    [House Report 110-652]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    110th Congress                                                   Report
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
     2d Session                                                     110-652

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

                         DUNCAN HUNTER NATIONAL DEFENSE
                     AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

                                   ----------

                                  R E P O R T

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                       ON

                                   H.R. 5658

                                 together with

                                ADDITIONAL VIEWS

          [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

      May 16, 2008.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
                  State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                         DUNCAN HUNTER NATIONAL DEFENSE
                     AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

    110th Congress                                                   Report
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
     2d Session                                                     110-652
    _______________________________________________________________________

                         DUNCAN HUNTER NATIONAL DEFENSE
                     AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

                                   __________

                                  R E P O R T

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                       ON

                                   H.R. 5658

                                 together with

                                ADDITIONAL VIEWS

          [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

        May 16, 2008.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
                theState of the Union and ordered to be printed

                       HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                           One Hundred Tenth Congress

                             IKE SKELTON, Missouri
    JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina          DUNCAN HUNTER, California
    SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas              JIM SAXTON, New Jersey
    GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi             JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
    NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii             TERRY EVERETT, Alabama
    MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts          ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
    SILVESTRE REYES, Texas               HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON,
    VIC SNYDER, Arkansas                     California
    ADAM SMITH, Washington               MAC THORNBERRY, Texas
    LORETTA SANCHEZ, California          WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
    MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina        ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
    ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California        KEN CALVERT, California
    ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania        JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia
    ROBERT ANDREWS, New Jersey           W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
    SUSAN A. DAVIS, California           J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia
    RICK LARSEN, Washington              JEFF MILLER, Florida
    JIM COOPER, Tennessee                JOE WILSON, South Carolina
    JIM MARSHALL, Georgia                FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey
    MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam          TOM COLE, Oklahoma
    MARK UDALL, Colorado                 ROB BISHOP, Utah
    DAN BOREN, Oklahoma                  MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio
    BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana              JOHN KLINE, Minnesota
    NANCY BOYDA, Kansas                  CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
    PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania      PHIL GINGREY, Georgia
    HANK JOHNSON, Georgia                MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
    CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire     TRENT FRANKS, Arizona
    JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut            THELMA DRAKE, Virginia
    DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa                 CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
    KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York         K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
    JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania             GEOFF DAVIS, Kentucky
    GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona
    ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
    KENDRICK B. MEEK, Florida
    KATHY CASTOR, Florida
                        Erin C. Conaton, Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Explanation of the Committee Amendments..........................     1
    Purpose..........................................................     2
    Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations..................     2
    Summary of Discretionary Authorizations in the Bill..............     2
      Summary Table of Authorizations................................     4
    Budget Authority Implication.....................................    14
      Summary Table of Budget Authority Implication..................    15
    Rationale for the Committee Bill.................................    18
    Hearings.........................................................    20

    DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS.................    21
    TITLE I--PROCUREMENT.............................................    21
      OVERVIEW.......................................................    21
        Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    24
          Overview...................................................    24
          Items of Special Interest..................................    28
            Armed reconnaissance helicopter..........................    28
            Compact aircraft support cart for Army National Guard
              rotorcraft.............................................    28
            UH-60A to UH-60L helicopter upgrade......................    29
        Missile Procurement, Army....................................    29
          Overview...................................................    29
          Item of Special Interest...................................    32
            Guided multiple launch rocket system.....................    32
        Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....    32
          Overview...................................................    32
          Items of Special Interest..................................    36
            Army vehicle modernization plans.........................    36
            Small arms acquisition strategy..........................    37
            Stryker mobile gun system production delay...............    37
        Procurement of Ammunition, Army..............................    38
          Overview...................................................    38
          Item of Special Interest...................................    43
            XM982 precision guided extended range artillery
              projectile.............................................    43
        Other Procurement, Army......................................    43
          Overview...................................................    43
          Items of Special Interest..................................    57
            Army enterprise resource planning systems................    57
            Counterfire radars.......................................    57
            Defense Advanced GPS Receivers...........................    57
            Interoperable radios for Texas Army National Guard
              disaster response......................................    58
            Multi-temperature refrigerated container system..........    58
            Non-system training device program.......................    58
            Operations center technology.............................    59
            Profiler meteorological system...........................    59
            Single channel ground and airborne radio system..........    59
            Tactical operations centers..............................    60
            Tactical wheeled vehicle acquisition strategy............    60
            Warfighter information network--tactical.................    61
        Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund................    61
          Overview...................................................    61
          Items of Special Interest..................................    63
            Explosives signatures database...........................    63
            Unfunded counter-improvised explosive device requirements
              and needs..............................................    63
        Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................    64
          Overview...................................................    64
          Items of Special Interest..................................    69
            Electronic warfare system core depot development.........    69
            F/A-18E/F and EA-18G.....................................    69
            Navy helicopter force structure..........................    69
        Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................    70
          Overview...................................................    70
        Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps...............    74
          Overview...................................................    74
        Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................    78
          Overview...................................................    78
          Items of Special Interest..................................    81
            Aircraft carrier force structure.........................    81
            Attack submarine force structure requirements............    81
            Service-life extension of SSN-688 Los Angeles class hulls    82
            U.S. Navy shipbuilding plan..............................    82
        Other Procurement, Navy......................................    84
          Overview...................................................    84
          Items of Special Interest..................................    96
            Boat davit system improvements...........................    96
            CVN propeller replacement program........................    96
            Jet fuel electric valve actuators........................    96
            Multi-climate protection system..........................    96
            Surface ship SPQ-9B radar improvements...................    97
        Procurement, Marine Corps....................................    97
          Overview...................................................    97
          Items of Special Interest..................................   103
            Abrams tank total integrated engine revitalization
                program strategy for Marine Corps Abrams tanks.......   103
            Chemical biological incident response force..............   103
            Marine Corps radio systems...............................   103
            Unit operations centers..................................   104
        Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................   104
          Overview...................................................   104
          Items of Special Interest..................................   112
            Air National Guard RC-26B modernization..................   112
            KC-45 aerial refueling aircraft program..................   112
            Mission support aircraft.................................   113
            Special Operations Command aircraft recapitalization.....   113
            Strategic airlift aircraft programs......................   113
        Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.........................   115
          Overview...................................................   115
        Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................   118
          Overview...................................................   118
        Other Procurement, Air Force.................................   122
          Overview...................................................   122
          Item of Special Interest...................................   128
            General information technology...........................   128
        Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................   128
          Overview...................................................   128
          Items of Special Interest..................................   137
            Standard Missile-3 interceptors..........................   137
            Terminal High Altitude Area Defense procurement..........   137
        Rapid Acquisition Fund.......................................   137
          Overview...................................................   137
        National Guard and Reserve Equipment.........................   138
          Overview...................................................   138
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   140
        Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   140
          Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations..........   140
          Section 105--National Guard and Reserve Equipment..........   140
          Section 106--Rapid Acquisition Fund........................   140
        Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................   140
          Section 111--Separate Procurement Line Items for Future
            Combat Systems Program...................................   140
          Section 112--Restriction on Contract Awards for Major
            Elements of the Future Combat Systems Program............   140
          Section 113--Restriction on Obligation of Funds for Army
            Tactical Radio Pending Report............................   140
          Section 114--Restriction on Obligation of Procurement Funds
            for Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Program Pending
            Certification............................................   141
        Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................   141
          Section 121--Refueling and Complex Overhaul of the U.S.S.
            Theodore Roosevelt.......................................   141
          Section 122--Applicability of Previous Teaming Agreements
            for Virginia-Class Submarine Program.....................   141
          Section 123--Littoral Combat Ship Program..................   141
          Section 124--Report on F/A-18 Procurement Costs, Comparing
            Multi-year to Annual.....................................   141
        Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................   142
          Section 131--Limitation on Retiring C-5 Aircraft...........   142
          Section 132--Maintenance of Retired KC-135E Aircraft.......   142
          Section 133--Repeal of Multi-Year Contract Authority for
            Procurement of Tanker Aircraft...........................   142
          Section 134--Report on Processes Used for Requirements
            Development for KC 09X...................................   143
        Subtitle E--Joint and Multi-Service Matters..................   143
          Section 141--Body Armor Acquisition Strategy...............   143
          Section 142--Small Arms Acquisition Strategy and
            Requirements Review......................................   143
          Section 143--Requirement for Common Ground Stations and
            Payloads for Manned and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.........   144

    TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............   144
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   144
        Army Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation.............   146
          Overview...................................................   146
          Items of Special Interest..................................   165
            Advanced lithium iron phosphate battery system for light
              tactical vehicles......................................   165
            Antiballistic windshield armor...........................   165
            Army intelligent agent software programs.................   165
            Army missile modernization...............................   166
            Chemical mechanical self-destruct fuze...................   166
            Common Missile Warning System............................   166
            Condition based maintenance..............................   167
            Data links aerial systems................................   167
            Dynamometer facility upgrade program.....................   167
            Enhanced holographic imager..............................   168
            Future Combat Systems....................................   168
            Future Combat Systems manned ground vehicles.............   169
            Future Combat Systems modular brigade enhancement........   170
            Future Combat Systems system of systems engineering and
                program management...................................   170
            Future Combat Systems unmanned aerial vehicles...........   171
            Future Combat Systems unmanned ground vehicles...........   171
            Glass ceramic armor technology for vehicle survivability.   171
            Capital Global Command and Control System-Army...........   172
            Ground soldier systems concept development...............   172
            Heavy duty hybrid electric vehicle demonstration.........   172
            High mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle bloc
              improvements...........................................   173
            Integrated fire control system for small arms............   173
            Joint Cargo Aircraft program.............................   173
            Landmine Warfare/Barrier--system development and
                demonstration........................................   174
            Multi-threat explosive detection initiative..............   174
            Near-net shaped direct-sinistered silicon carbide torso
                plate technology.....................................   175
            Platform soldier mission readiness system for tactical
              wheeled vehicles.......................................   175
            Polymer matrix composites for rotorcraft drive systems...   175
            RAND Arroyo Center.......................................   175
            Stryker family of vehicles research and development......   176
            Torque-vectoring rollover prevention technology..........   176
            Warfighter Information Network--Tactical, increment 3,
              program................................................   176
            Weapon shot counter technology...........................   177
            Wearable personal area network technology................   177
        Navy Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation.............   177
          Overview...................................................   177
          Items of Special Interest..................................   194
            Advanced anti-radiation guided-missile weapon data link
              program................................................   194
            Advanced electric motor development......................   194
            Affordable weapon system.................................   194
            All-weather sense-and-avoid system for unmanned aerial
              vehicles...............................................   195
            Composite Sea Lion craft project.........................   196
            Extended range guided-munitions..........................   196
            Global Command and Control System-Maritime...............   196
            Helicopter windscreen laminate appliques.................   197
            High-Integrity Global Positioning Systems................   197
            Hyper-spectral targeting sensor..........................   197
            Large-scale demonstration item for VA-Class bow dome.....   198
            Marine Corps assault vehicles............................   198
            Marine Corps shotgun modernization program...............   198
            Marine mammal awareness, alert and response systems......   198
            MK-48 torpedo technology development.....................   199
            Naval Ship Hydrodynamic Test Facilities, NSWC, Carderock.   199
            Navy strategy for maritime domain awareness..............   199
            Non-lethal weapons and technology........................   200
            Recapitalization of anti-submarine warfare aircraft......   201
            Reliable Replacement Warhead.............................   201
            Report on energetic materials research development and
                manufacturing technology.............................   202
            Ruggedized helicopter avionics displays..................   202
            Sea-based strategic deterrent/undersea launched missile
              study..................................................   203
            Seafighter...............................................   203
            SSGN/Virginia payload tube development...................   203
            Threat-D missile target development......................   204
            Trigger and alert sonobuoy...............................   204
            Ultraviolet-cure structural repair adhesives.............   204
            Urban operations laboratory..............................   205
            VH-71 presidential helicopter program....................   205
            Warfighter rapid awareness processing technology.........   205
        Air Force Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation........   206
          Overview...................................................   206
          Items of Special Interest..................................   223
            B-2 small Diameter Bomb Moving-Target-Kill integration...   223
            C-130J development.......................................   223
            Combat search and recovery vehicle-x.....................   223
            Common vertical lift support platform....................   224
            Cyber boot camp..........................................   224
            Global Command and Control System-Air Force..............   224
            High Accuracy Network Determination System...............   225
            Improved reliability for optimized inspection............   225
            Intercontinental ballistic missile cryptography upgrade..   225
            Joint cargo aircraft program.............................   226
            Joint strike fighter.....................................   227
            Low profile arresting gear...............................   228
            Metals affordability initiative..........................   229
            Multiple unmanned aerial vehicle employment against a
                common objective.....................................   229
            Next-generation tactical environmental clothing..........   229
            Non-attribution of open source intelligence research.....   230
            Operationally responsive space...........................   230
            RAND Project Air Force...................................   231
            Single-mode optical connectors for advanced air vehicles.   231
            Space control test capabilities..........................   232
            Third Generation Infrared Surveillance...................   232
            Winglets for in-service aerial refueling aircraft........   232
            Wire integrity technology program........................   233
        Defense Wide Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation.....   234
          Overview...................................................   234
        Operational Research, Development, Test and Evaluation.......   252
          Overview...................................................   252
          Items of Special Interest..................................   254
            Acquisition of foreign material for training purposes....   254
            Advanced energy storage technology initiative............   254
            Analysis of the industrial base for space acquisitions...   255
            Army advanced hypersonic weapon..........................   255
            Ballistic missile defense................................   255
              Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense........................   255
              Airborne Laser.........................................   256
              Arrow Weapons System...................................   257
              Ballistic missile defense discrimination radar in
                Israel...............................................   257
              Ballistic missile defense reductions...................   257
              Ballistic missile defense sensors......................   258
              Ballistic missile defense system space program.........   258
              European Ground-based Midcourse Defense component......   258
              Kinetic Energy Interceptor.............................   259
              Missile defense force structure........................   260
              Missile defense program element structure..............   260
              Missile defense program oversight......................   261
              Missile defense testing and targets....................   261
              Multiple Kill Vehicle..................................   262
              Short-range ballistic missile defense..................   262
              Space Tracking and Surveillance System.................   263
              Terminal High Altitude Area Defense....................   263
            Blood cell storage.......................................   263
            Center for Technology and National Security Policy at the
                National Defense University..........................   264
            Chemical and biological defense basic and applied
                research and advanced technology development
                initiative...........................................   264
              Chemical/biological defense advanced technology
                development initiative...............................   264
              Chemical/biological defense applied research initiative   265
              Chemical/biological defense basic research initiative..   265
            Cyberterror protection expansion for the Department of
              Defense................................................   265
            Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency................   265
            Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency relocation.....   266
            Defense Agencies Initiative sustainment..................   267
            Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive
              Research...............................................   267
            Defense Information System for Security..................   268
            Department of Defense bandwidth requirements for the
              future.................................................   268
            Energy technology investment roadmap.....................   269
            Foliage penetration capability...........................   269
            Green information technology standards...................   270
            Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority
                Serving Institutions.................................   270
            Human, social, and cultural behavioral modeling advanced
              development............................................   271
            Human, social, and cultural behavior modeling research...   272
            Human systems integration................................   272
            Increase in basic research...............................   273
            Independent verification and validation for financial
                management systems...................................   273
            Information technology clearinghouse.....................   273
            K-12 computer sciences and mathematics education.........   274
            Lean Six Sigma process analysis within the Office of
                Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
                Technology, and Logistics............................   274
            Managing and extending Department of Defense asset
              lifecycles.............................................   275
            Nanocrystal source display...............................   275
            Naval Postgraduate School................................   275
            Open source software systems.............................   275
            Post-detonation nuclear forensics........................   276
            Pre-Key Decision Point-B system vulnerability assessment.   276
            Printed circuit board technology.........................   277
            Review of cost reimbursements on defense research grants
                and contracts........................................   277
            Science and technology for strategic communication.......   278
            Social science research within the Department of Defense.   279
            Sustainment of Business Transformation Agency programs...   279
            Technology to improve future spectrum management usage...   280
            Transformational Medical Technology Initiative...........   280
            Wounded Warriors as information technology, scientific,
                and engineering specialists..........................   281
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   281
        Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   281
          Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations...............   281
          Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology.....   281
        Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
          Limitations................................................   281
          Section 211--Additional Determinations to be Made as Part
            of Future Combat Systems Milestone Review................   281
          Section 212--Analysis of Future Combat Systems
            Communications Network and Software......................   282
          Section 213--Future Combat Systems Manned Ground Vehicle
            Selected Acquisition Reports.............................   282
          Section 214--Separate Procurement and Research,
            Development, Test, and Evaluation Line Items and Program
            Elements for Sky Warrior Unmanned Aerial Systems Project.   282
          Section 215--Restriction on Obligations of Funds for the
            Warfighter Information Network--Tactical Program.........   282
          Section 216--Limitation on Source of Funds for Certain
            Joint Cargo Aircraft Expenditures........................   282
        Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs.........................   283
          Section 221--Independent Study of Boost Phase Missile
            Defense..................................................   283
          Section 222--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
            Procurement, Construction, and Deployment of Missile
            Defenses in Europe.......................................   283
        Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   283
          Section 231--Oversight of Testing of Personnel Protective
            Equipment by Director, Operational Test, and Evaluation..   283
          Section 232--Assessment of the Historically Black Colleges
            and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions
            Program..................................................   284
          Section 233--Technology-Neutral Information Technology
            Guidelines and Standards to Support Fully Interoperable
            Electronic Personal Health Information for the Department
            of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs............   284
          Section 234--Repeal of Requirement for Technology
            Transition Initiative....................................   285
          Section 235--Trusted Defense Systems.......................   285
          Section 236--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for Enhanced
            AN/TPQ-36 Radar System Pending Submission of Report......   286
          Section 237--Capabilities Based Assessment to Outline a
            Joint Approach for Future Development of Vertical Lift
            Aircraft & Rotorcraft....................................   286
          Section 238--Availability of Funds for Prompt Global Strike
            Capability Development...................................   287

    TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................   287
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   287
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   325
        Budget Request Adjustments...................................   325
          Air Sovereignty Alert......................................   326
          Cheyenne Mountain..........................................   326
          Defense Contract Management Agency Restoration of Staffing.   327
          F-15 Maintenance...........................................   327
          Navy Headquarters Organizational Changes...................   327
          Other Contracts............................................   328
          Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative..........   328
          Readiness Shortfalls.......................................   328
          Secure Site................................................   329
        Energy Issues................................................   329
          Energy Conversation........................................   329
          Energy Security on Military Installations..................   329
          Improving Energy Efficiency in Reset and Recapitalization
            Programs.................................................   330
        Environmental Issues.........................................   330
          Marine Mammal Protection Act National Defense Exemption....   330
          Measurement of Encroachment Impacts on Military Readiness..   331
          Environmental Management Information Systems...............   332
        Workplace and Depot Issues...................................   332
          Army Rail Shop Relocation Study............................   332
          Post-Reset Depot Maintenance...............................   333
          Inherently Governmental Functions..........................   333
          Report on Actions Taken Related to Public-Private
            Competitions.............................................   334
        Other Matters................................................   335
          Army Logistics Modernization Program.......................   335
          Clarification of Department of Defense Transportation
            Regulations..............................................   336
          Corrosion Control and Prevention...........................   336
          Defense Travel System......................................   337
          Report on Feasibility of Department of Defense Civilian Law
            Enforcement Force........................................   338
          Report on Improving Supply Chain Management to Enhance
            Joint Logistics Capability...............................   338
          Space-Available Priority for Military Retirees with
            Specialty Medical Care Referral..........................   339
          Space Wargames and Exercises...............................   339
          Tactical and Medium-Altitude Unmanned Aerial Systems Pilot
            Training and Management..................................   339
          Tire Privatization.........................................   340
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   341
        Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   341
          Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding.............   341
        Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions.........................   341
          Section 311--Authorization for Department of Defense
            Participation in Conservation Banking Programs...........   341
          Section 312--Reimbursement of Environmental Protection
            Agency for Certain Costs in Connection with Moses Lake
            Wellfield Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington.........   342
          Section 313--Expand Cooperative Agreement Authority for
            Management of Natural Resources to Include Off-
            Installation Mitigation..................................   342
        Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues.......................   342
          Section 321--Time Limitation on Duration of Public-Private
            Competitions.............................................   342
          Section 322--Comprehensive Analysis and Development of
            Single Government- Wide Definition of Inherently
            Governmental Function....................................   343
          Section 323--Study on Future Depot Capability..............   343
          Section 324--High-Performing Organization Business Process
            Reengineering............................................   343
          Section 325--Temporary Suspension of Studies and Public-
            Private Competitions Regarding Conversion of Functions of
            the Department of Defense Performed by Civilian Employees
            to Contractor Performance................................   344
          Section 326--Consolidation of Air Force and Air National
            Guard Aircraft Maintenance...............................   344
          Section 327--Guidance for Performance of Civilian Personnel
            Work Under Air Force Civilian Personnel Consolidation
            Plan.....................................................   344
          Section 328--Report on Reduction in Number of Fire Fighters
            on Air Force Bases.......................................   345
        Subtitle D--Energy Security..................................   345
          Section 331--Annual Report on Operational Energy Management
            and Implementation of Operational Energy Strategy........   345
          Section 332--Consideration of Fuel Logistics Support
            Requirements in Planning, Requirements Development, and
            Acquisition Processes....................................   345
          Section 333--Study on Solar Energy for Use at Forward
            Operating Locations......................................   345
          Section 334--Study on Coal-to-Liquid Fuels.................   345
        Subtitle E--Reports..........................................   346
          Section 341--Comptroller General Report on Readiness of
            Armed Forces.............................................   346
          Section 342--Report on Plan to Enhance Combat Skills of
            Navy and Air Force Personnel.............................   346
          Section 343--Comptroller General Report on the Use of the
            Army Reserve and National Guard as an Operational Reserve   346
          Section 344--Comptroller General Report on Link Between
            Preparation and Use of Army Reserve Component Forces to
            Support Ongoing Operations...............................   347
          Section 345--Comptroller General Report on Adequacy of
            Funding, Staffing, and Organization of Department of
            Defense Military Munitions Response Program..............   347
          Section 346--Report on Options for Providing Repair
            Capabilities to Support Ships Operating Near Guam........   347
        Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   348
          Section 351--Extension of Enterprise Transition Plan
            Reporting Requirement....................................   348
          Section 352--Demilitarization of Loaned, Given, or
            Exchanged Documents, Historical Artifacts, and Condemned
            or Obsolete Combat Materiel..............................   348
          Section 353--Repeal of Requirement that Secretary of Air
            Force Provide Training and Support to Other Military
            Departments for A-10 Aircraft............................   348
          Section 354--Display of Annual Budget Requirements for Air
            Sovereignty Alert Mission................................   348
          Section 355--Sense of Congress that Air Sovereignty Alert
            Missions Should Receive Sufficient Funding and Resources.   348
          Section 356--Revision of Certain Air Force Regulations
            Required.................................................   349
          Section 357--Transfer of C-12 Aircraft to California
            Department of Forestry and Fire Protection...............   349
          Section 358--Availability of Funds for Irregular Warfare
            Support Program..........................................   349
          Section 359--Sense of Congress Regarding Procurement and
            Use of Munitions.........................................   350
          Section 360--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for Air
            Combat Command Management Headquarters...................   350
          Section 361--Increase of Domestic Sourcing of Military
            Working Dogs Used by the Department of Defense...........   350

    TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS......................   350
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   350
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   351
        Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   351
          Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces...............   351
          Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength
            Minimum Levels...........................................   352
        Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   352
          Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............   352
          Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
            Support of the Reserve Components........................   352
          Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual
            Status)..................................................   353
          Section 414--Fiscal Year 2009 Limitation on Number of Non-
            Dual Status Technicians..................................   353
          Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized
            to be on Active Duty for Operational Support.............   353
          Section 416--Additional Waiver Authority of Limitation on
            Number of Reserve Component Members Authorized to be on
            Active Duty..............................................   354
        Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   354
          Section 421--Military Personnel............................   354

    TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY...............................   356
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   356
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   357
          Advance Deployment Notice to Reserve Component Members.....   357
          Air Force Academy Athletic Association.....................   357
          Competitions to Provide Unofficial Information Services to
            Service Members..........................................   358
          Financial Counseling for Homeowners in the Armed Forces....   359
          National Longitudinal Survey of Youth......................   359
          Report on Duty Status of the Reserve Component.............   359
          Review of Full-Time Manning for the Army National Guard and
            Army Reserves............................................   360
          Review of Reserve Officer Joint Requirements...............   360
          Searchable Military Decorations Database...................   361
          Strategic Plan to Address Science, Technology, Engineering,
            Mathematics, and Education...............................   361
          Youth Information in Recruiting Databases..................   362
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   362
        Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy Generally...............   362
          Section 501--Mandatory Separation Requirements for Regular
            Warrant Officers for Length of Service...................   362
          Section 502--Requirements for Issuance of Posthumous
            Commissions and Warrants.................................   363
          Section 503--Extension of Authority to Reduce Minimum
            Length of Active Service Required for Voluntary
            Retirement as an Officer.................................   363
          Section 504--Increase in Authorized Number of General
            Officers on Active Duty in the Marine Corps..............   363
        Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management.....................   363
          Section 511--Extension to All Military Departments of
            Authority to Defer Mandatory Separation of Military
            Technicians (Dual Status)................................   363
          Section 512--Increase in Authorized Strengths for Marine
            Corps Reserve Officers on Active Duty in the Grades of
            Major and Lieutenant Colonel to Meet Force Structure
            Requirements.............................................   363
          Section 513--Clarification of Authority to Consider for a
            Vacancy Promotion National Guard Officers Ordered to
            Active Duty in Support of a Contingency Operation........   363
          Section 514--Increase in Mandatory Retirement Age for
            Certain Reserve Officers.................................   364
          Section 515--Age Limit for Retention of Certain Reserve
            Officers on Active- Status List as Exception to Removal
            for Years of Commissioned Service........................   364
          Section 516--Authority to Retain Reserve Chaplains and
            Officers in Medical and Related Specialties until Age 68.   364
          Section 517--Study and Report Regarding Personnel Movements
            in Marine Corps Individual Ready Reserve.................   364
        Subtitle C--Joint Qualified Officers and Requirements........   364
          Section 521--Joint Duty Requirements for Promotion to
            General or Flag Officer..................................   364
          Section 522--Technical, Conforming, and Clerical Changes to
            Joint Specialty Terminology..............................   364
          Section 523--Promotion Policy Objectives for Joint
            Qualified Officers.......................................   365
          Section 524--Length of Joint Duty Assignments..............   365
          Section 525--Designation of General and Flag Officer
            Positions on Joint Staff as Positions to be Held Only by
            Reserve Component Officers...............................   365
          Section 526--Treatment of Certain Service as Joint Duty
            Experience...............................................   365
        Subtitle D--General Service Authorities......................   366
          Section 531--Increase in Authorized Maximum Reenlistment
            Term.....................................................   366
          Section 532--Career Intermission Pilot Program.............   366
        Subtitle E--Education and Training...........................   366
          Section 541--Repeal of Prohibition on Phased Increase in
            Midshipmen and Cadet Strength Limit at United States
            Naval Academy and Air Force Academy......................   366
          Section 542--Promotion of Foreign and Cultural Exchange
            Activities at Military Service Academies.................   366
          Section 543--Compensation for Civilian President of Naval
            Postgraduate School......................................   367
          Section 544--Increased Authority to Enroll Defense Industry
            Employees in Defense Product Development Program.........   367
          Section 545--Requirement of Completion of Service under
            Honorable Conditions for Purposes of Entitlement to
            Educational Assistance for Reserve Components Members
            Supporting Contingency Operations........................   367
          Section 546--Consistent Education Loan Repayment Authority
            for Health Professionals in Regular Components and
            Selected Reserve.........................................   367
          Section 547--Increase in Number of Units of Junior Reserve
            Officers' Training Corps.................................   367
        Subtitle F--Military Justice.................................   368
          Section 551--Grade of Staff Judge Advocate to the
            Commandant of the Marine Corps...........................   368
          Section 552--Standing Military Protection Order............   368
          Section 553--Mandatory Notification of Issuance of Military
            Protective Order to Civilian Law Enforcement.............   368
          Section 554--Implementation of Information Database on
            Sexual Assault Incidents in the Armed Forces.............   368
        Subtitle G--Decorations, Awards, and Honorary Promotions.....   368
          Section 561--Replacement of Military Decorations...........   368
          Section 562--Authorization and Request for Award of Medal
            of Honor to Richard L. Etchberger for Acts of Valor
            during the Vietnam War...................................   369
          Section 563--Advancement of Brigadier General Charles E.
            Yeager, United States Air Force (Retired), on the Retired
            List.....................................................   369
          section 564--Advancement of Rear Admiral Wayne E. Meyer,
            United States Navy (Retired), on the Retired List........   369
          Section 565--Award of Vietnam Service Medal to Veterans Who
            Participated in Mayaguez Rescue Operation................   369
        Subtitle H--Impact Aid.......................................   369
          Section 571--Continuation of Authority to Assist Local
            Educational Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members
            of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense Civilian
            Employees................................................   369
          Section 572--Calculation of Payments under Department of
            Education's Impact Aid Program...........................   370
        Subtitle I--Military Families................................   370
          Section 581--Presentation of Burial Flag...................   370
          Section 582--Education and Training Opportunities for
            Military Spouses.........................................   370
        Subtitle J--Other Matters....................................   370
          Section 591--Inclusion of Reserves in Providing Federal Aid
            for State Governments, Enforcing Federal Authority, and
            Responding to Major Public Emergencies...................   370
          Section 592--Interest Payments on Certain Claims Arising
            from Correction of Military Records......................   370
          Section 593--Extension of Limitation on Reductions of
            Personnel of Agencies Responsible for Review and
            Correction of Military Records...........................   371
          Section 594--Authority to Order Reserve Units to Active
            Duty to Provide Assistance in Response to a Major
            Disaster or Emergency....................................   371
          Section 595--Senior Military Leadership Diversity
            Commission...............................................   371

    TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..............   371
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   371
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   372
          Defense Commissary Agency Construction Funding.............   372
          Disabled Veterans Access to Commissary and Exchanges.......   372
          Post-Deployment Leave Policy...............................   373
          Telephone Services in Combat Zones.........................   373
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   374
        Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   374
          Section 601--Fiscal Year 2009 Increase in Military Basic
            Pay......................................................   374
          Section 602--Permanent Prohibition on Charges for Meals
            Received at Military Treatment Facilities by Members
            Receiving Continuous Care................................   374
          Section 603--Equitable Treatment of Senior Enlisted Members
            in Computation of Basic Allowance for Housing............   374
          Section 604--Increase in Maximum Authorized Payment or
            Reimbursement Amount for Temporary Lodging Expenses......   374
          Section 605--Availability of Portion of a Second Family
            Separation Allowance for Married Couples with Dependents.   374
          Section 606--Stabilization of Pay and Allowances for Senior
            Enlisted Members and Warrant Officers Appointed as
            Officers and Officers Reappointed in a Lower Grade.......   375
          Section 607--Extension of Authority for Income Replacement
            Payments for Reserve Component Members Experiencing
            Extended and Frequent Mobilization for Active Duty
            Service..................................................   375
          Section 608--Guaranteed Pay Increase for Members of the
            Armed Forces of One- Half of One Percentage Point Higher
            than Employment Cost Index...............................   375
        Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   375
          Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
            Authorities for Reserve Forces...........................   375
          Section 612--Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
            Authorities for Health Care Professionals................   375
          Section 613--Extension of Special Pay and Bonus Authorities
            for Nuclear Officers.....................................   376
          Section 614--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment
            of Other Title 37 Bonuses and Special Pays...............   376
          Section 615--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment
            of Referral Bonuses......................................   376
          Section 616--Increase in Maximum Bonus and Stipend Amounts
            Authorized under Nurse Officer Candidate Accession
            Program..................................................   376
          Section 617--Maximum Length of Nuclear Officer Incentive
            Pay Agreements for Service...............................   376
          Section 618--Technical Changes Regarding Consolidation of
            Special Pay, Incentive Pay, and Bonus Authorities of the
            Uniformed Services.......................................   376
          Section 619--Use of New Skill Incentive Pay and Proficiency
            Bonus Authorities to Encourage Training in Critical
            Foreign Languages and Foreign Cultural Studies...........   377
          Section 620--Temporary Targeted Bonus Authority to Increase
            Direct Accessions of Officers in Certain Health
            Professions..............................................   377
        Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances.............   377
          Section 631--Increased Weight Allowance for Transportation
            of Baggage and Household Effects for Certain Enlisted
            Members..................................................   377
          Section 632--Additional Weight Allowance for Transportation
            of Materials Associated with Employment of a Member's
            Spouse or Community Support Volunteer or Charity
            Activities...............................................   377
          Section 633--Transportation of Family Pets during
            Evacuation of Non-Essential Personnel....................   377
        Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits................   378
          Section 641--Equity in Computation of Disability Retired
            Pay for Reserve Component Members Wounded in Action......   378
          Section 642--Effect of Termination of Subsequent Marriage
            on Payment of Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity to Surviving
            Spouse or Former Spouse Who Previously Transferred
            Annuity to Dependent Children............................   378
          Section 643--Extension to Survivors of Certain Members Who
            Die on Active Duty of Special Survivor Indemnity
            Allowance for Persons Affected by Required Survivor
            Benefit Plan Annuity Offset for Dependency and Indemnity
            Compensation.............................................   378
          Section 644--Election to Receive Retired Pay for Non-
            Regular Service upon Retirement for Service in an Active
            Reserve Status Performed after Attaining Eligibility for
            Regular Retirement.......................................   378
          Section 645--Recomputation of Retired Pay and Adjustment of
            Retired Grade of Reserve Retirees to Reflect Service
            after Retirement.........................................   379
          Section 646--Correction of Unintended Reduction in Survivor
            Benefit Plan Annuities Due to Phased Elimination of Two-
            Tier Annuity Computation and Supplemental Annuity........   379
          Section 647--Presumption of Death for Participants in
            Survivor Benefit Plan in Missing Status..................   379
        Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund
          Instrumentality Benefits and Operations....................   379
          Section 651--Use of Commissary Stores Surcharges Derived
            from Temporary Commissary Initiatives for Reserve
            Components and Retired Members...........................   379
          Section 652--Requirements for Private Operation of
            Commissary Store Functions...............................   380
          Section 653--Additional Exception to Limitation on Use of
            Appropriated Funds for Department of Defense Golf Courses   380
          Section 654--Enhanced Enforcement of Prohibition on Sale or
            Rental of Sexually Explicit Material on Military
            Installations............................................   380
          Section 655--Requirement to Buy Military Decorations,
            Ribbons, Badges, Medals, Insignia, and Other Uniform
            Accouterments Produced in the United States..............   380
          Section 656--Use of Appropriated Funds to Pay Post
            Allowances or Overseas Cost of Living Allowances to
            Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality Employees Serving
            Overseas.................................................   380
          Section 657--Study Regarding Sale of Alcoholic Wine and
            Beer in Commissary Stores in Addition to Exchange Stores.   381
        Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   381
          Section 661--Bonus to Encourage Army Personnel and Other
            Persons to Refer Persons for Enlistment in the Army......   381
          Section 662--Continuation of Entitlement to Bonuses and
            Similar Benefits for Members of the Uniformed Services
            Who Die, are Separated or Retired for Disability, or Meet
            Other Criteria...........................................   381
          Section 663--Providing Injured Members of the Armed Forces
            Information Concerning Benefits..........................   382

    TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................   382
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   382
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   383
          Pain Care Initiative in Military Health Care Facilities....   383
          Reserve Component Dental Readiness.........................   384
          Suicide Prevention in the Armed Forces.....................   384
          Wounded Warriors as Health Providers.......................   384
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   385
        Subtitle A--Health Care Matters..............................   385
          Section 701--One-Year Extension of Prohibition on Increases
            in Certain Health Care Costs for Members of the Uniformed
            Services.................................................   385
          Section 702--Temporary Prohibition on Increase in
            Copayments under Retail Pharmacy System of Pharmacy
            Benefits Program.........................................   385
          Section 703--Prohibition on Conversion of Military Medical
            and Dental Positions to Civilian Medical and Dental
            Positions................................................   385
          Section 704--Chiropractic Health Care for Members on Active
            Duty.....................................................   385
          Section 705--Requirement to Recalculate TRICARE Reserve
            Select Premiums Based on Actual Cost Data................   386
          Section 706--Program for Health Care Delivery at Military
            Installations Projected to Grow..........................   386
          Section 707--Guidelines for Combined Federal Medical
            Facilities...............................................   386
        Subtitle B--Preventive Care..................................   386
          Section 711--Waiver of Copayments for Preventative Services
            for Certain TRICARE Beneficiaries........................   386
          Section 712--Military Health Risk Management Demonstration
            Project..................................................   387
          Section 713--Smoking Cessation Program Under TRICARE.......   387
          Section 714--Availability of Allowance to Assist Members of
            the Armed Forces and their Dependents Procure Preventive
            Health Care Services.....................................   387
        Subtitle C--Wounded Warrior Matters..........................   388
          Section 721--Center of Excellence in Prevention, Diagnosis,
            Mitigation, Treatment, and Rehabilitation of Hearing Loss
            and Auditory System Injuries.............................   388
          Section 722--Clarification to Center of Excellence Relating
            to Military Eye Injuries.................................   388
          Section 723--National Casualty Care Research Center........   388
          Section 724--Peer-Reviewed Research Program on Extremity
            War Injuries.............................................   389
          Section 725--Review of Policies and Processes Related to
            the Delivery of Mail to Wounded Members of the Armed
            Forces...................................................   389
        Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   389
          Section 731--Report on Stipend for Members of Reserve
            Components for Health Care for Certain Dependents........   389
          Section 732--Report on Providing the Extended Health Care
            Option Program to Autistic Dependents of Military
            Retirees.................................................   389
          Section 733--Sense of Congress Regarding Autism Therapy
            Services.................................................   389

    TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
        RELATED MATTERS..............................................   389
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   389
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   391
          Acquisition Workforce......................................   391
          Defense Industrial Security................................   392
          Implementation of Changes to Protections for Specialty
            Metals...................................................   392
          Implementation of Gansler Commission Recommendations.......   393
          Implementation of Revolving Door Requirements..............   394
          Increase in Bid Protests...................................   394
          Iraqi Recipients of Special Immigrant Visas................   395
          Memorandum of Understanding on Contracting in Iraq and
            Afghanistan..............................................   396
          Preservation of the Tool and Die Industry..................   396
          Service Contractor Inventory...............................   397
          Small Business Programs....................................   398
          Utilization of Local Businesses for Contracts on Guam......   398
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   399
        Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................   399
          Section 801--Review of Impact of Illegal Subsidies on
            Acquisition of KC-45 Aircraft............................   399
          Section 802--Assessment of Urgent Operational Needs
            Fulfillment..............................................   399
          Section 803--Preservation of Tooling for Major Defense
            Acquisition Programs.....................................   399
          Section 804--Prohibition on Procurement from Beneficiaries
            of Foreign Subsidies.....................................   400
          Section 805--Domestic Industrial Base Considerations during
            Source Selection.........................................   400
          Section 806--Commercial Software Reuse Preference..........   400
          Section 807--Comprehensive Proposal Analysis Required
            During Source Selection..................................   400
        Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,
          Procedures, and Limitations................................   401
          Section 811--Acquisition Workforce Expedited Hiring
            Authority................................................   401
          Section 812--Definition of System for Defense Acquisition
            Challenge Program........................................   401
          Section 813--Career Path and Other Requirements for
            Military Personnel in the Acquisition Field..............   401
          Section 814--Technical Data Rights for Non-FAR Agreements..   402
          Section 815--Clarification that Cost Accounting Standards
            Apply to Federal Contracts Performed Outside the United
            States...................................................   402
        Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Inherently Governmental
          Matters....................................................   402
          Section 821--Policy on Personal Conflicts of Interest by
            Employees of Department of Defense Contractors...........   402
          Section 822--Development of Guidance on Personal Services
            Contracts................................................   403
          Section 823--Limitation on Performance of Product Support
            Integrator Functions.....................................   403
        Subtitle D--Defense Industrial Security......................   404
          Section 831--Requirements Relating to Facility Clearances..   404
          Section 832--Foreign Ownership Control or Influence........   405
          Section 833--Congressional Oversight Relating to Facility
            Clearances and Foreign Ownership Control or Influence;
            Definitions..............................................   405
        Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   406
          Section 841--Clarification of Status of Government Rights
            in the Designs of Department of Defense Vessels, Boats,
            Craft, and Components Thereof............................   406
          Section 842--Expansion of Authority to Retain Fees from
            Licensing of Intellectual Property.......................   406
          Section 843--Transfer of Sections of Title 10 Relating to
            Milestone A and Milestone B for Clarity..................   406
          Section 844--Earned Value Management Study and Report......   407
          Section 845--Report on Market Research.....................   407
          Section 846--System Development and Demonstration Benchmark
            Report...................................................   407
          Section 847--Additional Matters Required to be Reported by
            Contractors Performing Security Functions in Areas of
            Combat Operations........................................   407
          Section 848--Report Relating to Munitions..................   408

    TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT......
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   408
          Cyber Command Responsibilities.............................   408
          Director of Operational Energy Plans and Programs..........   408
          Inter-agency transformation of the United States Southern
            Command..................................................   409
          Long-Term Nature of Business Transformation Agency Work....   411
          Planning Assumptions on the Level of Contract Support......   411
          Quadrennial Defense Review.................................   411
          United States Africa Command...............................   412
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   413
        Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management.................   413
          Section 901--Revisions in Functions and Activities of
            Special Operations Command...............................   413
          Section 902--Requirement to Designate Officials for
            Irregular Warfare........................................   413
          Section 903--Plan Required for Personnel Management of
            Special Operations Forces................................   413
          Section 904--Director of Operational Energy Plans and
            Programs.................................................   413
          Section 905--Corrosion Control and Prevention Executives
            for the Military Departments.............................   414
          Section 906--Alignment of Deputy Chief Management Officer
            Resposibilities..........................................   414
          Section 907--Requirement for the Secretary of Defense to
            Prepare a Strategic Plan to Enhance the Role of the
            National Guard and Reserves..............................   414
          Section 908--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as
            the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps..............   415
          Section 909--Support to Commitee Review....................   415
        Subtitle B--Space Activities.................................   415
          Section 911--Extension of Authority for Pilot Program for
            Provision of Space Surveillance Network Services to Non-
            United States Government Entities........................   415
          Section 912--Investment and Acquisition Strategy for
            Commercial Satellite Capabilities........................   415
        Subtitle C--Chemical Demilitarization Program................   415
          Section 921--Chemical Demilitarization Citizens Advisory
            Commissions in Colorado and Kentucky.....................   415
          Section 922--Prohibition on Transport of Hydrolystate at
            Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado..........................   416
        Subtitle D--Intelligence-Related Matters.....................   416
          Section 931--Technical Changes Following the Redesignation
            of National Imagery and Mapping Agency as National
            Geospatial-Intelligence Agency...........................   416
          Section 932--Technical Amendments to Title 10, United
            States Code, Arising from Enactment of the Intelligence
            Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004..............   416
          Section 933--Technical Amendments Relating to the Associate
            Director of the CIA for Military Affairs.................   417
        Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   417
          Section 941--Establishment of Department of Defense School
            of Nursing...............................................   417
          Section 942--Amendments of Authority for Regional Centers
            for Security Studies.....................................   417
          Section 943--Findings and Sense of Congress Regarding the
            Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation....   417
          Section 944--Restriction on Obligation of Funds for United
            States Southern Command Development Assistance Activities   418
          Section 945--Authorization of Non-Conventional Assisted
            Recovery Capabilities....................................   418
          Section 946--Report on United States Northern Command
            Development of Interagency Plans and Command and Control
            Relationships............................................   418

    TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS......................................   419
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   419
        Counter-Drug Activities......................................   419
          Overview...................................................   419
          Items of Special Interest..................................   419
            Budget requests..........................................   419
            International Support....................................   419
            South-propelled semi-submersible vessels and low profile
              vessels without nationality............................   419
            Southwest Border Fence...................................   420
            Temporary expansion of the Joint Inter-Agency Task Force-
              South..................................................   420
        Other Activities.............................................   421
          Civil Affairs..............................................   421
          Humanitarian Assistance Requirements of the Navy...........   422
          Inclusion of Non-Lethal Capability in Defense Civil Support
            Requirements Plan........................................   423
          Long-term Plans for Intelligence, Surveillance, and
            Reconnaissance...........................................   423
          National Language Service Corps............................   424
          Nuclear Weapons Inventory Control..........................   424
          Oversight of Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
            Proposals for New Capabilities...........................   425
          Strengthening Inter-Agency Stabilization and Reconstruction
            Contingency Planning.....................................   426
          Unmanned Aircraft Systems Task Force.......................   426
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   427
        Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   427
          Section 1001--General Transfer Authority...................   427
          Section 1002--Requirement of Separate Display of Budget for
            Afghanistan..............................................   427
          Section 1003--Requirement for Separate Display of Budget
            for Iraq.................................................   428
          Section 1004--One Time Shift of Military Retirement
            Payments.................................................   428
        Subtitle B--Policy Relating to Vessels and Shipyards.........   428
          Section 1011--Conveyance, Navy Drydock, Aransas Pass, Texas   428
          Section 1012--Report on Repair of Naval Vessels in Foreign
            Shipyards................................................   428
          Section 1013--Policy Relating to Major Combatant Vessels of
            the Strike Forces of the United States Navy..............   428
          Section 1014--National Defense Sealift Fund Amendments.....   429
          Section 1015--Report on Contributions to the Domestic
            Supply of Steel and Other Metals from Scrapping of
            Certain Vessels..........................................   429
        Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities..........................   429
          Section 1021--Continuation of Reporting Requirement
            Regarding Department of Defense Expenditures to Support
            Foreign Counter-drug Activities..........................   429
          Section 1022--Extension of Authority for Join Task Forces
            to Provide Support to Law Enforcement Agencies Conducting
            Counter-terrorism Activities.............................   429
          Section 1023--Extention of Authority to Support Unified
            Counter-drug and Counter-terrorism Campaign in Colombia
            and Continuation of Numerical Limitation on Assignment of
            United States Personnel..................................   430
          Section 1024--Expansion and Extension of Authority to
            Provide Additional Support for Counter-drug Activities of
            Certain Foreign Governments..............................   430
          Section 1025--Comprehensive Department of Defense Strategy
            for Counter- narcotics Efforts for West Africa and the
            Maghreb..................................................   431
          Section 1026--Comprehensive Department of Defense Strategy
            for Counter- narcotics Efforts in South and Central Asian
            Regions..................................................   431
        Subtitle D--Boards and Commissions...........................   432
          Section 1031--Strategic Communications Board...............   432
          Section 1032--Extension of Certain Dates for Congressional
            Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States.   432
          Section 1033--Extension of Commission to Assess the Threat
            to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)
            Attack...................................................   432
        Subtitle E--Studies and Reports..............................   433
          Section 1041--Report on Corrosion Control and Prevention...   433
          Section 1042--Study on Using Department of Defense Modular
            Airborne Fire Fighting Systems in a Federal Response to
            Wildfires................................................   433
          Section 1043--Study on Rotorcraft Survivability............   434
          Section 1044--Studies to Analyze Alternative Models for
            Acquisition and Funding of Inter-connected Cyberspace
            Systems..................................................   434
          Section 1045--Report on Non-strategic Nuclear Weapons......   434
          Section 1046--Study on National Defense Implications of
            Section 1083.............................................   434
          Section 1047--Report on Methods Department of Defense
            Utilizes to Ensure Compliance with Guam Tax and Licensing
            Laws.....................................................   434
        Subtitle F--Congressional Recognitions.......................   435
          Section 1051--Sense of Congress Honoring the Honorable
            Duncan Hunter............................................   435
          Section 1052--Sense of Congress in Honor of the Honorable
            Jim Saxton, a Member of the House of Representatives.....   435
          Section 1053--Sense of Congress Honoring the Honorable
            Terry Everett............................................   435
          Section 1054--Sense of Congress Honoring the Honorable Jo
            Ann Davis................................................   435
        Subtitle G--Other Matters....................................   435
          Section 1061--Amendment to Annual Submission of Information
            Regarding Information Technology Capital Assets..........   435
          Section 1062--Restriction on Department of Defense
            Relocation of Missions or Functions from Cheyenne
            Mountain Air Force Station...............................   435
          Section 1063--Technical and Clerical Amendments............   436
          Section 1064--Submission to Congress of Revision to
            Regulation on Enemy Prisoners of War, Retained Personnel,
            Civilian Internees, and Other Detainees..................   436
          Section 1065--Authorization of Appropriations for Payments
            to Portuguese Nationals Employed by the Department of
            Defense..................................................   436
          Section 1066--State Defense Force Improvement..............   436
          Section 1067--Barnegat Inlet to Little Egg Inlet, New
            Jersey...................................................   436
          Section 1068--Sense of Congress Regarding the Roles and
            Mission of the Department of Defense and Other National
            Security Institutions....................................   437
          Section 1069--Sense of Congress Relating to 2008
            Supplemental Appropriations..............................   437
          Section 1070--Sense of Congress Regarding Defense
            Requirements of the United States........................   437

    TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS.............................   437
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   437
          Implementation of Existing Policies for Medical Care for
            Department of Defense and Non--Department of Defense
            Civilians Injured or Wounded in Support of Contingency
            Operations...............................................   437
          Information Technology Workforce Analysis..................   438
          Review of Medical Care for Federal Civilian Employees
            Serving in a Contingency Operation.......................   438
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   439
          Section 1101--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on
            Premium Pay for Federal Employees........................   439
          Section 1102--Extension of Authority to Make Lump-Sum
            Severance Payments.......................................   439
          Section 1103--Extension of Voluntary Reduction-in-Force
            Authority of Department of Defense.......................   440
          Section 1104--Technical Amendment to Definition of
            Professional Accounting Position.........................   440
          Section 1105--Expedited Hiring Authority for Health Care
            Professionals............................................   440
          Section 1106--Authority to Adjust Certain Limitations on
            Personnel and Reports on Such Adjustments................   440
          Section 1107--Temporary Discretionary Authority to Grant
            Allowances, Benefits, and Gratuities to Personnel on
            Official Duty in a Combat Zone...........................   441
          Section 1108--Requirement Relating to Furloughs During the
            Time of a Contingency Operation..........................   441
          Section 1109--Direct Hire Authority for Certain Positions
            at Personnel Demonstration Laboratories..................   441

    TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS...................   441
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   441
          Combatant Commanders' Initiative Fund......................   441
          Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Iraq.............   442
          Foreign Disclosure.........................................   443
          Foreign Military Sales.....................................   443
          Graduates of the Jordanian International Police Training
            Center...................................................   444
          Honoring and Acknowledging Service Members Redeploying from
            Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom...   444
          Integrating Inter-agency Capabilities into Department of
            Defense Planning for Stability Operations................   445
          Oversight of Department of Defense Policies on Iran........   445
          Reconstruction, Security, and Stabilization Assistance.....   446
          Report on Command and Control Structure for Military Forces
            Operating in the Republic of Korea.......................   446
          Report on Efforts to Train and Equip the Afghan National
            Security Forces..........................................   446
          Security Developments in Pakistan and Implications for
            Afghanistan..............................................   449
          Security for Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Iraq.......   450
          Special Inspector General for Afghanistan..................   450
          Unity of Command in Provincial Reconstruction Teams........   450
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   451
        Subtitle A--Assistance and Training..........................   451
          Section 1201--Extension of Authority to Build the Capacity
            of the Pakistan Frontier Corps...........................   451
          Section 1202--Military-to-Military Contacts and Comparable
            Activities...............................................   451
          Section 1203--Enhanced Authority to Pay Incremental
            Expenses for Participation of Developing Countries in
            Combined Exercises.......................................   451
          Section 1204--Extension of Temporary Authority to Use
            Acquisition and Cross- servicing Agreements to Lend
            Military Equipment for Personnel Protection and
            Survivability............................................   451
          Section 1205--One-Year Extension of Authority for
            Distribution to Certain Foreign Personnel of Education
            and Training Materials and Information Technology to
            Enhance Military Interoperability........................   451
          Section 1206--Modification and Extension of Authorities
            Relating to Program to Build the Capacity of Foreign
            Military Forces..........................................   452
          Section 1207--Extension of Authority for Security and
            Stabilization Assistance.................................   452
          Section 1208--Authority for Support of Special Operations
            to Combat Terrorism......................................   452
          Section 1209--Regional Defense Combating Terrorism
            Fellowship Program.......................................   453
        Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Iraq and Afghanistan.........   453
          Section 1211--Limitation on Availability of Funds for
            Certain Purposes Relating to Iraq........................   453
          Section 1212--Report on Status of Forces Agreements between
            the United States and Iraq...............................   453
          Section 1213--Strategy for United States-Led Provincial
            Reconstruction Teams in Iraq.............................   453
          Section 1214--Commanders' Emergency Response Program.......   454
          Section 1215--Performance Monitoring System for United
            States-led Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan   454
          Section 1216--Report on Command and Control Structure for
            Military Forces Operating in Afghanistan.................   454
          Section 1217--Report on Enhancing Security and Stability in
            the Region along the Border of Afghanistan and Pakistan..   455
          Section 1218--Study and Report on Iraqi Police Training
            Teams....................................................   456
        Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   456
          Section 1221--Payment of Personnel Expenses for
            Multilateral Cooperation Programs........................   456
          Section 1222--Extension of Department of Defense Authority
            to Participate in Multinational Military Centers of
            Excellence...............................................   456
          Section 1223--Study of Limitation on Classified Contracts
            with Foreign Companies Engaged in Space Business with
            China....................................................   456
          Section 1224--Sense of Congress and Congressional Briefings
            on Readiness of the Armed Forces and Report on Nuclear
            Weapons-Capabilities of Iran.............................   457

    TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE
        FORMER SOVIET UNION..........................................   457
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   457
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   458
          Biological Threat Reduction................................   458
          Shchuch'ye Chemical Weapons Destruction Project............   459
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   460
          Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
            Programs and Funds.......................................   460
          Section 1302--Funding Allocations..........................   460

    TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................   466
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   466
          Advance Procurement Funding for Dry-Cargo Ammunition Ships
            (T-AKE)..................................................   466
          Use of the National Defense Sealift Fund for Procurement of
            New Construction Vessels in the Maritime Prepositioning
            Force (Future)...........................................   466
        Subtitle A--Military programs................................   466
          Section 1401--Working Capital Funds........................   466
          Section 1402--National Defense Sealift Fund................   466
          Section 1403--Defense Health Program.......................   467
          Section 1404--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction,
            Defense..................................................   467
          Section 1405--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
            Activities, Defense-Wide.................................   467
          Section 1406--Defense Inspector General....................   467
        Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile.......................   467
          Section 1411--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile
            Funds....................................................   467
          Section 1412--Revisions to Previously Authorized Disposals
            from the National Defense Stockpile......................   467
        Subtitle C--Armed Forces Retirement Home.....................   468
          Section 1421--Armed Forces Retirement Home.................   468
        Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   468
          Section 1431--Inapplicability of Executive Order 13457.....   468

    TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR
        OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM.......   468
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   468
      SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS................................   469
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   472
          Army Aircraft Repair and Recapitalization..................   472
          Counter-Improvised Explosive Device Operations Integration
            Center...................................................   472
          Counter Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars Program............   473
          F-22.......................................................   473
          Global Improvised Explosive Device Threat Estimate.........   473
          Increased Army Training....................................   474
          Iraq Security Forces Fund..................................   475
          Human Terrain Team Support.................................   475
          Production Rates of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
            Vehicles.................................................   475
          Special Operations Command Aircraft Radar Warning Receivers   476
          Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization................   476
          War Reserve Secondary Items--Prepositioned Stocks..........   477
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   477
          Section 1501--Purpose......................................   477
          Section 1502--Army Procurement.............................   477
          Section 1503--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement............   477
          Section 1504--Air Force Procurement........................   478
          Section 1505--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement..........   478
          Section 1506--Rapid Acquisition Fund.......................   478
          Section 1507--Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund   478
          Section 1508--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for the
            Joint Improvised Explosive Devices Defeat Organization
            Pending Notification to Congress.........................   478
          Section 1509--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation..   478
          Section 1510--Operation and Maintenance....................   479
          Section 1511--Other Department of Defense Programs.........   479
          Section 1512--Iraq Security Forces Fund....................   479
          Section 1513--Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.............   479
          Section 1514--Military Personnel...........................   479
          Section 1515--Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund.   479
          Section 1516--Special Transfer Authority...................   479
          Section 1517--Treatment as Additional Authorizations.......   479

    TITLE XVI--RECONSTRUCTION AND STABILIZATION CIVILIAN MANAGEMENT..   479
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   479
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   480
          Section 1601--Short Title..................................   480
          Section 1602--Findings.....................................   480
          Section 1603--Definitions..................................   480
          Section 1604--Authority to Provide Assistance for
            Reconstruction and Stabilization Crises..................   480
          Section 1605--Reconstruction and Stabilization.............   481
          Section 1606--Authorities Related to Personnel.............   481
          Section 1607--Reconstruction and Stabilization Strategy....   481
          Section 1608--Annual Reports to Congress...................   481

    DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.................   481
      PURPOSE........................................................   481
      MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW..............   481
          Section 2001--Short Title..................................   500
          Section 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
            Required to be Specified by Law..........................   500

    TITLE XXI--ARMY..................................................   500
      SUMMARY........................................................   500
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   500
          Sierra Army Depot Drinking Water...........................   500
          Explanation of Funding Adjustments.........................   500
          Planning and Design........................................   501
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   501
          Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   501
          Section 2102--Family Housing...............................   502
          Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   502
          Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........   502
          Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2008 Projects........................   502
          Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2007 Projects........................   502
          Section 2107--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2006 Projects.......................................   502
          Section 2108--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2005 Projects.......................................   502

    TITLE XXII--NAVY.................................................   502
      SUMMARY........................................................   502
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   503
          Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC), Twentynine
            Palms, California Land Expansion.........................   503
          Planning and Design........................................   503
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   503
          Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   503
          Section 2202--Family Housing...............................   503
          Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   503
          Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........   503
          Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2005 Project.........................   504
          Section 2206--Modification of Authority to Carry out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2007 Projects........................   504
          Section 2207--Report on Impacts of Surface Ship Homeporting
            Alternatives.............................................   504

    TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE...........................................   504
      SUMMARY........................................................   504
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   504
          Explanation of Funding Adjustments.........................   504
          Planning and Design........................................   505
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   505
          Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   505
          Section 2302--Family Housing...............................   505
          Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   505
          Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force...   505
          Section 2305--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2006 Projects.......................................   505
          Section 2306--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2005 Projects.......................................   505

    TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES.....................................   506
      SUMMARY........................................................   506
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   506
          Explanation of Funding Adjustments.........................   506
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   508
        Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations....................   508
          Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
            Land Acquisition Projects................................   508
          Section 2402--Energy Conservation Projects.................   508
          Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense
            Agencies.................................................   508
          Section 2404--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2007 Project.........................   508
          Section 2405--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2005 Projects........................   508
          Section 2406--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2006 Projects.......................................   508
        Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations.........   509
          Section 2411--Authorized Chemical Demilitarization Program
            Construction and Land Acquisition Projects...............   509
          Section 2412--Authorization of Appropriations, Chemical
            Demilitarization Construction, Defense-Wide..............   509
          Section 2413--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
            Certain Fiscal Year 1997 Projects........................   509
          Section 2414--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
            Certain Fiscal Year 2000 Projects........................   509

    TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
        PROGRAM......................................................   509
      SUMMARY........................................................   509
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   509
          Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   509
          Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........   509

    TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES..................   510
      SUMMARY........................................................   510
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   510
          Planning and Design, Army National Guard...................   510
          Planning and Design, Army Reserve..........................   510
          Planning and Design, Air National Guard....................   510
          Planning and Design, Air Reserve...........................   511
          Niagara Air Reserve Base, New York.........................   511
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISION..........................................   511
          Section 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction
            and Land Acquisition Projects............................   511
          Section 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   511
          Section 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps
            Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition Projects.......   511
          Section 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction
            and Land Acquisition Projects............................   511
          Section 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and
            Land Acquisition Projects................................   511
          Section 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National
            Guard and Reserve........................................   511
          Section 2607--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2006 Projects.......................................   512
          Section 2608--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
            Year 2005 Project........................................   512

    TITLE XXVII--BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT ACTIVITIES.............   512
      SUMMARY........................................................   512
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   521
          Base Closure and Realignment 2005 Program Underfunding.....   521
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   521
        Subtitle A--Authorizations...................................   521
          Section 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base
            Closure and Realignment Activities Funded through
            Department of Defense Base Closure Account 1990..........   521
          Section 2702--Authorized Base Closure and Realignment
            Activities Funded through Department of Defense Base
            Closure Account 2005.....................................   521
          Section 2703--Authorization of Appropriations for Base
            Closure and Realignment Activities Funded through
            Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005..........   522
        Subtitle B--Amendments to Base Closure and Related Laws......   522
          Section 2711--Repeal of Commission Approach to the
            Development of Recommendations in Any Future Round of
            Base Closures and Realignments...........................   522
          Section 2712--Modification of Annual Base Closure and
            Realignment Reporting Requirements.......................   522
          Section 2713--Technical Corrections Regarding Authorized
            Cost and Scope of Work Variations for Military
            Construction and Military Family Housing Projects Related
            to Base Closures and Realignments........................   523
        Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   523
          Section 2721--Conditions on Closure of Walter Reed Army
            Medical Hospital and Relocation of Operations to National
            Naval Medical Center and Fort Belvoir....................   523
          Section 2722--Report on Use of BRAC Properties as Sites for
            Refineries or Nuclear Power Plants.......................   523

    TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS...........   523
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   523
          Defense Critical Infrastructure Program....................   523
          Facilities Sustainment.....................................   524
          Formerly Used Defense Sites Review.........................   525
          Guam Integrated Water Management System....................   525
          Joint Land Use Study at Shaw Air Force Base................   526
          Military Spouse and Families Memorial......................   526
          Recycled Materials for Road Construction and other Uses....   526
          Safe Housing for Military Families.........................   527
          Training Range Expansion...................................   527
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   527
        Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
            Housing Changes..........................................   527
          Section 2801--Incorporation of Principles of Sustainable
            Design in Documents Submitted as Part of Proposed
            Military Construction Projects...........................   527
          Section 2802--Extension of Authority to Use Operation and
            Maintenance Funds For Construction Projects Outside the
            United States............................................   528
          Section 2803--Revision of Maximum Lease Amount Applicable
            to Certain Domestic Army Family Housing Leases to Reflect
            Previously Made Annual Adjustments in Amount.............   528
          Section 2804--Use of Military Family Housing Constructed
            Under Build and Lease Authority to House Members without
            Dependents...............................................   528
          Section 2805--Lease of Military Family Housing to the
            Secretary of Defense for Use as Residence................   528
          Section 2806--Repeal of Reporting Requirement in Connection
            with Installation Vulnerability Assessments..............   528
          Section 2807--Modification of Alternative Authority for
            Acquisition and Improvement of Military Housing..........   528
          Section 2808--Report on Capturing Housing Privatization
            Best Practices...........................................   529
        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   529
          Section 2811--Clarification of Exceptions to Congressional
            Reporting Requirements for Certain Real Property
            Transactions.............................................   529
          Section 2812--Authority to Lease Non-Excess Property of
            Military Departments and Defense Agencies................   529
          Section 2813--Modification of Utility System Conveyance
            Authority................................................   529
          Section 2814--Permanent Authority to Purchase Municipal
            Services for Military Installations in the United States.   529
          Section 2815--Defense Access Roads.........................   530
          Section 2816--Protecting Private Property Rights during
            Department of Defense Land Acquisitions..................   530
        Subtitle C--Provisions Related to Guam Realignment...........   530
          Section 2821--Guam Defense Policy Review Initiative Account   530
          Section 2822--Sense of Congress regarding Use of Special
            Purpose Entities for Military Housing Related to Guam
            Realignment..............................................   530
          Section 2823--Sense of Congress Regarding Federal
            Assistance to Guam.......................................   530
          Section 2824--Comptroller General Report Regarding
            Interagency Requirements Related to Guam Realignment.....   530
          Section 2825--Energy and Environmental Design Initiatives
            in Guam Military Construction and Installations..........   531
          Section 2826--Department of Defense Inspector General
            Report Regarding Guam Realignment........................   531
          Section 2827--Eligibility of the Commonwealth of the
            Northern Mariana Islands for Military Base Reuse Studies
            and Community Planning Assistance........................   531
          Section 2828--Prevailing Wage Applicable to Guam...........   531
        Subtitle D--Energy Security..................................   531
          Section 2841--Certification of Enhanced Use Leases for
            Energy-Related Projects..................................   531
          Section 2842--Annual Report on Department of Defense
            Installations Energy Management..........................   531
        Subtitle E--Land Conveyances.................................   532
          Section 2851--Land Conveyance, Former Naval Air Station,
            Alameda, California......................................   532
          Section 2852--Land Conveyance, Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply
            Point, Norwalk California................................   532
          Section 2853--Land Conveyance, Former Naval Station,
            Treasure Island, California..............................   532
          Section 2854--Condition on Lease Involving Naval Air
            Station, Barbers Point, Hawaii...........................   532
          Section 2855--Land Conveyance, Sergeant First Class M.L.
            Downs Army Reserve Center, Springfield, Ohio.............   532
          Section 2856--Land Conveyance, John Sevier Range, Knox
            County, Tennessee........................................   532
          Section 2857--Land Conveyance, Bureau of Land Management
            Land, Camp Williams, Utah................................   532
          Section 2858--Land Conveyance, Army Property, Camp
            Williams, Utah...........................................   533
          Section 2859--Extension of Potomac Heritage National Scenic
            Trail through Fort Belvoir, Virginia.....................   533
        Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   533
          Section 2871--Revised Deadline for Transfer of Arlington
            Naval Annex to Arlington National Cemetery...............   533
          Section 2872--Decontamination and Use of Former Bombardment
            Area on Island of Culebra................................   533
          Section 2873--Acceptance and Use of Gifts for Construction
            of Additional Building at National Museum of the United
            States Air Force, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio..   533
          Section 2874--Establishment of Memorial to American Rangers
            at Fort Belvoir, Virginia................................   533
          Section 2875--Lease Involving Pier on Ford Island, Pearl
            Harbor Naval Base, Hawaii................................   534
          Section 2876--Naming of Health Facility, Fort Rucker,
            Alabama..................................................   534

    TITLE XXIX--ADDITIONAL WAR-RELATED AND EMERGENCY MILITARY
      CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008...............   534
      SUMMARY........................................................   534
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   537
          Section 2901--Authorized Army Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   537
          Section 2902--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   537
          Section 2903--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
            Acquisition Projects.....................................   537
          Section 2904--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
            Land Acquisition Projects................................   537
          Section 2905--Termination of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
            Year 2008 Army Projects for which Funds Were not
            Appropriated.............................................   537

    DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS
        AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.....................................   537

    TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS......   537
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   537
      ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   561
        National Nuclear Security Administration.....................   561
          Overview...................................................   561
          Weapons Activities.........................................   561
            Assesssment of life extension programs...................   561
            Reliable Replacement Warhead.............................   561
            Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility..................   562
            Stockpile Services.......................................   562
              Research and Development Support.......................   562
              Research and Development Certification and Safety......   562
              Pit Manufacturing and Pit Manufacturing Capability.....   562
            Advanced Certification...................................   563
            Engineering Campaign.....................................   563
              Enhanced Surety........................................   563
              Enhanced Surveillance..................................   563
            Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield
              Campaign...............................................   564
            Readiness Campaign--Tritium Readiness....................   564
            Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities...............   564
              Operations of Facilities--Lawrence Livermore National
                Laboratory...........................................   564
              Operations of Facilities--Pantex Plant.................   565
              Operations of Facilities--Y-12.........................   565
            National Nuclear Security Administration nuclear weapons
              transport..............................................   565
            National Nuclear Technical Forensics.....................   566
            Defense Nuclear Security--Operations and Maintenance--
              Physical Security systems--Y-12........................   566
          Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...........................   566
            Nonproliferation and Verification Research and
              Development............................................   567
              Radiation detection technology.........................   568
              Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Capability
                Replacement Laboratory...............................   568
            Nonproliferation and International Security..............   568
              Global Nuclear Energy Partnership......................   568
              Global Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention........   569
            International Nuclear Materials Protection and
              Cooperation............................................   569
              Second Line of Defense.................................   569
            Elimination of Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production........   570
            Fissile Materials Disposition............................   570
              United States Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition....   570
              Russian Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition..........   571
            Global Threat Reduction Initiative.......................   571
            Office of the United States Coordinator for the
                Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction
                Proliferation and Terrorism..........................   572
          Office of the Administrator................................   572
        Environmental and Other Defense Activities...................   572
          Overview...................................................   572
            Defense Environmental Cleanup............................   573
              Defense Environmental Cleanup program funding..........   573
              Federal facility agreement and consent order milestones   573
              Consolidation and disposition of surplus special
                nuclear materials....................................   573
              Coordination of disposition efforts....................   574
              Mound Site Cleanup.....................................   574
              Low-activity waste treatment and disposition at Hanford   575
          Other Defense Activities...................................   575
              Nuclear energy--Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility..   575
          Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal.............................   576
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   576
        Subtitle A--National Security Program Authorizations.........   576
          Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration.....   576
          Section 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup................   576
          Section 3103--Other Defense Activities.....................   576
          Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal...............   576
          Section 3105--Energy Security and Assurance................   576
        Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
          Limitations................................................   576
          Section 3111--Utilization of International Contributions to
            Russian Plutonium Disposition Program....................   576
          Section 3112--Extension of Deadline for Comptroller General
            Report on Department of Energy Protective Force
            Management...............................................   577

    TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD.............   577
      OVERVIEW.......................................................   577
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   577
          Section 3201--Authorization................................   577

    TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................   577
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   577
          Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations..............   577

    TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION..............................   577
      LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   577
          Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal
            Year 2009................................................   577
          Section 3502--Limitation on Export of Vessels Owned by the
            Government of the United States for the Purpose of
            Dismantling, Recycling, or Scrapping.....................   578
          Section 3503--Student Incentive Payment Agreements.........   578
          Section 3504--Riding Gang Member Requirements..............   578
          Section 3505--Maintenance and Repair Reimbursement Program
            for the Maritime Security Fleet..........................   578
          Section 3506--Temporary Program Authorizing Contracts with
            Adjunct Professors at the United States Merchant Marine
            Academy..................................................   579
    Departmental Data................................................   579
      Department of Defense Authorization Request....................   579
    Committee Position...............................................   583
    Communications From Other Committees.............................   583
    Fiscal Data......................................................   592
      Congressional Budget Office Estimate...........................   593
      Congressional Budget Office Mandatory Cost Estimate............   593
      Committee Cost Estimate........................................   595
    Compliance with House Rule XXI...................................   595
    Oversight Findings...............................................   631
    General Performance Goals and Objectives.........................   631
    Constitutional Authority Statement...............................   632
    Statement of Federal Mandates....................................   632
    Record Votes.....................................................   632
    Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............   644
    Additional Views.................................................   645
      Additional views of Duncan Hunter, Jim Saxton, John M. McHugh,
        Terry Everett, Roscoe G. Bartlett, Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,
        Mac Thornberry, Robin Hayes, W. Todd Akin, J. Randy Forbes,
        Joe Wilson, Frank A. LoBiondo, Tom Cole, Rob Bishop, John
        Kline, Phil Gingrey, Mike Rogers, Trent Franks, Bill Shuster,
        Thelma D. Drake, K. Michael Conaway, Doug Lamborn, Robert J.
        Wittman......................................................   645
      Additional views of Jim Marshall, Tom Cole, Rob Bishop, Michael
        Turner.......................................................   649
      Additional views of Rob Bishop.................................   651
      Additional views of Niki Tsongas...............................   654

    110th Congress                                                   Report
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
     2d Session                                                     110-652

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

     DUNCAN HUNTER NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

                                    _______

      May 16, 2008.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
                  State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                    _______

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

                                  R E P O R T

                                 together with

                                ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                            [To accompany H.R. 5658]

                       [Includes committee cost estimate]

        The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
    bill (H.R. 5658) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
    2009 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to
    prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2009,
    and for other purposes, having considered the same, report
    favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill
    as amended do pass.
        The amendments are as follows:
        The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the
    bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the
    reported bill.
        The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment
    to the text of the bill.

                    EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

        The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
    substitute during the consideration of H.R. 5658. The title of
    the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the
    bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as
    amended.

