These are all issues we must address, but I am very 
concerned that the Committee's mark which recommends, and I 
quote, ``a one-year delay in production,'' will possibly drive 
up costs, delay the Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the 
aircraft, and adversely affect our international partners.
    I commend the Chairman for convening hearings on the JSF 
alternate engine program so that we would fully understand the 
DoD legislative proposal to eliminate the alternate engine 
program. However, I wish we also would have had the same 
understanding of this proposed delay before the Committee made 
its recommendations. I strongly believe that we need answers to 
the following questions before undertaking major changes to the 
program.
          1. Do we know how the proposed one-year delay in 
        production will affect the overall cost of the JSF 
        program?
          2. Do we know how the proposed one-year delay in 
        production will affect the Initial Operational 
        Capability (IOC) date of the Joint Strike Fighter?
          3. Do we know how the proposed one-year delay in 
        production will affect our international partners?
    It is premature to make any changes to the Joint Strike 
Fighter program without answers to the above questions.

                                                       John Cornyn.

             ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR NELSON OF FLORIDA

    The committee includes a provision that would repeal 
section 5062(2), title 10 U.S. Code that would require the Navy 
to have a minimum of twelve operational aircraft carriers in 
the fleet. I oppose this repeal. I am convinced that as a 
nation at war we should not increase our strategic risk by 
reducing our naval aviation capability or increase the time 
required to respond to crises around the world.
    The committee's statement makes the case that, while 
lifting the 12-carrier minimum requirement, we should not allow 
our carrier fleet to fall dangerously lower than eleven ships. 
I believe strongly that the size and capability of our carrier 
fleet is a matter of highest national concern. Once mothballed, 
scrapped or a combat loss, a carrier is difficult and expensive 
to replace. The nation needs twelve carriers for worldwide 
presence and crisis response. Congress should support a funding 
program to ensure that we achieve and sustain that level as 
soon as practical.
    As concerned as I am about reducing the size of our carrier 
fleet, I am equally concerned about the risk of failing to 
adequately disperse them. Stationing all our Atlantic coast 
carriers in a single port only compounds the challenges we will 
face with a smaller fleet. I am not alone in that assessment. 
The former Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Vernon Clark, 
told the Armed Services Committee in February 2005 that in his 
view, ``over-centralization of the [carrier] port structure is 
not a good strategic move * * * the Navy should have two 
carrier-capable home ports on each coast.'' Admiral Clark went 
on to say, ``* * * it is my belief that it would be a serious 
strategic mistake to have all of those key assets of our Navy 
tied up in one port.'' As recently as March this year Deputy 
Secretary of Defense and former Secretary of the Navy, Gordon 
England, testified to this committee that the Navy needed to 
disperse its Atlantic coast carriers saying, ``My judgment is 
that [dispersion] is still the situation * * * a nuclear 
carrier should be in Florida to replace the [USS John F.] 
Kennedy to get some dispersion.'' Secretary England explained 
that, ``the concern there was always weapons of mass 
destruction. Even though carriers were at sea, the maintenance 
facilities, et cetera, are all still there and the crews * * * 
so having some dispersion would be of value to the Department 
of the Navy.'' At the same hearing Vice Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Edmund Giambastiani, shared his own 
judgment that we should disperse our carriers. He illustrated 
his sense of risk to the nation's east coast carriers when he 
recalled his own visit to Norfolk one Christmas, ``where we had 
five aircraft carriers all sitting next to one another, and 
that is not something we'd like to routinely do.''
    I am opposed to cutting our nation's aircraft carrier fleet 
as a matter of strategic necessity during time of war. The 
risk, in my view, is unacceptable. As a matter of protecting 
our smaller carrier force, I am convinced that the nation must 
establish a second Atlantic coast nuclear carrier base as 
quickly as possible. An environmental impact study in 1997 
found Naval Station Mayport, Florida, current home of the USS 
John F. Kennedy, suitable to permanently station a nuclear 
aircraft carrier. The Navy should complete its update of that 
study as quickly as possible. Additionally, in order not to 
lose any time once the study is complete, the Navy should 
include funding in its fiscal year 2008 Future Years Defense 
Program to begin building the maintenance and support 
facilities necessary to stationing a nuclear aircraft carrier 
at Naval Station Mayport. Availability of these funds should 
naturally be contingent upon but timed in the budget's out-
years to coincide with the completion of an updated 
environmental impact study. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues on both these vital issues.

                                                       Bill Nelson.

                                  