                           PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

        The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
    year 2009 for procurement and for research, development, test
    and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
    year 2009 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working
    capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2009: (a) the
    personnel strength for each active duty component of the
    military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the
    Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed
    forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the
    active and reserve components of the military departments; (4)
    Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel
    and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel
    actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize
    appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for military construction
    and family housing; (6) Authorize emergency appropriations for
    increased costs due to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
    Enduring Freedom; (7) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
    2009 for the Department of Energy national security programs;
    (8) Modify provisions related to the National Defense
    Stockpile; and (9) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
    2009 for the Maritime Administration.

                RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS

        The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The
    bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts
    provide budget authority. The bill addresses the following
    categories in the Department of Defense budget: procurement;
    research, development, test and evaluation; operation and
    maintenance; working capital funds, military personnel; and
    military construction and family housing. The bill also
    addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs and
    the Maritime Administration.
        Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in
    this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
    personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
    the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
    authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.

              SUMMARY OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATIONS IN THE BILL

        The President requested discretionary budget authority of
    $601.4 billion for programs in the jurisdiction of the Armed
    Services Committee for fiscal year 2009. Of this amount, $515.4
    billion was requested for ``base'' Department of Defense
    programs, $70 billion was requested as a ``bridge fund'' to
    cover costs of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
    Freedom for the first several months of fiscal year 2009, and
    $16.0 billion was requested for Department of Energy national
    security programs and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
    Board.
        The committee recommends an overall discretionary
    authorization of $601.4 billion including $70.0 billion for war
    operations. The committee authorization is $232.7 million less
    than the President's request for the Department of Defense and
    an equal amount higher for the Department of Energy.
        The following table summarizes the committee's recommended
    discretionary authorizations by appropriation account and
    compares these amounts to the President's request.

                          BUDGET AUTHORITY IMPLICATION

        The President's total request for the national defense
    budget function (050) in fiscal year 2009 is $612.5 billion, as
    estimated by the Congressional Budget Office. In addition to
    funding for programs addressed in this bill, the total 050
    request includes discretionary funding for national defense
    programs not in the committee's jurisdiction, discretionary
    funding for programs that do not require additional
    authorization in fiscal year 2009, and mandatory programs.
        The fiscal year 2009 Concurrent Resolution on the Budget
    (H. Con. Res. 312) as passed by the House provides recommended
    levels of spending on national defense in three categories:
    national defense discretionary, national defense discretionary
    and mandatory, and overseas deployments and other activities.
    The fiscal year 2009 concurrent resolution recommendation for
    national defense equals the President's request.
        The following table shows amounts authorized in the bill
    compared to amounts recommended by the budget resolution for
    national defense.

                        RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

        H.R. 5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2009, is a key mechanism through which the Congress
    of the United States fulfills one of its primary
    responsibilities as mandated in Article I, Section 8 of the
    Constitution of the United States which grants Congress the
    power to raise and support an Army; to provide and maintain a
    Navy; and to make rules for the government and regulation of
    the land and naval forces. Rule X of the House of
    Representatives provides jurisdiction over the Department of
    Defense generally, and over the military application of nuclear
    energy, to the House Committee on Armed Services. The committee
    includes in this Act the large majority of the findings and
    recommendations resulting from its oversight activities in the
    current year, as informed by the experience gained over the
    previous decades of the committee's existence.
        The committee remains steadfast in its continued and
    unwavering support for the men and women of the armed forces,
    the civilian employees of the Department of Defense (DOD), and
    the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security
    Administration. The armed forces continue to be deeply engaged
    in a number of ongoing military operations around the world,
    most significantly, the wars in the Islamic Republic of
    Afghanistan and the Republic of Iraq. The committee is deeply
    committed to including in this Act a full authorization for the
    funding required to restore the readiness of our military;
    sustain and improve the armed forces; enhance the quality of
    life of military service members; and properly safeguard the
    national security of the United States.
        The committee's recommendations for H.R. 5658 are focused
    first and foremost on readiness, as was the case with the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. After
    more than six years at war and with the recent increase in
    operational tempo associated with the surge of military forces
    to Iraq, the strain of ongoing military operations is taking an
    especially heavy toll on the Department of Defense. DOD's
    reports on the state of readiness of our ground forces remain
    highly concerning, especially those of the National Guard but
    increasingly also those of units in the active duty force
    slated for near-term deployment. Recent tours of duty of an
    extended length in addition to the harsh environments in which
    military operations occur have led to exceptional wear and tear
    on military service members and their families, and on the
    equipment of the Army and Marine Corps. In this Act, the
    committee attempts to address the near-term needs of the armed
    forces first, while remaining mindful of the longer-term needs
    of the Department of Defense.

    Restoring Readiness

        The committee directs nearly $2.0 billion towards unfunded
    readiness initiatives requested by the military services,
    including $932.0 million towards key readiness needs within the
    base defense budget, and over $1.0 billion more for additional
    readiness initiatives in the budget for ongoing military
    operations. The committee focuses these increased
    authorizations on unfunded depot maintenance requirements.

    Taking Care of Service Members and Their Families

        The committee authorizes a pay raise of 3.9 percent, an
    increase of 0.5 percent above the budget request. This increase
    further reduces the gap in pay between the uniformed services
    and the private sector to 2.9 percent. The committee extends
    the prohibition on increasing premiums and co-pays for TRICARE
    recipients and continues to prohibit increasing user fees for
    the TRICARE retail pharmacy program. These recommendations will
    save beneficiaries $1.2 billion in healthcare costs. The
    committee continues to reject the philosophy that the only way
    to control health care cost growth is to dramatically raise
    fees in order to discourage beneficiaries from seeking care or
    participating in TRICARE.

    Increasing Capabilities for Operations in Afghanistan

        The committee believes that Afghanistan is the primary
    front in the war on terror and must remain a top priority. To
    that end, the committee authorizes several provisions to
    increase our military and civilian capabilities in that
    country. The committee requires a report on possible
    modifications to the command and control structure for
    Afghanistan to better coordinate military operations and
    achieve unity of command. The committee also requires the
    Department to clearly display any funding requested for U.S.
    operations and other activities in Afghanistan in future budget
    requests, a central recommendation of the Afghanistan Study
    Group that will enable the committee to conduct the necessary
    level of oversight of funding for Afghanistan.

    Requiring Burden Sharing in Iraq

        The committee believes that the time has come to begin
    shifting the burden for funding for many reconstruction
    activities that have been primarily paid for by the Department
    of Defense out of the Commanders' Emergency Response Program
    (CERP) and the Iraq Security Forces Fund (ISFF) to the
    Government of Iraq. The Government of Iraq is unlikely to build
    the capacity to perform these tasks until at least some portion
    of the work, and the responsibility for funding it, has been
    shared. For this reason, the committee requires the Department
    to submit a report detailing how Iraq's increasing revenue is
    being included in calculating the funding request for CERP, and
    also requires more burden-sharing with Iraq by tying amounts
    for reconstruction under CERP to Iraqi contributions.
    Additionally, the Committee authorizes $1 billion, half of the
    original budget request, for training and support of the Iraqi
    Security Forces and prohibits any of those funds from being
    used for the construction or renovation of infrastructure.

    Improving Interagency Coordination

        The committee believes that the way the federal government
    currently sets, coordinates, and executes its national security
    policy suffers from a lack of dependable cooperation among
    federal agencies. There are many efforts across the federal
    government to improve the interagency system, but the committee
    believes the task cannot be accomplished in a single year. In
    this bill, the committee takes steps towards improving that
    cooperation, particularly as it pertains to stability
    operations, Provincial Reconstruction Teams, and strategic
    communications. The committee further intends to work with the
    House Committee on Foreign Affairs to pass significant
    legislation enhancing the ability of the Department of Defense
    and the Department of State to better coordinate in the
    fulfillment of their joint responsibilities for matters of
    national security.

    Oversight and Accountability

        Oversight of contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan remains a
    central activity of the committee. The committee includes
    several recommendations of the Commission on Army Acquisition
    and Program Management in Expeditionary Operations, commonly
    known as the Gansler Commission, in this Act. These
    recommendations primarily relate to the composition, quantity,
    and quality of the acquisition workforce and the committee is
    committed to continuing recent efforts to enhance funding and
    authorities for this workforce. The National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 included the Acquisition
    Improvement and Accountability Act of 2007. In addition to
    providing oversight to the implementation of that Act within
    the Department of Defense, the committee intends to work with
    the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to extend many
    acquisition reforms enacted for the Department of Defense to
    all federal agencies.

    Balancing Near and Longer-Term Military Capabilities

        The committee made significant adjustments in the areas of
    procurement and research, development, test, and evaluation in
    an effort to balance the urgent near-term requirements of the
    Department of Defense against longer-term requirements.
    Adjustments that the committee made in this area were focused
    on delays in programs, or portions of programs, not scheduled
    to field equipment for five or more years, while transferring
    funding to the highest priority warfighting priorities in the
    ground forces, such as funding for combatant commander
    requirements and for procurement for the National Guard and for
    the reserves. The committee took steps to reverse the decline
    in the Navy's fleet by adding funding for construction of the
    tenth San Antonio class LPD-17 ship and adding funding to begin
    construction of two Virginia class submarines per year starting
    in 2010. Additionally, the committee took steps to address
    concerns about aging aircraft and the operational tempo of the
    Department's strategic mobility aircraft fleet by adding
    funding for 15 additional C-17 aircraft.

                                    HEARINGS

        Committee consideration of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 results from hearings
    that began on January 17, 2008, and that were completed on
    April 24, 2008. The full committee conducted 16 sessions. In
    addition, a total of 27 sessions were conducted by 6 different
    subcommittees on various titles of the bill.

                DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION

                              TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

                                    OVERVIEW

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $102.7
    billion for procurement. This represents no change from the
    amount authorized for fiscal year 2008.
        The committee recommends authorization of $102.7 billion,
    and increase of $17.6 million from the fiscal year 2009
    request.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    procurement program are identified in the table below. Major
    issues are discussed following the table.

                           Aircraft Procurement, Army

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $5.0
    billion for Aircraft Procurement, Army. The committee
    recommends authorization of $4.9 billion, a decrease of $97.1
    million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Aircraft Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Armed reconnaissance helicopter

        The budget request contained $358.8 million for procurement
    and $80.0 million for advance procurement of the Armed
    Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH).
        The committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, cited
    ARH program execution difficulties, noted a projected doubling
    of aircraft unit costs, and recommended that the ARH program be
    terminated and a new source selection initiated, to allow more
    competitors to compete for a new ARH program.
        The ARH program was subsequently restructured, with $174.6
    million being authorized and appropriated for the procurement
    of 10 ARH aircraft for fiscal year 2008. The committee notes
    that:
              (1) The unit cost estimate for the 28 ARH aircraft
            requested in fiscal year 2009 has increased 97 percent
            over the unit cost estimate for fiscal year 2009
            included in the fiscal year 2008 budget request;
              (2) The current cost estimate has not been validated
            by the Defense Acquisition Board;
              (3) The production decision for 10 ARH aircraft in
            fiscal year 2008 has not been made;
              (4) No testing has been accomplished on a production
            representative ARH;
              (5) A Limited User Test has been added to the program
            for March 2009, nine months after the currently
            scheduled production decision;
              (6) A year-over-year production rate increase of 50
            percent over the prior year's production rate is
            standard acquisition practice;
              (7) The fiscal year 2009 request of 28 aircraft is
            180 percent greater than the fiscal year 2008 program
            of 10 aircraft; and
              (8) The production decision will be delayed from June
            2008, until at least April 2009.
        The committee believes that a budget request for 28
    aircraft is not warranted and recommends $229.0 million for
    procurement and $43.8 million for advance procurement, a
    reduction of $129.8 million and $36.2 million, respectively,
    for procurement of 15 ARH aircraft and advance procurement of
    23 ARH aircraft. The committee also recommends a provision,
    section 114 of this Act, that limits fiscal year 2009
    expenditures pending the results of the Limited User Test.

    Compact aircraft support cart for Army National Guard rotorcraft

        The budget request contained $28.1 million for aviation
    ground power units, but the request did not contain funds for
    compact aircraft support carts for Army National Guard (ARNG)
    aviation units.
        The ARNG must provide emergency domestic and homeland
    security support in addition to supporting ARNG overseas
    operations. Availability of lightweight, compact ground power
    units would provide the ARNG with important dual-use
    capability, which is currently too heavy and immobile to be
    quickly deployed.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million for
    compact aircraft support carts for ARNG rotorcraft.

    UH-60A to UH-60L helicopter upgrade

        The budget request contained $10.9 million for utility
    helicopter modifications, but the request did not contain funds
    for recapitalization and conversion of UH-60A to UH-60L
    helicopters as part of a UH-60A upgrade program.
        The committee notes the prior year funding to complete the
    non-recurring engineering for a UH-60A to UH-60L upgrade, which
    would primarily apply to Army National Guard helicopters,
    resulting in significantly increased reliability, reduction in
    operating costs, and increased capability.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for
    the upgrade of UH-60As to the UH-60L configuration.

                           Missile Procurement, Army

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $2.2
    billion for Missile Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
    authorization of $2.2 billion, a decrease of $10.0 million, for
    fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Missile Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
    following the table.

                            Item of Special Interest

    Guided multiple launch rocket system

        The budget request contained $247.2 million for procurement
    of 1,938 rockets for the guided multiple launch rocket system
    (GMLRS).
        The committee notes that there are several significant
    pending foreign military sales contracts for this system that
    should allow for savings due to increased quantities of rockets
    in production.
        The committee recommends $237.2 million, a decrease of
    $10.0 million, for procurement of GMLRS rockets.

            Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $3.7
    billion for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles,
    Army. The committee recommends authorization of $3.5 billion, a
    decrease of $147.9 million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
    program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the
    Army request are discussed following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Army vehicle modernization plans

        The committee is concerned that the Army's current plan to
    field, maintain, and continuously modernize three separate
    fleets of ground combat vehicles, in addition to replacing much
    of its wheeled vehicle fleet, is unaffordable in the near- and
    mid-term and could greatly increase operational support costs
    in the long-term.
        Today, the Army supports two families of ground combat
    vehicles: the heavy mechanized force with M1 Abrams tanks, M2
    Bradley fighting vehicles, and M113 support vehicles; and the
    separate Stryker family of vehicles. In addition, the Army is
    designing a third set of ground combat vehicles for the Future
    Combat Systems (FCS) program that would begin fielding in
    fiscal year 2015. While the Army plans to replace some heavy
    brigade combat team sets of equipment with FCS vehicles, its
    current plan would only replace 15 of 31 heavy brigade sets by
    2029, requiring a long-term effort to continuously upgrade the
    M1/M2 fleet and the Stryker family of vehicles, both of which
    would remain in the Army's inventory for an indefinite period.
        The committee notes that based on historic examples, plans
    to modernize and procure new versions of any one of these
    fleets will prove expensive. The cost of doing so for all three
    fleets at the same time could require funding far in excess of
    likely Army procurement funding in the fiscal year 2010 to
    fiscal year 2020 period. The committee notes that during this
    same time period, the Army also plans to procure major elements
    of a new tactical wheeled vehicle fleet, including replacement
    of the high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle with the
    joint light tactical vehicle. In addition to procurement costs,
    the committee is concerned that the cost to the Army of the
    equipment, personnel, repair parts, and industrial base
    maintenance necessary to support three families of ground
    combat vehicles, in addition to the wheeled vehicle fleet, will
    further reduce Army funding available for other priorities.
        The committee supports the Army's overall transformation
    goals and the desired ground vehicle capabilities promised by
    the FCS program. Although the committee encourages the Army to
    accelerate mature capabilities when practical, acceleration
    efforts or program restructures should not pose additional risk
    to efforts to improve current force platforms. Upgrades to
    existing ground vehicles should continue until replacement
    vehicles are properly tested and proven to be more lethal and
    survivable than the vehicles they are intended to replace.
        The committee supports low-risk approaches to increasing
    the capability of ground combat systems, such as upgrading the
    M1 Abrams tank, M2 Bradley fighting vehicle, M109A6 Paladin,
    and Stryker families of vehicles. The committee is less
    inclined to support a plan that would significantly reduce
    funding for these platforms (in the expectation of their
    replacement) with FCS vehicles in the near- to mid-term, which
    the committee believes would be a high-risk approach given the
    technological and integration challenges faced by the FCS
    program. However, the committee notes that some current
    vehicles, such as the M113 family of vehicles, have
    requirements significantly less demanding than the M1 Abrams,
    M2 Bradley, and M109A6 Paladin in terms of combat capability,
    therefore the committee could support replacement of the M113
    family with FCS or Stryker vehicles.
        The committee urges the Army, as part of its fiscal year
    2010 budget review and the upcoming quadrennial defense review,
    to reexamine the proper mix of brigade combat teams and ground
    combat vehicles to ensure that the Army can adequately
    modernize and support its future family of ground combat
    systems under realistic future budget assumptions.

    Small arms acquisition strategy

        The committee expects the military services to work through
    the joint acquisition process to develop and adequately
    resource a joint long-term competitive acquisition strategy for
    small arms. The committee expects that any future acquisition
    program for a next-generation handgun and next-generation
    carbine would be conducted through a full and open competitive
    process. The committee strongly encourages the Department to
    acquire the technical data rights for any approved and
    contracted solution.
        The committee is also aware the Air Force is in the process
    of generating a requirement for a next-generation, modular
    handgun system. The committee would discourage any obligation
    of funds towards this program until the Joint Requirements
    Oversight Council (JROC) has approved this requirement as part
    of a joint service small arms acquisition strategy. The
    committee understands the Army is the executive agent for small
    arms procurement and should maintain that executive agency. The
    committee believes the military services should work closely
    together in developing new small arms requirements and would
    encourage the JROC to expeditiously review these requirements.

    Stryker mobile gun system production delay

        The budget request contained $1.2 billion for 119 new
    Stryker vehicles and upgrades to existing Stryker vehicles. Of
    this amount, $445.8 million was requested for procurement of 79
    Stryker mobile gun system (MGS) vehicles.
        The committee notes that obligation of funds to procure
    Stryker MGS vehicles is restricted by section 117 the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181). The committee is concerned that the Secretary of the Army
    has not provided the certification required by section 117 to
    lift the restriction on obligation of funds, and that the
    Secretary of Defense has not exercised the waiver authority
    provided in the same section. The committee understands that
    failure to provide the required certification or exercise of
    the waiver will delay the production and delivery of Stryker
    MGS vehicles, requiring adjustment of requested funding. In
    addition, the committee notes that due to denial of a
    reprogramming request that the Army has identified $33.0
    million of the requested fiscal year 2009 funding as excess.
        The committee recommends $1.0 billion, a decrease of $155.8
    million, for Stryker vehicle procurement. The committee expects
    the Army to only reduce funding for Stryker MGS production and
    to prioritize Stryker vehicle survivability upgrades with the
    funds provided.

                        Procurement of Ammunition, Army

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $2.3
    billion for Procurement of Ammunition, Army. The committee
    recommends authorization of $2.3 billion, an increase of $19.0
    million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Procurement of Ammunition, Army program are identified in the
    table below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
    following the table.

                            Item of Special Interest

    XM982 precision guided extended range artillery projectile

        The budget request contained $34.2 million for Excalibur
    XM982 precision guided extended range artillery projectiles.
        The committee notes the Excalibur I-A projectile has been
    successfully fielded in limited quantities to Operation Iraqi
    Freedom in response to an urgent operational need from theater
    and is exceeding expectations. The committee believes that
    additional funds would allow for the acceleration of production
    of this critical high demand/low density projectile, as well as
    to help stabilize the future procurement strategy which in turn
    should create cost savings based on economies of scale. The
    committee recommends the realignment of $15.0 million from PE
    64814A to increase low-rate initial production of Excalibur
    XM982 projectiles.
        Therefore, the committee recommends $49.2 million, an
    increase of $15.0 million, to continue to accelerate production
    and fielding of Excalibur XM982 projectiles.

                            Other Procurement, Army

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $11.4
    billion for Other Procurement, Army. The committee recommends
    authorization of $11.2 billion, a decrease of $166.1 million,
    for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Other Procurement, Army program are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Army enterprise resource planning systems

        The committee is concerned about duplication of effort
    within the Army regarding implementation of multiple enterprise
    resource planning (ERP) systems. The committee believes that
    the Army should work towards consolidating their business and
    logistics transformation efforts to create an integrated
    business environment. These programs should focus on
    identifying and eliminating redundancy among programs to reduce
    costs and accelerate fielding.
        The committee believes the Army needs to establish a strong
    governance structure based on well-defined metrics of success.
    This governance structure should identify elements that are
    common across the programs and enforce a single coherent
    strategy with a synchronized master schedule. The programs
    should be restructured to allocate functionality in a manner
    that provides seamless integration of end-to-end business
    processes within a single ERP. The financial processes and data
    should be implemented in the same instance as the associated
    business practices. Asset accountability and financial
    accounting for an item should exist only in one ERP
    instantiation, otherwise there is no value-added to having an
    enterprise solution. The emphasis should be on adoption of
    common process configurations across the multiple numbers of
    ERP systems, aimed at eliminating the maximum number of legacy
    systems.
        The committee recognizes that taking such actions will have
    an impact on the ability of these programs to execute funds in
    a timely fashion. The committee supports any associated pause
    in these programs that may be necessary in order for a solution
    that achieves the goals outlined above.

    Counterfire radars

        The budget request contained $107.1 million for 14 EQ-36
    counterfire radar systems.
        The committee notes that the amended fiscal year 2008
    budget request for ongoing military operations contained $174.0
    million for 12 EQ-36 systems to meet part of a theater
    operational needs statement. As a result, the full amount
    requested in fiscal year 2009 is not needed to complete the
    theater requirement for EQ-36 systems.
        The committee recommends $60.4 million, a decrease of $46.7
    million, for EQ-36 counterfire radar systems.

    Defense Advanced GPS Receivers

        The budget request contained $72.1 million for acquisition
    of 30,051 Defense Advanced GPS Receivers (DAGRs).
        The committee is aware that the Army has an unfunded
    requirement for additional DAGRs beyond those currently
    programmed in the budget request for Army National Guard units
    deployed in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
    Freedom. Additional funding for DAGR procurement should reduce
    the cost of each unit and increase the number of units
    available for deployment to warfighters.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for
    procurement of an additional 3,000 DAGRs.

    Interoperable radios for Texas Army National Guard disaster response

        The budget request contained $105.3 million for automated
    data processing equipment.
        The committee notes that standard two-way radios are a
    critical asset for the Army National Guard in domestic
    emergency response situations. The committee also notes that
    this equipment could improve interagency coordination and
    synchronization in such situations while assuring that the Army
    National Guard can better command and control units when
    operating in support of civilian agencies.
        The committee recommends $106.3 million, an increase of
    $1.0 million, for procurement of standard two-way radios for
    the Texas Army National Guard.

    Multi-temperature refrigerated container system

        The budget request contained $70.8 million for field
    feeding equipment, but contained no funds to procure additional
    Multi-Temperature Refrigerated Container Systems (MTRCS).
        MTRCS is a next generation refrigeration system that would
    provide the capability to transport and store both refrigerated
    and frozen products in a single container. The committee
    recognizes this capability would minimize transportation
    requirements and improve upon space utilization. The committee
    notes this capability would benefit subsistence units and
    medical units.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.2 million to
    procure additional MTRCS.

    Non-system training device program

        The budget request contained $218.6 million to continue the
    non-system training device (NSTD) program, but included no
    funds to procure the following NTSD programs: Call for Fire II/
    Joint Fires and Effects Trainer Systems (JFETS), combat skills
    simulation systems for the Ohio National Guard (ARNG), combined
    arms collective training facility instrumentation upgrades,
    Future Soldier Trainer training systems for the Texas ARNG,
    immersive group simulation virtual training systems for the
    Hawaii ARNG, Virtual Interactive Combat Environment (VICE)
    systems for the New Jersey ARNG, urban assault course
    instrumentation upgrades for the Tennessee ARNG, virtual convoy
    operation trainers for the Kentucky ARNG, and combat skills
    marksmanship trainers.
        The Army's NTSD program is an initiative to introduce
    realistic and effective training devices into individual and
    unit training settings. The committee understands there is an
    emphasis on training military personnel in urban operations and
    asymmetric tactical situations similar to those being
    experienced by soldiers in Operation Enduring Freedom and
    Operation Iraqi Freedom. The committee supports this initiative
    and believes these programs could improve soldier
    survivability.
        The committee recommends $247.0 million for non-system
    training devices for a total increase of $28.4 million,
    including: an increase of $4.0 million for JFETS; $4.7 million
    for combat skills training systems for the Ohio ARNG; $4.0
    million for combined arms collective training instrumentation
    upgrades; $3.0 million for Future Soldier Trainer training
    systems for the Texas ARNG; $4.5 million for immersive group
    simulation virtual training systems for the Hawaii ARNG; $2.0
    million for VICE systems for the New Jersey ARNG; $1.8 million
    for urban assault course instrumentation upgrades for the
    Tennessee ARNG; $1.5 million for virtual convoy operation
    trainers for the Kentucky ARNG; and $3.0 million for combat
    skills marksmanship trainers.

    Operations center technology

        The committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    contained an item of special interest urging the Army, Navy and
    Marine Corps to seek common opportunities among the services to
    procure, where possible, common command post equipment in order
    to reduce the unit cost of each system and to improve
    interoperability.
        The committee recognizes the potential success of the
    Navy's Deployable Joint Command and Control (DJC2) system which
    provides two additional networks, one top secret and one
    unclassified for use by non-governmental organizations, which
    are not provided by the Army and Marine Corps command and
    control tools. Furthermore, the DJC2 system is fully certified
    for interoperability, information assurance, transportability,
    and has completed security, environmental and electromagnetic
    interference testing.
        The committee encourages the Army and Marine Corps to
    assess the potential for DJC2 to meet their requirements for
    tactical operations centers and report back to the committee on
    those findings.

    Profiler meteorological system

        The budget request contained $12.5 million for eight
    Profiler meteorological systems.
        The committee notes that funding for the Profiler program
    increased from $24.7 million in fiscal year 2007 to $88.8
    million in fiscal year 2008. Due to limited production capacity
    available, the committee is concerned that the full amount
    requested in fiscal year 2009 will face production challenges.
        The committee recommends $5.0 million, a decrease of $7.5
    million, for Profiler systems. The committee expects the Army
    to fully fund the necessary fielding support activities with
    the remaining funding, and defer procurement of the eight
    systems to fiscal year 2010.

    Single channel ground and airborne radio system

        The budget request contained $84.9 million for Single
    Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) radios and
    fielding support.
        The committee notes that the Army significantly reduced its
    acquisition objective for SINCGARS radios after the budget
    request was received, and that $175.0 million of remaining
    fiscal year 2007 funding and fiscal year 2008 requested funding
    of $649.6 million is sufficient to procure the Army's revised
    acquisition objective and provide radio fielding support.
        The committee also notes that, while the SINCGARS program
    is currently an Acquisition Category (ACAT) III program,
    funding provided for SINCGARS procurement over the past four
    fiscal years is well above the Department of Defense threshold
    for classification of a program as an ACAT I activity. The
    committee urges the Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition,
    Technology and Logistics, to review the status of the SINCGARS
    program and determine whether or not it should be managed as an
    ACAT I program if the Army intends to continue to acquire
    SINCGARS radios beyond fiscal year 2008.
        The committee recommends no funding for SINCGARS
    procurement, a decrease of $84.9 million.

    Tactical operations centers

        The budget request contained $196.2 million for tactical
    operations center (TOC) equipment and fielding support.
        The committee notes that funding for the TOC program
    increased from $237.6 million in fiscal year 2007 to $557.6
    million in fiscal year 2008. Due to limited production capacity
    available, the committee is concerned that the full amount
    requested in fiscal year 2009 will face production challenges.
        The committee recommends $147.2 million, a decrease of
    $49.0 million, for TOC equipment and fielding support.

    Tactical wheeled vehicle acquisition strategy

        The committee understands the Army is requesting large
    amounts of funding through emergency supplemental
    appropriations to address immediate, near-term, and future
    tactical wheeled vehicle needs without having articulated a
    long-term acquisition strategy for the composition of the
    tactical wheeled vehicle (TWV) fleets. In addition to the
    thousands of light, medium, and heavy trucks and hundreds of
    armored security vehicles, the committee is aware the Army
    would purchase over 12,000 mine resistant ambush protected
    (MRAP) vehicles by the end of fiscal year 2008 and almost 2,000
    additional Stryker vehicles through fiscal year 2013.
    Concurrently, the Army and the Marine Corps continue to develop
    the joint light tactical vehicle (JLTV), which would perform
    many of the same missions that current up-armored high mobility
    multi-purpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV) and MRAP vehicles now
    perform.
        The committee is aware the Army also plans to procure an
    improved HMMWV, called the evolutionary concept vehicle (ECV),
    that would provide for improvements in payload and protection
    over current up-armored HMMWVs. The committee also understands
    the HMMWV ECV could have only 30 percent commonality with
    current up-armor HMMWVs. The committee supports investments in
    product improvements for TWVs, however, the committee is
    concerned that this lack of commonality could potentially
    categorize the HMMWV ECV as a ``new start'' program and would
    subject the program to full and open competition as required by
    federal acquisition regulations. The committee is concerned
    over whether there could be a potential to prematurely
    accelerate ``point solutions'' for the JLTV program. The
    committee commends the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics for his competitive
    prototyping strategy. The committee encourages the Secretary of
    the Army, as executive agent for the JLTV program, to apply
    this policy to JLTV.
        Given the increasing diverse mix of vehicle configurations,
    fleet composition requirements, potential fiscal constraints
    and competing priorities in Future Year Defense Programs the
    committee strongly encourages the Army to articulate a long-
    term acquisition and sustainment strategy for its TWV fleet
    that would maximize resources and capability, as well as
    minimize duplication of effort. The committee encourages the
    Army to reference the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163) and work jointly with the
    Marine Corps in developing this strategy and consider cost
    reduction strategies, reliability, and maintainability
    improvement initiatives.
        The committee is concerned that currently planned single-
    year contract awards could be extremely costly for the Army,
    given the large quantity requirements that continue to exist
    within the modular force and for ``resetting the force'' to
    include the reserve component quantities. The committee notes
    that multi-year procurement contracts could potentially assure
    favorable cost-effective prices for more advanced
    configurations of current TWVs that would incorporate lessons
    learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), as well as ensure
    stability in the industrial base.

    Warfighter information network--tactical

        The budget request contained $287.6 million for procurement
    of Warfighter Information Network--Tactical (WIN-T) equipment.
    Of this amount, $179.8 million was requested for procurement of
    WIN-T Increment 2 low-rate initial production.
        The committee notes that the requested WIN-T Increment 2
    funding procures significantly more sets of equipment than are
    needed for WIN-T Increment 2 testing activities in fiscal year
    2009 and does not account for possible delays or modification
    of WIN-T Increment 2 equipment subsequent to testing.
        The committee recommends $242.6 million, a decrease of
    $45.0 million, for procurement of WIN-T equipment. The
    committee expects the Army to fully fund WIN-T elements, other
    than Increment 2 equipment, requested in this procurement line.

                 Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $496.3
    million for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund.
    The committee recommends transfer of this funding to title XV
    of this Act.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Explosives signatures database

        Improvised explosive devices (IED) continue to be the
    primary cause of American casualties in Operation Iraqi Freedom
    and Operation Enduring Freedom. The committee recognizes that
    the constantly evolving nature of this threat makes it
    difficult to develop technical solutions to counter the IED
    threat. However, since all IEDs make use of explosives, a
    highly desirable but currently elusive goal is the ability to
    chemically detect these explosives from a safe stand-off
    distance. Stand-off detection is a complex problem due, in
    part, to the variety of the explosives used (including home-
    made compositions) and to the changes to chemical signatures
    that occur with exposure to different environments. Although
    the benefits of developing such a detection capability are
    obvious, there is no single database of explosive chemical
    signatures for use by those who are expert in detection
    technologies. The committee believes that the ongoing efforts
    to characterize high-explosive signatures are neither well-
    coordinated nor adequately funded.
        The Joint IED Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) has the
    responsibility to lead, coordinate, and advocate for all
    Department of Defense activities to defeat IEDs and is the
    appropriate organization to lead an effort to develop an
    explosives signatures database. Within funds contained, the
    committee directs the Director of JIEDDO to fund from its
    science and technology budget, at a level no less than $10.0
    million, the following activities:
              (1) Development of a standardized database of
            explosive signatures;
              (2) Development of standard test methods for
            characterizing explosive signatures;
              (3) Collection of existing reliable explosive
            signature data from all national sources; and
              (4) Characterization of explosive signatures for
            which there is no existing data.
        The committee further directs the Director of JIEDDO to
    report to the congressional defense committees on the actions
    taken, including funding, to fulfill these requirements, by
    March 15, 2009.

    Unfunded counter-improvised explosive device requirements and needs

        The committee supports the Department of Defense's (DOD)
    efforts to defeat the threat posed by improvised explosive
    devices (IED), which continue to be the primary cause of
    casualties in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
    Freedom and have been used as a weapon of asymmetric warfare
    and terror in other parts of the world. To date, Congress has
    provided over $10.0 billion for the Joint IED Defeat
    Organization (JIEDDO) to lead, advocate for, and coordinate all
    DOD counter-IED efforts. Despite the magnitude of this effort,
    the committee understands that there may be useful IED
    countermeasures that have not been funded for a number of
    reasons: some IED countermeasures may currently be a low
    priority for the U.S. Central Command; there may be
    insufficient funding; or the technologies may be immature.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Director of JIEDDO to
    submit a report by March 15, 2009, to the congressional defense
    committees that describes in detail unfunded counter-IED
    requirements and needs, including any plans to address the
    unfunded requirements and needs in future budgets.

                           Aircraft Procurement, Navy

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $14.7
    billion for Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The committee
    recommends authorization of $14.6 billion, a decrease of $89.5
    million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Electronic warfare system core depot development

        The budget request contained $66.4 million for common
    electronic counter-measures equipment (ECM), but contained no
    funds for establishing a core depot maintenance capability for
    the ALQ-214 ECM system employed on Navy and Marine Corps
    tactical aircraft.
        The committee notes that depot maintenance for the ALQ-214
    ECM system is experiencing a 180- to 240-day repair turnaround
    time. Establishing an organic depot maintenance capability
    should reduce the turnaround time to 30 to 45 days. The
    committee understands that section 2464 of title 10, United
    States Code, provides that a core depot maintenance capability
    must be established no later than four years after initial
    operational capability (IOC) is achieved for mission-essential
    weapons systems designated by the Secretary of Defense. The
    committee understands that IOC was achieved for the ALQ-214 ECM
    system in March 2006, and that core depot maintenance
    capability should be established by March 2010.
        The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for
    common electronic counter-measures equipment to begin
    establishment of core depot maintenance capability for the ALQ-
    214 ECM system.

    F/A-18E/F and EA-18G

        The budget request contained $1.6 billion for procurement
    of 22 EA-18G aircraft and $1.9 billion for procurement of 23 F/
    A-18E/F aircraft. The EA-18G is an electronic attack aircraft
    designed to replace the EA-6B, and the F/A-18E/F is a strike
    fighter designed for fighter escort, fleet air defense,
    interdiction, and close air support missions. The EA-18G and F/
    A-18E/F are produced on the same production line.
        The committee notes that a foreign military sales customer
    has committed to the procurement of 24 F/A-18E/F aircraft in
    fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The committee understands that this
    increase in production will lower unit costs and generate a
    total savings of $182.0 million for the 85 EA-18Gs and F/A-18E/
    Fs to be procured in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The committee
    believes that $90.0 million in savings in fiscal year 2009
    exceeds requirements for the procurement of EA-18Gs and F/A-
    18E/Fs in fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommends $1.6 billion, a decrease of $45.0
    million, for procurement of 22 EA-18G aircraft; and $1.8
    billion, a decrease of $45.0 million, for procurement of 23 F/
    A-18E/F aircraft.

    Navy helicopter force structure

        The committee believes that vertical lift remains an
    essential capability for the Navy to meet the unique demands of
    operations in the maritime environment. However, with the
    retirement of the MH-53E beginning in 2016, the Navy will lose
    all vertical lift capability beyond that provided by the MH-60
    series. Moreover, the committee notes that the aging MH-53E
    remains one of the most expensive aircraft to operate and
    maintain in the Navy inventory and is undergoing engine
    upgrades to improve operational availability.
        Further, the committee is aware of several mission areas in
    which a heavy medium-lift or light heavy-lift helicopter could
    provide substantial utility, such as airborne mine
    countermeasures, combat search and rescue, special operations,
    vertical onboard delivery, airborne re-supply/logistics for sea
    basing, maritime homeland defense or humanitarian relief
    missions.
        The committee notes that in testimony before the committee
    on March 6, 2008, the Chief of Naval Operations stated that
    U.S. Fleet Forces Command is currently performing a study of
    the Navy's vertical lift requirements to inform planning for
    the fiscal year 2010 budget request. The committee supports
    this effort and requests that the Secretary of the Navy include
    an assessment of the potential benefits of a new type/model/
    series helicopter that is larger than the H-60 in such an
    analysis. The committee recommends that the Secretary include
    consideration of the mission areas referenced above and such
    factors as range, payload, time on station, manpower, and
    operation and maintenance costs. The committee directs the
    Secretary to submit a copy of this study to the congressional
    defense committees by November 30, 2008.

                           Weapons Procurement, Navy

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $3.6
    billion for Weapons Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
    authorization of $3.6 billion, the requested amount, for fiscal
    year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Weapons Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table
    below.

                 Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $1.1
    billion for Procurement of Ammunition, Navy & Marine Corps. The
    committee recommends authorization of $1.1 billion, the
    requested amount, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps program are
    identified in the table below.

                       Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $12.7
    billion for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. The committee
    recommends authorization of $12.9 billion, an increase of
    $185.0 million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program are identified in the
    table below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Aircraft carrier force structure

        The committee notes that section 5062 of title 10, United
    States Code, requires the Department of Defense to maintain 11
    active aircraft carriers. The committee is aware that the
    Department of Defense requested legislative relief to waive
    this statutory requirement for the period between the proposed
    decommissioning of the USS Enterprise (CVN-65) and the initial
    operating capability of the USS Ford (CVN-78). The committee is
    concerned with the position of the Department of Defense,
    especially since the Department recently reached a compromise
    with Congress to reduce the statutory requirement from 12
    aircraft carriers to 11 in section 1011 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364). Moreover, the committee notes that the period
    between the proposed decommissioning of CVN-65 and the initial
    operating capability of CVN-78 will be a minimum of 33 months
    and may be more than 4 years, depending on the construction
    progress of the first-of-class CVN-78 and its post-
    commissioning testing and evaluation period.
        Consequently, the committee rejects the request of the
    Department to allow a waiver to section 5062 of title 10,
    United States Code, for the purpose of retiring CVN-65 in
    fiscal year 2013. However, the committee understands that there
    are significant schedule and cost implications associated with
    a depot maintenance period which would be necessary to maintain
    CVN-65 in active service after fiscal year 2013 and that, even
    with an overhaul, the CVN-65 has limited nuclear fuel life.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
    to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on
    the cost and potential schedule implications of either
    returning USS Kennedy (CV-67) to service or retaining USS Kitty
    Hawk (CV-63) in service during the period between the scheduled
    retirement of CVN-65 and the commissioning of CVN-78. The
    committee directs the Secretary to include in the report the
    number and location of dry-docks in United States shipyards,
    both public and private, which have the capacity to dock and
    make repairs to either CV-63 or CV-67.
        The report should be submitted within 90 days after the
    date of enactment of this Act, but in any event not later than
    February 3, 2009.

    Attack submarine force structure requirements

        The committee directs the Secretary of the Defense to
    assess the total number of attack submarines required to
    fulfill the missions of the Department of Defense and to
    support the national defense strategy, as part of the
    Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) conducted in fiscal year 2009
    pursuant to section 118 of title 10, United States Code. Such
    an assessment should be based upon an analysis and
    prioritization of unconstrained attack submarine requirements,
    sorted by mission, provided by the combatant commanders. The
    committee further directs that results of such an assessment be
    included in the report on the quadrennial defense review,
    submitted to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services in accordance with section
    118(d) of title 10, United States Code.

    Service-life extension of SSN-688 Los Angeles class hulls

        The committee understands that the Secretary of the Navy
    has conducted an assessment of the feasibility of extending the
    service life of certain SSN-688 Los Angeles class submarines in
    order to mitigate the projected shortfall in the Navy's attack
    submarine force structure. The committee is encouraged by this
    effort, but notes that the assessment did not explore options
    that would increase the number of attack submarines above 48,
    in the long-term. The committee also notes that the assessment
    did not explore options for limiting deployments or other
    actions that could limit hull fatigue in the near term, in
    order to conserve service life of more Los Angeles class
    submarines over the long-term.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy
    to submit a report which includes an assessment of the
    feasibility and cost of extending the service life of all
    current Los Angeles class submarines. This report should
    explore the options in the near term which would fully utilize
    all available hull life and maximize the total number of attack
    submarines available after 2016. The committee directs the
    Secretary to submit this report within 120 days after the date
    of enactment of this Act.

    U.S. Navy shipbuilding plan

        The committee remains concerned with the totality of the
    Navy shipbuilding plan. The committee is not confident that the
    current mix of planned ship procurement is the most effective
    way to balance the need for quantity versus capability across
    the spectrum of naval requirements. Considering likely budget
    constraints for shipbuilding procurement, it is evident that
    the long-range plan is unaffordable.
        The committee is also concerned with short-term
    affordability. The key to efficient shipbuilding is stability
    in programs and commonality between programs. With stability,
    the shipbuilder can reasonably invest in infrastructure
    improvements for increased efficiency. Commonality allows
    savings in order quantity across programs as well as life-cycle
    savings in maintenance and repair parts. The goal of a 313-ship
    fleet will never be achieved until very difficult decisions are
    made concerning quantity, capability, affordability, and
    stability.
        The committee remains committed to building a capable naval
    force in sufficient quantity to protect the nation's interests.
    This force must consist of major combatant vessels with
    multiple warfighting capabilities. It must also include ships
    with specific roles and missions, from operations in the
    littoral regions, to the projection of power ashore from a sea-
    base. The balance of capabilities within this force and the
    affordability of sustaining this force is the key task before
    both the Navy and Congress throughout the foreseeable future.
        The committee disagrees with the submitted Future Years
    Defense Plan and budget request for: canceling the Amphibious
    Landing Ship-Dock (LPD 17) program at 9 ships; canceling the
    procurement of the 13th and 14th Dry Cargo Ammunition Ships (T-
    AKE); not requesting funding to increase the build rate of
    Virginia class submarines to 2 ships per year starting in 2010;
    and the failure to deliver a coherent strategy for Littoral
    Combat Ship acquisition.
        The committee authorizes a reallocation of funding in the
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy account and the National
    Defense Sealift Fund. The committee recommends: full funding
    for the 10th ship of the LPD 17 class; an increase in advance
    procurement funding for the Virginia class submarine program,
    necessary for the procurement of 2 ships in fiscal year 2010;
    advance procurement for the final 2 ships of the T-AKE class;
    and advance procurement for the construction of DDG 51 class
    destroyers or DDG 1000 class destroyers. The committee notes
    that due to the overall delay in the DDG 1000 destroyer
    program, the Navy would be unable to execute the full funding
    request in fiscal year 2009 for the third ship of the planned
    seven ship class. Additionally, the committee is concerned with
    potential significant cost overruns in the DDG 1000 program and
    considers it prudent to pause the program until technological
    challenges are completely understood.
        The committee authorizes these programs without prejudice
    to any specific program. The committee also understands the
    Navy is strongly considering re-starting the DDG 51 class
    destroyer upgraded with an improved radar system to fill an
    urgent need in ballistic missile defense. The committee would
    only support that decision if the industrial base for surface
    combatant construction is not affected. The committee expects
    the Secretary of Defense, subject to the availability of
    appropriations, to enter into advance procurement and advance
    construction contracts for the construction of surface
    combatants balanced between the two current surface combatant
    shipyards, taking into account workforce challenges still in
    effect on the Gulf Coast due to the lingering economic effects
    of Hurricane Katrina.
        The committee expects the budget submission for fiscal year
    2010 to contain a funding request for the 11th ship of the LPD
    17 class, a two-one-two build strategy (two ships in 2010, one
    ship in 2011, and two ships in 2012 and following years) for
    the Virginia class submarine program, the balance of full
    funding for the 13th T-AKE, and a comprehensive decision on the
    acquisition plan for surface combatants including the plan for
    the Littoral Combat Ship class.
        The committee expects the Navy to solve the capacity and
    capability issues of the surface combatant, amphibious warfare,
    and submarine combatant forces before beginning multiple new
    starts in programs to field the maritime prepositioning force
    (future) (MPF(F)). The committee is supportive of the
    requirement to constitute a seabase with a flotilla of vessels
    from which both combatant and non-combatant operations ashore
    could be launched. However, the committee is not convinced the
    seabase should be composed of non-combatant vessels such as the
    planned MPF aviation ship (MPF LHA) and the MPF landing
    platform ship (MPF MLP). The committee directs the Secretary of
    the Navy, along with the Chief of Naval Operations and the
    Commandant of the Marine Corps, to report to the congressional
    defense committees within 60 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act, on the size and composition of the naval
    amphibious force necessary (without the MPF LHA and MPF MLP
    vessels) to conduct operations from a seabase, with a force
    comprising two marine expeditionary brigades (MEB).

                            Other Procurement, Navy

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $5.5
    billion for Other Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends
    authorization of $5.5 billion, a decrease of $20.9 million, for
    fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Other Procurement, Navy programs are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Boat davit system improvements

        The budget request contained $90.7 million for landing ship
    dock (LSD) mid-life logistics support, but contained no funds
    for modifications to the LSD-41 and LSD-49 ship-class boat
    davit system.
        The committee understands the mid-life replacement for the
    original electro-mechanical double-armed strong back davit has
    been plagued by electronic and mechanical control problems
    which caused the Navy to limit use to only the manual mode.
    Because these ships form the core amphibious assault echelon,
    the operational reliability of the boat davit system is
    imperative for mission success.
        The committee recommends an increase of $1.7 million for
    LSD mid-life logistics support to design and implement
    modifications to existing LSD-41 and LSD-49 boat davit systems.

    CVN propeller replacement program

        The budget request contained $136.2 million in the category
    of items less than $5.0 million, but contained no funds for the
    aircraft carrier propeller replacement program.
        The committee understands that the original propellers on
    the Nimitz class aircraft carriers suffer from significant
    blade erosion caused by cavitation and require refurbishment
    every three to six years. The newly designed propeller is
    resistant to erosion by cavitation and only requires
    refurbishment every 12 years which most closely approximates
    major dry-docking availabilities.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in the
    category of items less than $5.0 million, for the aircraft
    carrier propeller replacement program.

    Jet fuel electric valve actuators

        The budget request contained $136.2 million in the category
    of items less than $5.0 million, but contained no funds for jet
    fuel electric valve actuators for aircraft carriers.
        The committee understands the Navy has authorized an
    upgrade to the jet fuel distribution system on Nimitz class
    aircraft carriers with electric valve actuator technology. The
    committee notes that upgrading jet fuel valves from motor-
    operated to electric-operated valves should improve fuel
    service system safety, improve the reliability of the aircraft
    carrier aviation fueling system, and should reduce excessive
    maintenance costs.
        The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in the
    category, items less than $5.0 million, for installation of jet
    fuel electric valve actuators for aircraft carriers.

    Multi-climate protection system

        The budget request contained $17.7 million for aviation
    life support equipment, but only contained $1.0 million for
    procurement of 621 multi-climate protection (MCP) systems.
        The committee understands the MCP system is an abbreviated
    acquisition program intended to develop a modular protective
    clothing system which provides flame protection, thermal
    protection, and sufficient insulation while reducing heat
    stress and bulk commonly associated with cold weather clothing
    systems. The committee notes that the Navy requirement is for
    25,000 MCP systems but only procured and fielded 6,250 MCP
    systems to date.
        The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million, for
    aviation life support equipment to procure additional MCP
    systems.

    Surface ship SPQ-9B radar improvements

        The budget request contained $9.3 million for SPQ-9B
    radars, but contained no funds to upgrade the radar to detect
    sea-skimmer missiles and low observable threats.
        The committee understands that the SPQ-9B radar provides
    early warning for threats near the horizon during surveillance
    missions and complements the capabilities of the Aegis SPY-1
    radar system. The committee notes there are radar upgrades
    available, but not currently installed, that can: increase the
    probability of the SPQ-9B radar detecting low-observable, sea-
    skimmer missiles; increase the tracking ability for gunfire
    control against surface targets; assist ship control in
    restricted waters; and complement the Aegis SPY-1 radar system
    during surveillance missions.
        The committee recommends $14.7 million, an increase of $5.4
    million, to upgrade the SPQ-9B surface ship radar.

                           Procurement, Marine Corps

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $1.5
    billion for Procurement, Marine Corps. The committee recommends
    authorization of $1.3 billion, a decrease of $216.4 million,
    for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Procurement, Marine Corps program are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Marine Corps request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Abrams tank total integrated engine revitalization program strategy for
            Marine Corps Abrams tanks

        In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
    committee encouraged the Army to adopt the total integrated
    engine revitalization (TIGER) program for Army and Army
    National Guard M1 Abrams tanks. The TIGER program for the M1
    Abrams tank is an integrated engine maintenance program that
    leverages manufacturing improvements, supply chain management
    efficiencies, and condition-based maintenance initiatives to
    increase the service life of the M1 Abrams tank engine from 700
    to 1,400 hours. The committee notes that the Army is currently
    working towards modernizing the Army and Army National Guard
    Abrams fleet with TIGER engines.
        Accordingly, the committee encourages the Commandant of the
    Marine Corps to coordinate with the Chief of Staff of the Army
    to develop and fund a plan that utilizes the TIGER integrated
    engine maintenance program to modernize the entire Abrams
    engine tank fleet, including Marine Corps Abrams tanks, with
    TIGER engines by 2010.

    Chemical biological incident response force

        The budget request contained $6.6 million for the
    procurement of field medical equipment, but contained no funds
    to provide for new command and control or personal protective
    equipment for the Chemical and Biological Incident Response
    Force (CBIRF).
        The committee is concerned that the proliferation of new
    response capabilities for chemical, biological, radiological
    and nuclear (CBRN) events is occurring in an enthusiastic but
    uncoordinated fashion. This is particularly disconcerting as
    the committee believes that this has happened to the detriment
    of the CBIRF, a superb capability within the Marine Corps that
    has existed and matured over the past 10 years.
        The committee reiterates its strong support for section
    1815 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2008 (Public Law 110-181) and urges the Department to also
    include:
              (1) A description of all of the units within the
            active, reserve, and guard that would have a role in
            responding to CBRN attack;
              (2) Specific roles and capabilities for each of these
            units; and
              (3) Current status of each of these units, including
            manpower and equipping.
        The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million for
    the procurement of three Emergency Response Vehicles, as well
    as additional personal protective equipment to replace aging
    systems.

    Marine Corps radio systems

        The budget request contained $95.8 million for Marine Corps
    radio systems.
        The committee supports continued improvements in Marine
    Corps tactical communications capability. However, the
    committee notes that funding for Marine Corps radio systems in
    fiscal year 2007 was $826.1 million and $518.5 million in
    fiscal year 2008, and that funding provided through 2008 will
    procure the Marine Corps identified requirements. The committee
    also notes that there are significant unobligated balances for
    both fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008 due to contract
    delays and production limitations.
        The committee recommends $47.9 million, a decrease of $47.9
    million, for Marine Corps radio systems. The committee urges
    the Marine Corps to pursue any additional needed funding in
    fiscal year 2010.

    Unit operations centers

        The budget request contained $14.9 million for procurement
    of Marine Corps unit operations center equipment.
        The committee notes that $151.1 million was provided for
    unit operations center equipment in fiscal year 2008, and that
    current projections show execution of less than half that
    funding by the end of fiscal year 2008.
        The committee recommends $7.9 million, a decrease of $7.0
    million, for unit operations center procurement.

                        Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $12.7
    billion for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force. The committee
    recommends authorization of $12.6 billion, a decrease of $57.8
    million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
    table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
    discussed following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Air National Guard RC-26B modernization

        The budget request contained $151.9 million for other
    aircraft modifications, but contained no funds to design,
    install, and test one RC-26B aircraft with the block 20
    software and hardware modifications and the beyond-line-of-
    sight (BLOS) data link modification.
        The RC-26B is a low-density, high-demand intelligence,
    surveillance, and reconnaissance platform that can be rapidly
    deployed for operations in the United States and overseas. The
    block 20 hardware and software modifications would allow the
    RC-26B's mission equipment to fully utilize accurate position
    information and the BLOS data link modification would add a
    capability to pass real-time data to ground terminals. The
    committee notes that the Chief of the National Guard Bureau has
    included both the block 20 software and hardware modifications
    and the BLOS data link among his essential 10 equipment
    requirements for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommends $154.9 million for other aircraft
    modifications, an increase of $3.0 million, to design, install,
    and test one RC-26B with the block 20 software and hardware
    modifications and the BLOS data link modification.

    KC-45 aerial refueling aircraft program

        The budget request contained $893.5 million to initiate
    systems design and demonstration to begin replacement of the
    KC-135 aerial refueling fleet, a fleet that averages 47 years
    old. The committee notes that the Air Force has prior year
    appropriations of $421.7 million available for the KC-45
    program.
        The committee supports the Air Force's number one
    acquisition program of tanker recapitalization and understands
    that the ability to aerially refuel aircraft during military
    operations is a critical capability in meeting national
    military strategy objectives.
        The committee includes three provisions in title I of this
    Act, sections 132, 133, and 134. Section 132 would require the
    Secretary of the Air Force to maintain a minimum of 46 KC-135E
    aircraft in Type-1000 storage to alleviate the challenges of
    maintaining the current fleet of KC-135R aircraft due to parts
    obsolescence issues and diminishing manufacturing sources of
    supply. Section 133 would repeal section 135 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
    136), associated the KC-X tanker lease program, which was not
    executed and no longer applies. Section 134 would require the
    Air Force Secretary to submit a report to the congressional
    defense committees by December 1, 2008, that examines the
    processes used to determine KC-X requirements and provides an
    evaluation of very large tanker aircraft as a potential Air
    Force aerial refueling platform.
        The committee also recommends, without prejudice to the KC-
    45 program, a decrease of $61.7 million for advanced
    procurement funding, because advanced procurement funding is
    not required for KC-45 program execution.

    Mission support aircraft

        The budget request contained no funding for C-40 aircraft.
    The Air Force unfunded requirements list contained $370.0
    million for procurement of three C-40 aircraft.
        The committee notes the Air Force has a validated
    operational requirement to provide worldwide air transportation
    for executive branch officials and high-ranking U.S.
    dignitaries as well as other operational support missions. The
    committee understands that in fiscal year 2007, one-third of
    all requests for special mission airlift support aircraft went
    unfilled due to current fleet limitations and performance
    characteristics of the C-9 aircraft. The committee notes that
    the C-9 will be retired from the Air Force inventory in fiscal
    year 2011 and that no planned replacement aircraft exists.
        The committee recommends $88.0 million for procurement of
    one C-40C aircraft to replace one C-9C aircraft, currently at
    Scott AFB, scheduled for retirement in fiscal year 2011.

    Special Operations Command aircraft recapitalization

        The budget request contained $507.7 million for HC-130J and
    MC-130J recapitalization, and $80.0 million for advanced
    procurement for HC-130J and MC-130J in fiscal year 2010. The
    budget request also contained $36.3 million to modify MC-130J
    aircraft to meet requirements for Special Operations Command's
    (SOCOM) MC-130J aircraft to conduct operations in low-
    visibility conditions. The MC-130J will replace Special
    Operations Command's MC-130E and MC-130P fleets.
        The committee notes that the average age for the MC-130E
    and MC-130P fleet is 43 and 40 years, respectively. The
    committee understands that SOCOM has a requirement to field 11
    MC-130J aircraft prior to fiscal year 2012 to maintain adequate
    mission capability. The committee further understands that all
    11 MC-130Js must be funded no later than fiscal year 2010 to
    meet the SOCOM requirement.
        The committee notes that the current MC-130J acquisition
    plan includes a total of eight MC-130J aircraft for Special
    Operations Command in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The committee
    is concerned, however, that this plan may fail to adequately
    meet SOCOM's warfighting requirement, since a total of 11 MC-
    130Js may not be planned for acquisition by fiscal year 2010.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to provide a report to the congressional defense committees on
    the Department of the Air Force's and SOCOM's plan to
    recapitalize the MC-130E and MC-130P fleets with the MC-130J as
    it relates to meeting the SOCOM MC-130J force structure
    requirement. The report shall be provided to the congressional
    defense committees by March 1, 2009.

    Strategic airlift aircraft programs

        The budget request contained $561.9 million for C-5
    aircraft modernization programs. The Air Force Chief of Staff
    included $3.9 billion on the Air Force unfunded priority list
    for procurement of 15 additional C-17 aircraft.
        The committee notes that on September 27, 2007, the
    Secretary of the Air Force notified Congress that the C-5
    Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP)
    experienced a critical Nunn-McCurdy cost growth breach of 48
    percent above the current program acquisition unit cost (PAUC),
    and 68 percent above the original PAUC established in fiscal
    year 2000. The committee notes that on February 14, 2008, the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
    Logistics (USD(AT&L)) certified the C-5 RERP program to
    Congress during the Nunn-McCurdy process. The committee
    understands that USD(AT&L) concluded that a program to perform
    RERP on only 52 C-5B/C aircraft and perform only the Avionics
    Modernization Program on the remaining 59 C-5A aircraft is the
    most cost-effective solution to meet airlift requirements
    contained in the 2005 Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS).
        In written testimony to the Subcommittee on Air and Land
    Forces on March 11, 2008, USD(AT&L) stated that the 2005 MCS
    concluded that a ``fleet of 112 modernized C-5s, provided
    sufficient strategic airlift capacity'' to meet the
    Department's future airlift requirements. However, the
    committee notes that the 2005 MCS actually stated that a fleet
    of ``112 modernized and reliability improved C-5s'' meets the
    Department's strategic airlift requirements. The committee is
    extremely concerned that the newly certified RERP program
    conflicts with the recommendations of the 2005 Mobility
    Capabilities Study that USD(AT&L) states was used as the
    analytical basis for determining C-5 inventory requirements.
        The committee's concern is validated by written testimony
    of the Commander, Air Mobility Command to the Subcommittee on
    Air and Land Forces on April 1, 2008, that states ``the current
    program for 190 C-17s, 52 RERP modified C-5s, and 59 legacy C-
    5As will not quite provide the organic strategic airlift
    capacity of 33.95 million ton miles per day specified by the
    Joint Requirements Oversight Council. Therefore, we remain
    concerned and vigilant that given the dynamic nature of our
    world and the increasing imperative for rapid warfighter
    response, coupled with the fact that our current strategic
    airlift baseline is based upon a three-year old MCS, that we
    have the correct balance.''
        The committee is extremely concerned by the
    shortsightedness of the MCS used by the Department to make
    critical decisions concerning the C-17 production line because
    the MCS did not: take into account the end strength increases
    of 92,000 personnel for the Army and Marine Corps; consider any
    mobility requirements of the Army's Future Combat Systems and
    modularity concepts of employment; consider the fact that the
    Army Manned-Ground Vehicle is too large to be transported by a
    C-130 aircraft; consider the 159 percent over-utilization rate
    of the current fleet of C-17 aircraft; consider the use of C-
    17s in multi-use roles for which the C-17 is being used
    extensively in current operations; have or use historical
    mobility forces operational data in its analysis to verify
    actual mobility requirements and operations.
        The committee understands that the Department is conducting
    the 2008 Mobility Capabilities and Requirements Study (MCRS) to
    determine the appropriate inventory requirements for airlift
    and sealift to meet the National Defense Strategy. The
    committee notes that the estimated completion date of the 2008
    MCRS is May 2009. The committee is extremely disappointed by
    the Department's decision to set a completion date for the
    study one month prior to delivery of the final production C-17
    in June 2009. The committee also notes that the Department's
    2008 MCRS will not be completed in time to inform the
    President's fiscal year 2010 budget request to Congress.
        To compensate for the Department's decision-making and
    planning process concerning strategic airlift production and
    force structure requirements, the committee recommends $3.9
    billion in title XV of this Act for procurement of 15
    additional C-17s. Additionally, the committee strongly
    encourages the Secretary of Defense to program funding for
    additional C-17 aircraft in subsequent budget requests if the
    Department determines during the 2008 MRCS execution process
    that procuring additional C-17 aircraft is required to meet the
    National Defense Strategy. The committee also recommends a
    decrease of $86.7 million to RERP funding due to the
    Department's stated inability to execute this amount in fiscal
    year 2009.
        The committee also includes a provision, section 131, in
    title I of this Act that would allow the Secretary of the Air
    Force to retire C-5 aircraft from the inventory and replace the
    capability with C-17 aircraft if the cost analysis performed is
    prudent in meeting strategic airlift requirements and does not
    significantly increase overall costs above those already
    planned in the out-years.
        The committee understands that the Air Force should have a
    minimum of 299 strategic airlift aircraft in the inventory with
    delivery of the 189th C-17 in June 2009. Consequently, the
    committee understands that no C-5A retirements will occur
    before the delivery of the 189th C-17. Additionally, the
    committee understands that after section 8062(g) of title 10,
    United States Code, was implemented with the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364), the C-17 delivery schedule changed due to
    additional C-17 foreign military sales which will impact the
    Secretary of the Air Force complying with section 8062(g) of
    title 10, United States Code.

                      Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $894.5
    million for Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force. The committee
    recommends authorization of $994.5 million, an increase of
    $40.0 million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force program are identified in
    the table below.

                         Missile Procurement, Air Force

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $5.5
    billion for Missile Procurement, Air Force. The committee
    recommends authorization of $5.5 billion, the requested amount,
    for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Missile Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
    table below.

                          Other Procurement, Air Force

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $16.1
    billion for Other Procurement, Air Force. The committee
    recommends authorization of $16.1 billion, an increase of $6.5
    million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Other Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the
    table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are
    discussed following the table.

                            Item of Special Interest

    General information technology

        The budget request contained $100.1 million for general
    information technologies, but contained no funds for the
    science and engineering lab data integration (SELDI) program,
    or for information modernization for processing with advance
    coating technologies (IMPACT).
        The Air Force Material Command's science and engineering
    lab captures, analyzes, and disseminates lab test data to the
    Department of the Air Force's engineering and system overhaul
    operations. The SELDI program facilitates this mission by
    providing a maintenance and logistics information management
    tool that allows more rapid lab data access. The SELDI program
    also provides accident investigators with immediate access to
    lab results of failed components, enables component failure
    trend analysis, and implements a new acoustic signature sensor
    to ensure the proper chemical composition of materials and
    equipment. The committee understands that the SELDI program has
    provided quantifiable benefits including cost avoidance in
    spare parts configuration discrepancies and elimination of
    unnecessary landing gear overhaul process operations. In the
    committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the committee
    recommended increases for the SELDI program and continues to
    believe its implementation would improve operational aircraft
    readiness, increase flight safety, and reduce support costs.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
    million for this purpose.
        The IMPACT program is working to calibrate, validate, and
    certify the existing thermal spray equipment used in the
    advanced coating systems process and to identify candidate
    parts that could be overhauled with this process. As a result
    of much more stringent permissible exposure limits to chemical
    byproducts of chrome plating processes, Warner Robins Air
    Logistics Center will be required to migrate to a new process
    known as advanced coating systems. In addition to reduced
    chemical exposure, the committee understands that the advanced
    coating systems process will offer improved durability of 40 to
    50 percent, lower life-cycle costs for those components treated
    with this process, and reduced repair processing times by 20 to
    40 percent. In the committee report (H. Rept 110-146)
    accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2008, the committee recommended an increase for the IMPACT
    program and continues to believe it will help to reduce
    hazardous exposure, improve component durability, and lower
    life-cycle costs. To accelerate the IMPACT program, the
    committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million.
        The committee recommends $104.1 million, an increase of
    $4.0 million, for general information technology.

                           Procurement, Defense-Wide

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $3.2
    billion for Procurement, Defense-Wide. The committee recommends
    authorization of $3.5 billion, an increase of $321.2 million,
    for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2009
    Procurement, Defense-Wide program are identified in the table
    below. Major changes to the Defense-Wide request are discussed
    following the table.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Standard Missile-3 interceptors

        The budget request contained no funds for advanced
    procurement of Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptors.
        Consistent with the findings of the Joint Capabilities Mix
    Study II, which indicated that the combatant commanders
    require, at minimum, twice as many SM-3 interceptors than the
    133 now planned, the committee strongly supports efforts to
    increase production of SM-3 interceptors to counter the threat
    from short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.
        In accordance with section 223 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
    the committee recommends the transfer of $56.0 million of the
    funds from PE 63892C for advanced procurement of SM-3
    interceptors to be executed by the Missile Defense Agency.
        Furthermore, the committee recommends an additional
    increase of $55.0 million for SM-3 production. Of this amount,
    $20.0 million is for facility upgrades that will increase the
    capacity to manufacture 4 or more SM-3 missiles per month in
    fiscal year 2010, and $35.0 million is for long-lead
    procurement of an additional 12 SM-3 missiles.
        Therefore, the committee recommends a total increase of
    $111.0 million for procurement of SM-3 interceptors.

    Terminal High Altitude Area Defense procurement

        The budget request contained no funds for advanced
    procurement for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
    Fire Units #3 and #4.
        Consistent with the findings of the Joint Capabilities Mix
    Study II, which indicated that the combatant commanders require
    twice as many THAAD interceptors than the 96 now planned, the
    committee recommends an increase of funds for THAAD production.
        In accordance with section 223 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
    the committee recommends the transfer of $65.0 million of the
    funds in PE 63881C for the procurement of advanced components
    for THAAD Fire Units #3 and #4 to be executed by the Missile
    Defense Agency.
        Furthermore, the committee recommends an additional $75.0
    million to begin long-lead procurement of additional THAAD
    interceptors and the ground segments.
        Therefore, the committee recommends a total increase of
    $140.0 million for advanced procurement of THAAD Fire Units #3
    and #4.

                             Rapid Acquisition Fund

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $102.0
    million for Rapid Acquisition Fund. The committee recommends
    authorization of $50.0 million and a transfer of $102.0 million
    to title XV of this Act.

                      National Guard and Reserve Equipment

                                    Overview

        The budget request for fiscal year 2009 contained $8.9
    billion for National Guard and Reserve Equipment. The committee
    recommends authorization of $9.7 billion, an increase of $800.0
    million, for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee notes that the events of September 11, 2001,
    Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and Operation Enduring Freedom
    (OEF) have caused dramatic changes in how national guard and
    reserve components are used to support overseas operational
    missions and domestic security and preparedness tasks. The
    national guard and reserve forces are no longer a strategic
    reserve component but are now considered an operational reserve
    force. Further, the committee notes that many non-deployed
    national guard and reserve units have significant equipment
    shortages compared to required equipment levels, caused by a
    combination of increases in required equipment, the need to
    prioritize equipment going to deployed forces, and changes in
    Army standards for substitute equipment. While the Army has
    articulated a plan to address this issue, the committee is
    concerned that the current timelines for doing so are too long
    and pose too much risk in the event of a large-scale national
    emergency or unanticipated overseas deployment requirement. As
    a result, the committee authorizes additional funding for
    equipment.
        The committee is aware the budget request provides a
    significant increase in procurement funding for national guard
    and reserve component equipment from previous budget requests;
    however, the committee notes that despite this increase in
    funds, significant equipment shortfalls will continue for some
    national guard and reserve component units. In addition, the
    committee notes that in past budget years, despite plans to
    provide significant equipment to the National Guard and
    reserves, that the promised funding and equipment has not
    actually reached national guard and reserve units due to
    changes in Army priorities. The committee urges the Army to
    create better audit and tracking procedures for funds provided
    by Congress for reserve component equipment to ensure that the
    equipment needs of the national guard and reserves are
    appropriately addressed.
        The committee is aware that equipment items on the Army's
    unfunded priority list for fiscal year 2009 are considered to
    be critical dual-purpose unfunded equipment programs for the
    Army National Guard and Army Reserve. The committee expects
    funds authorized in this section would be used in some capacity
    to address funding shortfalls for these unfunded programs. The
    committee strongly believes the National Guard and reserve
    components should receive an equitable share of funding and
    equipment distribution and that reserve components should be
    better integrated into the equipping process.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                  Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

               Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations

        These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year
    2009 funding levels for all procurement accounts.

               Section 105--National Guard and Reserve Equipment

        This section would authorize $800.0 million for the
    procurement of aircraft, missiles, wheeled and tracked combat
    vehicles, tactical wheeled vehicles, ammunition, small arms,
    tactical radios, non-system training devices, logistic
    automation systems, and other critical procurement items for
    the national guard and reserve forces.

                      Section 106--Rapid Acquisition Fund

        This section would authorize $50.0 million for the Rapid
    Acquisition Fund. The committee expects these funds would be
    made available as part of a U.S. Central Command Rapid
    Acquisition Fund that would be used by the Commander, U.S.
    Central Command, to rapidly address unforeseen, joint urgent
    operational needs. The committee notes that additional funding
    for the Rapid Acquisition Fund is authorized in title XV of
    this Act.

                           Subtitle B--Army Programs

    Section 111--Separate Procurement Line Items for Future Combat Systems
                                    Program

        This section would require, beginning with the Fiscal Year
    2010 President's Budget Request, separate procurement lines for
    five classes of equipment planned for procurement under the
    Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. These classes would be FCS
    manned ground vehicles, FCS unmanned ground vehicles, FCS
    unmanned aerial vehicles, FCS unattended ground systems, and
    other FCS elements.

     Section 112--Restriction on Contract Awards for Major Elements of the
                         Future Combat Systems Program

        This section would prohibit the Army from awarding a
    contract for low-rate production or full-rate production for
    major elements of the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program to
    entities serving in the role of a lead systems integrator for
    the FCS program.

    Section 113--Restriction on Obligation of Funds for Army Tactical Radio
                                 Pending Report

        This section would require a report from the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense, Networks and Information Integration,
    regarding Army tactical radio fielding plans and whether they
    are properly aligned to create the future battlefield network
    envisioned by the Army, as well as the future role of joint
    tactical radios in such a network. The report would be due to
    Congress by March 30, 2009. This section would prohibit
    obligation of 25 percent of the funds for tactical radios until
    the required report is received.

     Secton 114--Restriction on Obligation of Procurement Funds for Armed
            Reconnaissance Helicopter Program Pending Certification

        This section would limit the obligation of funding for the
    Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) for fiscal year 2009 to
    not more than 20 percent of the authorized funding until 30
    days after the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
    Technology, and Logistics (USD/AT&L) certifies to the
    congressional defense committees that the ARH has
    satisfactorily completed a Limited User Test and has been
    approved by the USD/AT&L to enter production.

                           Subtitle C--Navy Programs

     Section 121--Refueling and Complex Overhaul of the U.S.S. ``Theodore
                                  Roosevelt''

        This section would authorize the refueling and complex
    overhaul (RCOH) of the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Theodore
    Roosevelt to commence in fiscal year 2009 and would authorize
    the first of three increments of funding planned for the RCOH.

         Section 122--Applicability of Previous Teaming Agreements for
                      ``Virginia''-Class Submarine Program

        This section would modify the multi-year procurement
    authority granted in the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense
    Authorization Act (Public Law 110-181) to include the
    requirement that any multi-year contract entered into between
    the Navy and the shipbuilders must specify that the previous
    teaming agreements for submarine construction between the two
    shipbuilders shall remain in effect.

                   Section 123--Littoral Combat Ship Program

        This section would amend section 124 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
    163) as amended by section 125 of the John Warner National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
    364) by allowing costs associated with economic inflation to
    exceed the cost cap of $460.0 million per vessel, provided that
    the increase for economic inflation does not exceed $10.0
    million per vessel. The provision would also allow costs
    associated with the introduction of new technology, not fielded
    on the first two ships of the class, provided that the
    insertion of new technology would reduce life-cycle cost of the
    vessel, or the new technology is required to meet an emergent
    warfighting threat.

     Section 124--Report on F/A-18 Procurement Costs, Comparing Multi-year
                                   to Annual

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report on F/A-18 procurement to the congressional
    defense committees by March 1, 2009. The report would include
    the following:
              (1) The number of F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft
            programmed for procurement for fiscal years 2010
            through 2015;
              (2) The estimated procurement costs for those
            aircraft, if procured through annual procurement
            contracts;
              (3) The estimated procurement costs for those
            aircraft, if procured through a multiyear procurement
            contract;
              (4) The estimated savings that could be derived from
            the procurement of those aircraft through a multiyear
            procurement contract, and whether the Secretary
            considers the amount of those savings to be
            substantial;
              (5) A discussion comparing the costs and benefits of
            obtaining those aircraft through annual procurement
            contracts with the costs and benefits of obtaining
            those aircraft through a multiyear procurement
            contract; and
              (6) The recommendations of the Secretary as to
            whether Congress should authorize a multiyear
            procurement contract for those aircraft.
        This section would also require the Secretary to submit the
    certifications required by section 2306b of title 10, United
    States Code, if the Secretary recommends that Congress
    authorize a multiyear procurement contract for F/A-18 aircraft.
    Additionally, this section would authorize the Secretary to
    obligate up to $100.0 million of the amount authorized for
    procurement of F/A-18E/F or EA-18G aircraft for cost reduction
    initiatives in fiscal year 2009, subject to the availability of
    appropriations.

                         Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

                Section 131--Limitation on Retiring C-5 Aircraft

        This section would allow the Secretary of the Air Force to
    retire C-5A aircraft from the inventory and replace the
    capability with C-17 aircraft if the cost analysis demonstrates
    such action is prudent in meeting strategic airlift
    requirements and does not significantly increase overall costs
    above those already planned. Before C-5A retirement can
    commence, the Secretary must submit to the congressional
    defense committees a cost analysis performed by a federally
    funded research and development center that concludes that
    retiring C-5A aircraft and procuring C-17 aircraft is more
    prudent in meeting strategic airlift mobility requirements than
    performing the Avionics Modernization and the Reliability
    Enhancement and Re-engining Programs on C-5A aircraft, and
    certify that operational risk will not increase in meeting the
    National Defense Strategy by retiring C-5A aircraft and
    procuring additional C-17 aircraft.

              Section 132--Maintenance of Retired KC-135E Aircraft

        This section would require the Air Force to maintain a
    minimum of 46 retired KC-135Es in Type-1000 storage.

    Section 133--Repeal of Multi-Year Contract Authority for Procurement of
                                Tanker Aircraft

        This section would repeal the multi-year procurement
    contract authority provided in the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136)
    during the KC-X tanker-lease program.

    Section 134--Report on Processes Used for Requirements Development for
                                      KC-X

        This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
    to submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
    December 1, 2008, that: examines the processes used to
    determine KC-X requirements; outlines why the KC-135R aircraft
    was established as the comparative baseline aircraft for KC-X;
    provides an evaluation of very large tanker aircraft as a
    potential Air Force aerial refueling platform; and, examines
    aerial refueling aircraft range, fuel offload at range and
    passenger/cargo carrying capabilities.

                  Subtitle E--Joint and Multi-Service Matters

                  Section 141--Body Armor Acquisition Strategy

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish an executive agent for individual body armor and
    associated components and establish a procurement budget line
    item for body armor and personnel protection enhancements.
        This section would also require the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to report to
    the congressional defense committees by March 15, 2009,
    detailing:
              (1) The U.S. body armor industrial base;
              (2) The strategic plan for sustaining the body armor
            industrial base, to include critical component
            suppliers; and
              (3) The objective body armor system level of
            protection, weight, and manufacturing productivity and
            the research and development path for achieving the
            objective system.
        The committee is aware that none of the military services
    have programmed funds in the Future Year's Defense Plan for the
    fielding of the latest generation of body armor and the
    military services continue to rely on supplemental funding for
    long-term sustainment. The committee is concerned this lack of
    planning and programming is adversely impacting the capability
    of the body armor industrial base and could potentially impact
    the industrial base's ability to rapidly respond to new threats
    or requirements.

      Section 142--Small Arms Acquisition Strategy and Requirements Review

        This section would require the Comptroller General of the
    United States Government Accountability Office to audit the
    Department of Defense small arms requirements generation
    process and report to the congressional defense committees by
    October 1, 2009, on any statutory, regulatory, or procedural
    barriers that may affect the ability of the military services
    to rapidly field small arms.
        This section would also require the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to provide a
    report to the congressional defense committees within 120 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act that details:
              (1) The current inventory, acquisition objective,
            operational, and budgetary status of current small arms
            programs to include pistols, carbines, rifles, light,
            medium, and heavy machine guns;
              (2) A plan for a joint acquisition strategy for small
            arms modernization with emphasis on a possible near-
            term competition for a new pistol and carbine;
              (3) Analysis of current small arms research and
            development programs; and
              (4) An analysis of any ongoing small arms capability
            gap assessments being pursued by the individual
            military services.

     Section 143--Requirement for Common Ground Stations and Payloads for
                      Manned and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish a policy and acquisition strategy for manned and
    unmanned vehicle intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
    payloads and ground stations, to be applicable through the
    Department of Defense, to achieve integrated research,
    development, test and evaluation, and procurement commonality.
        Payloads included within the policy and acquisition
    strategy, by vehicle class, would be: signals intelligence;
    electro-optical; synthetic aperture radar; ground moving target
    indicator; conventional explosive detection; foliage
    penetrating radar; laser designator; chemical, biological,
    radiological, nuclear, explosive detection; and national
    airspace operations avionics and sensors.
        This section would also seek: commonality of ground systems
    by vehicle class; common management of vehicle and payloads;
    ground station interoperability standardization; open source
    software code; acquisition of technical data rights in
    accordance with section 2320 of title 10, United States Code;
    and acquisition of vehicles, payloads, and ground stations
    through competitive procurement.
        Classes of vehicles for the purpose of this section are
    defined as:
              (1) Tier II class: vehicles such as Silver Fox and
            Scan Eagle;
              (2) Tactical class: vehicles such as RQ-7;
              (3) Medium altitude class: vehicles such as MQ-1, MQ-
            1C, MQ-5, MQ-8, MQ-9, and Warrior Alpha; and
              (4) High Altitude class: vehicles such as RQ-4, RQ-
            4N, unmanned airship systems, Constant Hawk, Angel
            Fire, Special Project Aircraft, Aerial Common Sensor,
            EP-3, Scathe View, Compass Call, and Rivet Joint.
        Finally, this section would require a report be provided to
    the congressional defense committees, the House Permanent
    Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select
    Committee on Intelligence within 120 days after the date of
    enactment of this Act on the policy and acquisition strategy
    established for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
    payloads and ground station to achieve integrated research,
    development, test and evaluation, and procurement commonality
    for manned and unmanned systems.

             TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

                                    OVERVIEW

        The budget request contained $79.6 billion for research,
    development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E). The committee
    recommends $79.7 billion, an increase of $109.5 million to the
    budget request.

                Army Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $10.5 billion for Army
    research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
        The committee recommends $10.7 billion, an increase of
    $159.6 million to the budget request.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Advanced lithium iron phosphate battery system for light tactical
            vehicles

        The budget request contained $107.9 million in PE 63005A
    for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but
    contained no funds for advanced lithium iron phosphate battery
    systems for combat hybrid high mobility multi-purpose wheeled
    vehicles (HMMWV).
        The committee understands that technology developed under a
    small business innovative research program uses advanced
    lithium iron phosphate battery systems for HMMWVs for
    demonstrations of ``silent watch'' missions. The committee
    notes this technology could provide a 5 to 10 times increase in
    capability over lead acid batteries that the military services
    currently use.
        The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
    63005A for the advancement and demonstration of a lithium iron
    phosphate battery system for use on a combat hybrid HMMWV
    platform.

    Antiballistic windshield armor

        The budget request contained $107.9 million in PE 63005A
    for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but
    contained no funds for antiballistic windshield armor (AWA)
    prototype demonstrations.
        The AWA is a bolt-on device for tactical wheeled vehicles
    and is based on an oversized periscope concept using an upper
    and lower set of stainless mirrors backed by armor. The
    committee understands significant work is being performed to
    accelerate the development of the AWA design that could
    potentially provide improved blast protection and improved
    visibility for the warfighter during and following an enemy
    attack.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    63005A for the continued development and future demonstration
    of AWA prototypes.

    Army intelligent agent software programs

        The budget request contained $3.4 million in PE 63006A for
    Vertical Integration of Space Technology Applications (VISTA).
    VISTA is an Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC)
    sponsored program designed to use ``intelligent agent''
    software to manage and distribute space-based capabilities to
    Army users operating at multiple echelons. The committee is
    aware of another SMDC program, Joint Awareness Warfighter-Space
    (JAWS), which is being developed to address many of the same
    operational needs that are used to justify the VISTA project.
    The committee is further aware that an operational prototype of
    JAWS is scheduled to be delivered to the Army Battle Lab for
    testing in January 2009, following three years of development.
        The committee notes an opportunity to leverage these two
    efforts. The committee, therefore, directs the Secretary of
    Defense to examine the feasibility of merging the VISTA and
    JAWS projects to make optimal use of the Department's
    investment. The Secretary shall submit a report describing the
    results of this examination to the congressional defense
    committees by March 1, 2009.

    Army missile modernization

        The budget request contained $1.5 million in PE 23802A for
    Army missile product improvement research and development.
        The committee notes with concern that the Army's fiscal
    year 2009 budget contains funds for neither upgrades to the
    Javelin and the ground launched version of the tube-launched,
    optically-tracked, wire-guided (TOW) missiles nor a development
    program for new missiles to replace the Javelin and TOW.
        Given the rapid pace of counter-missile technologies, the
    committee believes it is imperative that the Army begin a
    research and development effort to upgrade or replace Javelin
    and TOW to ensure the United States maintains its technical
    superiority in battlefield missile systems. The committee urges
    the Army, as it considers its fiscal year 2010 budget, to fund
    a new research and development effort to address the need to
    upgrade or replace the successful Javelin and ground-launched
    TOW missile families.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    23802A for the Army to begin a missile upgrade or replacement
    research and development program for the Javelin and TOW
    missiles.

    Chemical mechanical self-destruct fuze

        The budget request contained $73.7 million in PE 63004A for
    weapons and munitions advanced technology, but contained no
    funds for chemical-mechanical self-destruct fuze
    demonstrations.
        The committee is aware a chemical-mechanical self-destruct
    fuze device is currently under development and has progressed
    through an initial proof-of-principle ballistic test with
    positive results. The committee understands this technology
    could decrease the rate of unexploded ordnance on the
    battlefield.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
    63004A to support demonstration and qualification testing of a
    chemical-mechanical self-destruct fuze.

    Common Missile Warning System

        The committee is encouraged by the Army's fielding of the
    Common Missile Warning System, but remains concerned with the
    delay the Army is experiencing in the fielding of infra-red
    countermeasures (IRCM) laser-based systems on rotary aircraft.
    The Advanced Threat Infrared Countermeasures (ATIRCM) system
    has been in development since the mid-1990s. The committee
    understands that the Department of Defense has fielded other
    laser-based countermeasures and is considering additional
    developing technologies that will significantly reduce the size
    and weight of this capability when compared to current systems.
    Given the delays in the fielding of ATIRCM, the committee
    believes that the Department of the Army should take immediate
    steps to accelerate the fielding of laser-based countermeasures
    for the protection of Army rotary aircraft in theater.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to
    the congressional defense committees, a report on laser-based
    countermeasures across the Department of Defense. This report
    shall be submitted within 60 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act and shall include the Army's plan to consider
    technologies other than the ATIRCM system to provide a
    functional laser-based IRCM for both fixed- and rotary-wing
    platforms.

    Condition-based maintenance

        The committee recognizes the efforts underway to integrate
    condition-based maintenance (CBM) in the Department of the
    Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) vehicles and other Army
    platforms. The CBM development program within FCS seeks to
    provide diagnostic and prognostic capabilities aimed at
    performing maintenance based on the actual condition of a
    component or system versus predetermined, time-phased
    maintenance. The committee understands that the Department of
    the Army may be pursuing development of similar CBM software
    programs for Army vehicles outside the work being conducted
    within the FCS program. The committee directs the Secretary of
    the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense
    committees by March 15, 2009, detailing all current and planned
    CBM software projects to include the cost of each project,
    expected maintenance cost savings, and requirements.

    Data links aerial systems

        The committee recognizes that a new radio software
    waveform, the high-band networking waveform (HNW), is intended
    to be the backbone line-of-sight communications data link for
    the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) and Future
    Combat Systems (FCS) programs. HNW is being specifically
    designed to enable internet protocol net-centric operations,
    create a multi-point to multi-point network, and provide other
    advantages not previously available with the common data link
    (CDL) waveform, including the ability for radios to
    automatically establish communications with one another and
    form a robust network without operator intervention.
        The committee is also aware that the Army is in the process
    of obtaining full government purpose rights for use of the HNW
    for the federal government. Once those rights are secured, the
    HNW would be available for use by all military services and
    maintained in Department of Defense libraries to ensure that
    future revisions or changes will be interoperable.
        The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide
    a report to the congressional defense committees within 60 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act detailing its
    legislative requirements (related to required communications
    data links for aerial systems), for the transmission and
    reception of communications, intelligence, surveillance,
    reconnaissance data and other data, in support of service-
    unique and joint operations. The committee expects that the
    report will include joint service requirements as well as
    conclusions of previous related studies, including the WIN-T
    line-of-sight backbone study, the Navy joint-CDL working group
    report, and the Army's FCS network data link study.

    Dynamometer facility upgrade program

        The budget request contained $107.9 million in PE 63005A
    for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but
    contained no funds for the Dynamometer facility upgrade
    program.
        The committee recognizes current dynamometers used by the
    Army for combat and tactical vehicle powertrain assessments
    lack modern technology upgrades. The committee understands
    improved dynamometers could improve the Army's ability to
    rapidly assess and evaluate conventional and hybrid electric
    powertrains and their associated components. The committee
    believes this capability could provide improved knowledge
    regarding powertrain subsystem reliability, durability, and
    safety, as well as help identify any potential power train
    problems at the earliest stage of development.
        The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million, in PE
    63005A for the Dynamometer facility upgrade program.

    Enhanced holographic imager

        The budget request contained $7.7 million in PE 63734A for
    military engineering advanced technology, but contained no
    funds for the final phase of development for the enhanced
    holographic imager.
        The holographic imager system is used to produce three-
    dimensional imagery for the Army's tactical battlefield
    visualization program. The committee notes that digital
    holographic images have proven to be an extremely useful
    capability for deployed Army and Special Operations Command
    warfighters. The committee further notes that over 1,700
    holographic images were provided to soldiers in theater in
    calendar year 2007. Planned efforts for the final phase will be
    to develop a field-deployable imager and to improve the process
    to produce holograms three times faster than the current
    system.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.8 million in PE
    63734A to complete the development of the enhanced holographic
    imager.

    Future Combat Systems

        The budget request contained $3.6 billion for the Future
    Combat Systems (FCS) program.
        In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
    committee expressed its concern with the schedule delays, cost
    growth, and reduced scope of the FCS program since its
    inception in fiscal year 2003. The committee also notes that
    the Army's growing need for funding to achieve its many other
    priorities, including completion of modular unit conversions,
    growth in the size of the Army, reset of equipment used in
    combat, improving the capability of the Army National Guard and
    Army Reserve, and modernization of current Army equipment would
    eventually require the realignment of the FCS program to a more
    affordable and deliberate schedule. Over the past year, the
    committee's concerns have only grown more acute as additional
    information on the cost of achieving the Army's numerous major
    initiatives came into more specific relief and the FCS program
    continued to struggle with developing critical technology
    elements.
        The committee continues to be concerned with specific
    aspects of the FCS program and its relationship to the Army's
    overall future needs. One element of concern includes the
    simultaneous development of the FCS communications network and
    FCS vehicles. It is the committee's understanding that FCS
    manned ground vehicles will depend upon a robust, pervasive,
    and high-performance communications network for much of their
    survivability. In addition, the committee understands that some
    progress on development of the network has been made during the
    system development and demonstration phase. However, given the
    current lack of clear requirements, mature technology, and
    progress on vital complementary programs necessary to develop
    the network on schedule, the committee notes that there is
    significant risk that delays in achieving the FCS network could
    lead to fielding of FCS manned ground vehicles without the FCS
    network support the Army considers essential to achieve FCS
    vehicle survivability requirements.
        A second area of concern is the current misalignment of FCS
    program testing events, knowledge points, and major program
    decisions. In its 2007 and 2008 reports on the FCS program, the
    Government Accountability Office noted that most major program
    and funding decisions occur before significant program test
    events intended to demonstrate progress on individual FCS
    program technologies and the ambitious FCS system of systems
    integration goals. One example is the program's current plan to
    request more than $1.2 billion in procurement funding in the
    fiscal year 2011 budget more than two years prior to the first
    significant FCS network demonstration in late 2012. The Army
    also intends to request $2.9 billion in FCS procurement funding
    in fiscal year 2012, which Congress would have to approve
    almost two years before the FCS milestone C low-rate initial
    production decision in fiscal year 2013. In addition, the
    committee notes that even some near-term elements of the FCS
    program, including the Non-Line of Sight Launch System, are
    scheduled for milestone C decisions on beginning low-rate
    initial production prior to completion of major testing events
    and required certifications. The committee believes that such
    contradictions of long-standing Department of Defense (DOD)
    procurement policies, including the concept of ``fly before you
    buy,'' may lead to significant program delays and cost
    increases as additional development work occurs late in the
    program.
        Overall, while the committee understands that the FCS
    program is an unprecedented development effort seeking to
    integrate 14 distinct elements, an entirely new battle command
    software system, and a complex wireless battlefield network,
    the committee does not believe that such an unusual and
    ambitious program structure obviates the need for the Army to
    follow established DOD acquisition policies. While some
    selected Army force protection programs have been permitted to
    bypass standard acquisition policies due to urgent combat
    needs, the committee does not believe that the FCS program
    meets that criteria, primarily due to its long delivery
    timelines for its major elements and the immaturity of many
    critical FCS technologies despite six years of system
    development and demonstration activities and an expenditure of
    $15.0 billion in development funding. However, should elements
    of the FCS program be deemed appropriate to fill theater
    operational needs, the committee would support fielding of
    selected FCS elements using rapid equipping or other expedited
    procurement procedures outside the FCS program.

    Future Combat Systems manned ground vehicles

        The budget request contained $774.3 million in PE 64660A
    for research and development of Future Combat Systems (FCS)
    manned ground vehicles.
        In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for 2008, the committee
    noted its concern with the simultaneous nature of the
    development of FCS manned ground vehicles and the FCS
    communications network upon which the manned ground vehicles
    depend on to meet key survivability requirements. The committee
    notes that recent analysis by the Government Accountability
    Office points to likely delays to the FCS communications
    network development and continuing challenges with critical
    vehicle technology elements, including vehicle armor. In
    addition, the committee is concerned that the current program
    schedule will not provide Department of Defense and Army
    officials with adequate information at critical decision points
    related to FCS manned ground vehicles about the performance of
    the communications network. Absent such information, the
    committee remains concerned that the FCS vehicle designs could
    be based upon assumptions concerning the communications network
    that prove inaccurate, requiring significant vehicle design
    changes.
        The committee recommends $673.3 million, a decrease of
    $101.0 million, in PE 64660A for FCS manned ground vehicle
    research and development. Within the amount provided, the
    committee expects the Army to prioritize common vehicle chassis
    work necessary to field the Non-Line of Sight Cannon.

    Future Combat Systems modular brigade enhancement

        The budget request contained $64.9 million in PE 64666A for
    Future Combat Systems (FCS) modular brigade enhancement
    research and development.
        The committee notes that this program element is the
    primary source of funds for activities of the Army Evaluation
    Task Force (AETF), a unit tasked with evaluation and
    development of near-term FCS program equipment, including FCS
    spin out 1 equipment, the small unmanned aerial vehicle, and
    small unmanned ground vehicle. The committee is concerned that
    requested funding in fiscal year 2009 is not sufficient to
    accommodate the evaluation and test activities necessary to
    meet the spin out 1 fielding timeline.
        The committee recommends $74.9 million, an increase of
    $10.0 million, in PE 64666A for FCS modular brigade enhancement
    and AETF activities.

    Future Combat Systems system of systems engineering and program
            management

        The budget request contained $1.4 billion in PE 64661A for
    Future Combat Systems (FCS) system of systems engineering and
    program management.
        The committee notes that this program element includes the
    management reserve for the FCS program, which has been
    approximately seven percent of total program funding during the
    past two program years. In addition, the committee notes that
    this program element includes the contractor fees for the FCS
    program, which are calculated on a fixed formula based upon
    total contractor funding in the FCS program. The committee
    further notes that both of these elements can be adjusted based
    on funding adjustments to other elements of the FCS program
    recommended by the committee.
        The committee recommends $1.3 billion, a decrease of $132.0
    million, in PE 64661A for FCS system of systems engineering and
    program management.

    Future Combat Systems unmanned aerial vehicles

        The budget request contained $34.4 million for Future
    Combat Systems (FCS) unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
        The committee notes that of the total $34.4 million
    requested for FCS unmanned aerial vehicles, only $14.3 million
    was requested for the FCS class I UAV, representing just four-
    tenths of one percent of total requested FCS funding. The
    committee notes that the Micro Air Vehicle, an early precursor
    to the FCS class I UAV, is already in use in Iraq by Navy
    explosive ordnance disposal teams, but that the FCS program's
    current schedule will not deliver a full-capability prototype
    class I UAV until the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2011. The
    committee supports additional funding for the FCS class I UAV
    in order to accelerate its readiness for fielding in an FCS
    spin out or directly to theater based on operational needs.
        The committee recommends $49.4 million, an increase of
    $15.0 million, in PE 64662A for development of FCS unmanned
    aerial vehicles, in order to support accelerated development of
    the FCS class I UAV.

    Future Combat Systems unmanned ground vehicles

        The budget request contained $96.9 million in PE 64663A for
    Future Combat Systems (FCS) unmanned ground vehicles.
        The committee notes that of the total $96.9 million
    requested for FCS unmanned ground vehicle development, only
    $8.2 million was requested for the FCS small unmanned ground
    vehicle (SUGV), representing just two-tenths of one percent of
    total FCS requested funding. The SUGV is an FCS element based
    on the PackBot robot system in use in Iraq and Afghanistan
    today. The committee supports additional funding for the FCS
    SUGV in order to accelerate its readiness for fielding in an
    FCS spin out or directly to theater based on operational needs.
        The committee recommends $104.9 million, an increase of
    $8.0 million, in PE 64663A for FCS unmanned ground vehicles, in
    order to support accelerated development of the FCS SUGV.

    Glass ceramic armor technology for vehicle survivability

        The budget request contained $55.2 million in PE 62601A for
    combat vehicle and automotive technology, but contained no
    funds to develop transparent ceramic armor through Lawrence
    Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL).
        The committee is aware that current transparent armor
    systems used on tactical and combat vehicles for protection
    against large improvised explosive devices and explosively
    formed penetrators are extremely heavy and impact vehicles'
    performance as well as decrease vehicles' life cycles. The
    committee notes that improvements in weight reduction without
    sacrificing survivability could benefit vehicle platforms that
    require improvements with balancing critical key performance
    parameters of payload, protection, and performance.
        The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
    62601A for the advancement of glass ceramic armor technology
    for vehicle survivability.

    Global Command and Control System-Army

        The budget request contained $12.9 million in PE 33150A for
    the Global Command and Control System-Army.
        The committee is concerned over a lack of commitment by the
    services to transition from service stove-piped command and
    control systems to a joint architecture, such as the Network
    Enabled Command and Control system. The services can no longer
    sustain a multitude of disparate systems, from a technical
    management or financial perspective. Yet there appears to be no
    clear strategy articulated to senior decision makers showing
    how the services will move from multiple independent systems,
    to a joint, federated approach. This approach does not
    necessarily entail adopting a single system, but until the
    services commit to a unified approach to commonality, the
    military services will continue to waste funds and inhibit the
    benefits accrued by jointness.
        The committee recommends $11.9 million, a decrease of $1.0
    million in PE 33150A.

    Ground soldier systems concept development

        The budget request contained $36.6 million in PE 63827A for
    soldier systems advanced development of which $25.5 million is
    for the ground soldier system, a ``new start'' development
    program.
        The committee is concerned that the Army is proposing a
    ``new start'' system development and demonstration program for
    a soldier ensemble despite the service's limited resources and
    the success of the Land Warrior (LW) system. The committee is
    aware that LW has been deployed in response to urgent
    operational needs statements from units in Operation Iraqi
    Freedom (OIF) and has proven to increase combat capability of
    the individual soldier, as well as the efficiency of small
    units. The operational use of LW in OIF has yielded soldier-
    driven improvements, primarily in weight reduction and has
    increased LW's demand by deployed and ``next-to-deploy'' units.
    The committee notes the Army has requested $102.0 million in
    the amended fiscal year 2008 budget request for ongoing
    military operations to provide LW systems for the next-to-
    deploy Stryker Brigade Combat Team. The committee believes the
    proposed level of funding for a new start ground soldier system
    program is not justified. The committee believes that
    additional resources should be allocated to the LW program in
    current and future budget requests and encourages the Army to
    continue to leverage and apply lessons learned from LW systems
    for next-generation soldier systems.
        The committee recommends $16.6 million, a decrease of $20.0
    million, in PE 63827A for the ground soldier system development
    program and realigns this funding to Other Procurement, Army
    budget activities to procure additional LW systems in response
    to urgent operational needs statements.

    Heavy duty hybrid electric vehicle demonstration

        The budget request contained $107.9 million in PE 63005A
    for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but
    contained no funds for the demonstration of low-emission and
    fuel-efficient hybrid electric engine propulsion systems for
    heavy tactical wheeled vehicles.
        The committee understands low emission and fuel efficient
    hybrid electric engine propulsion systems could be used to
    develop and demonstrate next generation hybrid electric
    powertrains on up to five heavy tactical wheeled vehicles. The
    committee notes these powertrains could operate on bio-diesel
    and could also demonstrate auxiliary power capability. The
    committee is aware that prior year funds have been appropriated
    for an Air Force first-generation hybrid electric heavy
    tactical wheeled vehicle program and the committee expects the
    Army to leverage results from the Air Force program.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    63005A for the continued refinement of system development and
    demonstration of a low emission and fuel efficient hybrid
    electric engine propulsion system for the Army's heavy tactical
    wheeled vehicle fleet.

    High mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle bloc improvements

        The budget request contained no funding in PE 64609A for
    light tactical vehicles to include the high mobility multi-
    purpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV) bloc improvement program.
        The HMMWV bloc improvement program could provide the Army
    with the ability to conduct assessments of technologies to
    better meet requirements and to react to evolving threats in
    combat theaters of operation. The committee understands this
    program could support readily available product improvements in
    payload, power, protection, range, and reliability. The
    committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to provide the
    necessary resources to continue to develop and insert critical
    technology product improvements into the HMMWV fleet.

    Integrated fire control system for small arms

        The budget request contained $8.8 million in PE 63607A for
    the joint service small arms program, but contained no funds
    for an integrated fire control system for small arms.
        The committee understands the joint service small arms
    capability assessment defined a list of 14 desired capabilities
    for existing small arms platforms in the relevant technology
    areas of technical fire control, tactical fire control in the
    small unit, and new concepts and applications. The committee
    recognizes an integrated fire control system could address 1 of
    these 14 desired capabilities and would enhance the
    warfighter's real-time cognition and decision-making ability
    especially in urban, counter-insurgent, and non-linear combat
    environments.
        The committee recommends $10.3 million, an increase of $1.5
    million, in PE 63607A, to further the development of an
    integrated fire control system for existing small arms
    platforms.

    Joint Cargo Aircraft program

        The Army budget request contained $267.2 million for
    procurement of seven Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA).
        The committee understands the Army plans to procure JCA to
    replace its C-23 and CH-47 fleets of aircraft that support the
    Army's intra-theater time-sensitive cargo mission. The JCA
    sustainment strategy was completed in February 2007, but many
    details, such as core depot maintenance capabilities,
    distribution of depot maintenance funds between contractor
    logistics support and organic performance, and determination of
    public and private partnering will not be finalized until low-
    rate initial production.
        The committee notes that the Secretary of the Army plans to
    fund procurement of initial spares, support equipment, training
    simulators, post-production modifications, and system
    engineering and management items through the Operations and
    Maintenance, Army (OMA) appropriation account. The committee is
    concerned by this approach because Congress has less oversight
    and more difficulty tracking obligations and expenditures for
    these items, and notes that these items are traditionally
    procured through research and development, or procurement
    appropriation accounts. Of further concern, the committee notes
    that the April 17, 2008, Undersecretary of Defense for
    Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) acquisition
    program baseline documentation states that ``operations and
    maintenance costs are not tracked and are not breachable.''
        The committee includes a provision, section 216, in title
    II of this Act that would prohibit the Secretary of the Army
    from funding initial spares, support equipment, training
    simulators, post-production modifications, and system
    engineering and management items through the O&M appropriations
    account.

    Landmine Warfare/Barrier--system development and demonstration

        The budget request contained $126.5 million in PE 64808A
    for Landmine Warfare/Barrier system development and
    demonstration.
        The committee notes that $74.0 million of this amount is
    for continuing work on the Intelligent Munitions System (IMS),
    a system that the Army decided to remove from the Future Combat
    Systems (FCS) program, creating a reduced demand for the IMS
    system. The committee further notes that $52.5 million of the
    request is for the Ground Standoff Mine Detection System and
    the Airborne Surveillance, Target, Acquisition, and Minefield
    Detection System, two programs that are developing sensors for
    FCS platforms that will not be deployed until 2014. The
    committee is concerned that these sensor programs are not
    properly aligned with the development timelines of the FCS
    systems that will use them.
        The committee recommends $64.3 million, a decrease of $62.2
    million, in PE 64808A for Landmine Warfare/Barrier.

    Multi-threat explosive detection initiative

        The budget request contained $25.6 million in PE 62709A for
    night vision technology, but contained no funds for eye-safe
    standoff detection of multiple threat explosives technology.
        The committee notes the continued need to accomplish
    standoff detection of multiple threat explosive devices, even
    at trace amounts.
        The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
    62709A for the eye-safe standoff multiple threat explosive
    detection initiative.

    Near-net shaped direct-sinistered silicon carbide torso plate
            technology

        The budget request contained $30.7 million in PE 63747A for
    soldier support and survivability, but contained no funds for
    the expansion of near-net shaped direct-sinistered silicon
    carbide torso plate technology.
        The committee understands near-net shaped direct-sinistered
    silicon carbide torso plate technology could expand alternate
    methods for manufacturing critical ceramic components used for
    vehicle and personnel protection programs. The committee notes
    these methods could provide for significant advances in life
    cycle costs, performance, and weight reduction.
        The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
    63747A to evaluate near-net shaped direct-sinistered silicon
    carbide torso plate technology.

    Platform soldier mission readiness system for tactical wheeled vehicles

        The committee understands platform soldier mission
    readiness systems (PSMRS) is the central condition-based
    maintenance software solution for the Army's Future Combat
    Systems (FCS). Condition-based maintenance provides diagnostic
    and prognostic capabilities aimed at performing maintenance
    based on the actual condition of a component or system versus
    predetermined time-phased maintenance. The committee
    understands that PSMRS software could be spiraled from FCS into
    the tactical wheeled vehicle (TWV) fleet that would potentially
    achieve a 30 percent reduction in annual maintenance costs. The
    committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to develop a
    plan that would utilize a PSMRS program as part of the TWV
    fleet modernization effort. The committee understands this
    program could be implemented at the Army's Center of Industrial
    and Technical Excellence for Ground Combat and Tactical
    Systems.

    Polymer matrix composites for rotorcraft drive systems

        The budget request contained $57.3 million in PE 63003A for
    aviation advanced technology, but contained no funds for the
    demonstration of structural composite rotorcraft drive system
    components.
        The committee notes the opportunity to reduce costs of
    production, operations, and support of rotorcraft through the
    use of polymer matrix composite (PMC) technologies for major
    components such as rotorcraft drive system components.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    63003A to demonstrate full-scale design, fabrication, and
    testing of PMC rotorcraft drive systems.

    RAND Arroyo Center

        The budget request contained $16.3 million in PE 65103A for
    the RAND Arroyo Center.
        In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
    committee expressed its concern about reductions in the Army's
    budget request for the RAND Arroyo Center, which is one of the
    Army's primary federally funded research and development
    centers. The committee notes with concern that funding
    requested for fiscal year 2009 remained at the same level as
    fiscal year 2008. The committee continues to support stable
    funding for the RAND Arroyo Center and encourages the Army in
    its fiscal year 2010 budget submission to increase funding for
    this activity.
        The committee recommends $19.3 million, an increase of $3.0
    million, in PE 65103A for the RAND Arroyo Center.

    Stryker family of vehicles research and development

        The budget request contained $108.0 million in PE 63653A
    for research and development of upgrades to the Stryker family
    of vehicles.
        The committee notes that, subsequent to the submission of
    the fiscal year 2009 budget request, the Army comptroller
    requested the committee move $38.7 million from Stryker program
    procurement to Stryker research and development to ensure full
    funding for the Stryker product improvement program (PIP).
    However, this request assumed committee approval of a fiscal
    year 2008 reprogramming that would have reduced Stryker
    research and development by $33.0 million. Because this
    reprogramming was not approved, only $5.7 million in additional
    funds for Stryker research and development are needed in fiscal
    year 2009 to fully fund the Stryker PIP.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.7 million in PE
    63653A for Stryker vehicle research and development.

    Torque-vectoring rollover prevention technology

        The budget request contained $55.2 million in PE 62601A for
    combat vehicle and automotive technology, but contained no
    funds for torque-vectoring rollover prevention technology.
        The committee understands torque-vectoring allows active
    control of wheel speed ratio and torque distribution, typically
    through the application of multi-plate wet clutches coupled
    with advanced gear-train technology. The committee is aware
    domestic torque-vectoring technology could increase stability
    and performance in lightweight tactical wheeled vehicles.
        The committee recommends an increase of $1.4 million in PE
    62601A for the development of torque-vectoring rollover
    prevention technology in light tactical wheeled vehicles.

    Warfighter Information Network--Tactical, increment 3, program

        The budget request contained $414.4 million in PE 63782A
    for Warfighter Information Network--Tactical (WIN-T) research
    and development.
        The committee notes that Increment 3 of the WIN-T program
    has not had an updated acquisition program baseline for more
    than two years. As a result, the committee is concerned that
    the $330.5 million in this program element for WIN-T Increment
    3 is not based on a thorough understanding of program funding
    needs. In addition, the committee remains concerned that the
    WIN-T Increment 3 program has yet to complete the independent
    cost estimate or technology development validation required by
    the June 2007 Nunn-McCurdy program recertification.
        The committee recommends $381.3 million, a decrease of
    $33.1 million, in PE 63782A for WIN-T research and development.
    The committee expects the Army to fully fund WIN-T Increment 2
    funding requested in this program element.

    Weapon shot counter technology

        The committee is aware that weapon shot counter technology
    for small arms weapons has been developed and tested by the
    Naval Surface Warfare Center and is being fielded by the United
    States Special Operations Command on the M4 carbine, MK11, and
    MK 12 sniper rifles. Rounds fired data allows weapons to be
    maintained at a high level of readiness with use-based
    technology rather than the antiquated calendar based
    maintenance. The committee notes preventive and predictive
    maintenance allows high wear parts such as barrels and bolts to
    be replaced prior to catastrophic failure and eliminates
    unnecessary weapon rebuilds and replacements. The committee
    strongly encourages the Secretary of the Army to evaluate the
    viability of fielding this technology for small arms weapons.

    Wearable personal area network technology

        The budget request contained $21.9 million in PE 62786A for
    warfighter technology, but contained no funds for wearable
    personal area network technology.
        The committee understands wearable personal area network
    technology would develop clothing that could integrate
    electrical power distribution, data transmission, and
    communication networks to provide military personnel with the
    capability to operate and control a suite of miniature,
    personal communication systems. The committee notes this
    technology could provide critical weight reduction to the
    combat carrying load of the individual warfighter and improve
    combat effectiveness.
        The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
    62786A for wearable personal area network technology.

                Navy Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $19.3 billion for Navy
    research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
        The committee recommends $19.8 billion, an increase of
    $432.5 million to the budget request.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Advanced anti-radiation guided-missile weapon data link program

        The budget request contained $60.4 million in PE 63114N for
    power projection advanced technology programs, but contained no
    funds for a flight demonstration of the advanced anti-radiation
    guided-missile (AARGM) weapon data link program.
        The AARGM is a medium-range, supersonic, air-launched
    tactical missile designed to attack enemy radars. The AARGM
    weapon data link program demonstrates an ability to use a new
    data link program, developed by the Defense Advanced Research
    Projects Agency, to replace the two data links currently used
    on the AARGM with one data link that also provides an expanded
    capability against moving targets while reducing data link
    costs.
        The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE
    63114N for the AARGM weapon data link flight demonstration.
    Subsequent to a successful flight demonstration, the committee
    expects the Department of the Navy to incorporate the AARGM
    weapon data link as part of its AARGM product improvement
    program.

    Advanced electric motor development

        The budget request contained a total of $256.5 million in
    PE 63513N, PE 64307N, and PE 63123N for advanced shipboard
    component development programs.
        The committee strongly supports the Navy's research and
    technology efforts to design and develop the next generation of
    advanced electric motors. The committee understands that
    promising technologies exist in high temperature
    superconducting motors, permanent magnet motors, and direct
    current (DC) homopolar motors. The committee is committed to
    the concept of the all-electric integrated propulsion and
    distribution systems for future classes of naval vessels and
    recognizes that adequate funding for the testing of multiple
    promising technologies is in the best interest of the future
    naval force.
        The committee recommends increases of $4.0 million in PE
    63513N, $3.0 million in PE 64307N, and $4.0 million in PE
    63123N for continued design, development, and testing of high
    temperature superconducting, permanent magnet, and DC homopolar
    advanced electric motors.

    Affordable weapon system

        The budget request contained $40.0 million in PE 63795N for
    land attack technology, but contained no funds for the
    affordable weapon system (AWS) project.
        The committee understands that AWS is an advanced
    technology initiative intended to identify and mature
    capabilities that should lead to a precision guided weapon
    capable of kinetically engaging targets at stand-off ranges
    with a fly-away cost goal of less than $0.3 million per weapon.
    The committee notes the development of an affordable strike
    weapon against moving and urban targets has been identified by
    the Department of the Navy as a warfighting science and
    technology gap.
        The committee notes the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile
    (TLAM), Block IV is an example of an increasingly expensive
    strike weapon. The committee notes the Navy signed a five year,
    multi-year procurement contract in fiscal year 2004 for 2,200
    TLAM Block IV missiles at a unit cost of $0.7 million per
    missile. The committee notes for fiscal year 2009, the
    Department of the Navy will not procure TLAM Block IV missiles
    using multi-year procurement contract authority but will use
    annual procurement contract authority. The committee is
    concerned by the Navy's approach to Tomahawk Block IV missile
    procurement and notes that the Navy plans to obligate $281.1
    million for procurement of 207 missiles, resulting in a unit
    cost of $1.4 million per missile. The committee notes this is
    an 86 percent unit cost increase of $0.6 million per missile in
    fiscal year 2009, as compared to the unit cost of a missile
    procured under the previous multi-year procurement contract
    authority.
        The committee commends the Naval Air Systems Command's
    decision to restructure the AWS project into 2, 12-month phases
    that, with the proper funding, allow the Navy to evaluate a
    broad scope of innovative industrial base ideas that could
    potentially meet the Department's requirements for an
    affordable weapon. The committee understands the results of the
    two-phased approach should support the development of an
    initial capabilities document, which may lead to a new start
    program for AWS beginning in fiscal year 2010, with a goal of
    first article delivery in fiscal year 2016. The committee notes
    that AWS phase two, scheduled to begin in September, 2008,
    would evaluate material approaches, further refine concept of
    operations and system architecture, and construct a
    comprehensive risk assessment of material solutions provided by
    industry.
        However, the committee is concerned that the current budget
    request and prior year appropriations for AWS would only allow
    two concepts to be carried forward into phase two, instead of
    continuing to develop each concept found to have merit. The
    committee strongly encourages the Secretary of the Navy to
    maximize industry participation for the AWS project and
    understands that awarding more than two phase-two contracts
    would provide the Secretary additional system concepts and
    options to consider for AWS.
        The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE
    63795N for AWS. Additionally, the committee strongly encourages
    the Secretary of the Navy to examine more cost-effective
    alternative courses of action concerning the procurement of the
    TLAM Block IV.

    All-weather sense-and-avoid system for unmanned aerial vehicles

        The budget request contained $77.1 million in PE 62235N for
    common picture applied research, but contained no funds for
    continued development of the all-weather sense-and-avoid system
    for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
        The committee notes that UAVs operate in the national
    airspace, crowded theaters of operation, and in hazardous
    weather. Currently, UAVs lack adequate collision avoidance
    systems. The committee further notes that $2.4 million was
    appropriated by Congress for fiscal year 2008, and understands
    that additional funding in fiscal year 2009 would complete the
    development, prototype fabrication, and laboratory testing of
    the all-weather sense-and-avoid system for UAVs in a ground-
    based vehicle.
        The committee recommends $81.6 million, an increase of $2.5
    million, in PE 62235N for continued development of the all-
    weather sense-and-avoid system for UAVs.

    Composite Sea Lion craft project

        The budget request contained $131.3 million in PE 62123N
    for force protection applied research but contained no funds
    for the manufacture of a composite craft based on the aluminum
    Sea Lion craft developed by the Naval Surface Warfare Center
    for use in the special operations forces.
        The committee understands that the manufacture of a
    composite craft based on the Sea Lion hull design will allow
    the Navy to determine which type of craft, aluminum or
    composite, best serves the needs of the special operations
    forces and the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    62123N for the manufacture of a composite craft using the Sea
    Lion hull form.

    Extended range guided-munition

        The budget request contained $40.0 million in PE 63795N for
    land attack technology.
        The committee notes that $38.8 million of the funding
    requested in this program element was for the extended range
    guided munition (ERGM) program. However, this program is under
    a stop work order by the Navy pending a possible program
    cancellation by the Undersecretary of Defense, Acquisition,
    Technology, and Logistics. The committee further notes that as
    of early April 2008, only 15 percent of $51.1 million in fiscal
    year 2008 program funds were obligated due to the delay in the
    program.
        The committee believes the Navy has justifiable concerns
    regarding the performance of ERGM, especially after expending
    over $600.0 million for research and development. Nevertheless,
    the Marine Corps still requires long-range precision fire
    support. The committee is concerned that the Navy is no closer
    to fulfilling the naval surface fire support requirement than
    it was at the inception of the ERGM program. However, Congress
    has previously supported significant funding to develop
    alternatives, such as the ballistic-trajectory extended range
    munition (B-TERM), that may prove to be promising approaches to
    addressing the requirement. The committee directs the Secretary
    of the Navy to submit a report to the congressional defense
    committees within 90 days from the date of enactment of this
    Act containing an assessment of appropriate alternatives, an
    estimate of necessary resources, and a suitable program
    schedule to field a capability to support the Marine Corps
    requirement for extended range munitions capability.
        The committee recommends $1.2 million, a decrease of $38.8
    million, in PE 63795N for land attack technology.

    Global Command and Control System--Maritime

        The budget request contained $128.7 million in PE 64231N
    for tactical command systems, including some funds for the
    Global Command and Control System--Maritime.
        The committee is concerned over a lack of commitment by the
    services to transition from service stove-piped command and
    control systems to a joint architecture, such as the Network
    Enabled Command and Control system. The services can no longer
    sustain a multitude of disparate systems, from a technical
    management or financial perspective. Yet there appears to be no
    clear strategy articulated to senior decision makers showing
    how the services will move from multiple independent systems,
    to a joint, federated approach. This approach does not
    necessarily entail adopting a single system, but until the
    services commit to a unified approach to commonality, the
    military services will continue to waste funds and inhibit the
    benefits accrued by jointness.
        The committee recommends $127.7 million, a decrease of $1.0
    million in PE 64231N.

    Helicopter windscreen laminate appliques

        The budget request contained $122.9 million in PE 25633N
    for aviation improvements, but contained no funds for
    development of helicopter windscreen laminate appliques.
        The committee understands that helicopter windscreens are
    subject to erosive effects of environmental conditions, which
    can lead to significant degradation of visibility for the
    aircrew, especially during low visibility and night missions.
    The committee notes that a multi-layered protective laminate
    applique could be developed and applied to helicopter
    windscreens that would allow maintenance personnel to quickly
    restore windscreen visibility for the aircrew prior to flight
    by peeling away degraded layers, thus increasing success of
    mission operations and safety for the aircrew.
        The committee recommends an increase of $1.2 million in PE
    25633N for aviation improvements and development of helicopter
    windscreen laminate appliques.

    High-Integrity Global Positioning Systems

        The budget request contained $61.2 million in PE 63235N for
    High-Integrity Global Positioning Systems (HIGPS).
        HIGPS is designed to develop the technology required to
    demonstrate the capability to use the existing Iridium
    satellite constellation to enhance current GPS navigation and
    timing capabilities. The benefits of this approach have not
    been sufficiently proven and the committee does not recommend
    funding for this request.
        The committee recommends no funds in PE 63235N for High-
    Integrity Global Positioning Systems.

    Hyper-spectral targeting sensor

        The budget request contained $60.4 million in PE 63114N for
    power projection advanced technology, but contained no funds to
    develop a hyper-spectral targeting sensor for unmanned aerial
    systems (UAS).
        The committee notes that tactical UASs are being developed
    by the Department to provide intelligence, surveillance, and
    reconnaissance during military operations. The committee
    understands that a capability shortfall exists for an advanced
    technology sensor package that can operate on UASs from medium-
    to-long stand-off distances and at low-to moderate-grazing
    angles to mitigate exposure to defensive ground-fire and
    increase mission accomplishment. The committee also understands
    there is a requirement to collect and process specific
    wavelength-sensitive and high-quality image data, suitable for
    use with advanced algorithms that can yield actionable data in
    real time.
        The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
    63114N for power projection advanced technology for development
    of a hyper-spectral targeting sensor for UASs.

    Large-scale demonstration item for VA-Class bow dome

        The budget request contained $167.4 million in PE 64558N
    for new design SSN, but contained no funds for development of a
    large-scale Virginia class submarine bow dome utilizing
    composite manufacturing technology.
        The committee understands that certifying a composite
    process to manufacture bow domes for Virginia Class submarines
    has potential benefits of reduced cost and an expanded supply
    base compared to the current process of manufacturing
    rubberized bow domes with an auto-clave process.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
    64558N for the manufacture of a large scale composite bow dome
    as a proof of concept demonstration model.

    Marine Corps assault vehicles

        The budget request contained $316.1 million in PE 63611M
    for expeditionary fighting vehicle (EFV) research and
    development.
        The committee is concerned that plans to begin fabrication
    of new EFV prototypes in fiscal year 2009 have not sufficiently
    addressed the need to enhance protection of the EFV from mines
    and improvised explosive devices in some operational scenarios.
        The committee recommends $275.9 million, a decrease of
    $40.2 million, in PE 63611M for EFV research and development.

    Marine Corps shotgun modernization program

        The budget request contained $136.1 million in PE 26623M
    for Marine Corps ground combat/supporting arms systems, but
    contained no funds for the Marine Corps shotgun modernization
    program.
        The Marine Corps shotgun modernization program transitions
    LTLX-7000 technology into current M1014 combat shotgun
    platforms through a series of spiral developments. The
    committee understands LTLX-7000 technology uses a simple and
    robust sighting system, as well as a unique gas bleeding system
    to adjust the muzzle velocity of less than lethal (LTL)
    projectiles so that the LTL projectile hits desired targets at
    any range with the desired effect. The committee is aware that
    certain LTL projectiles can be lethal when fired at close
    range. The committee is aware LTLX-7000 technology could
    provide the user with flexibility to adjust muzzle velocity to
    address any situation and prevent unnecessary casualties.
        The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
    26623M to accelerate the Marine Corps shotgun modernization
    program.

    Marine mammal awareness, alert and response systems

        The budget request contained $28.8 million in PE 63254N for
    anti-submarine warfare (ASW) systems development but contained
    no funds for the marine mammal awareness, alert and response
    systems.
        The committee is concerned with both the need to protect
    marine mammals from adverse effects of mid-frequency sonar and
    the need for the Navy to train using mid-frequency sonar in a
    realistic environment. The committee understands that
    development of the marine mammal awareness, alert and response
    system would significantly increase the Navy's ability to
    monitor marine mammal activity in the vicinity of training
    exercises using mid-frequency sonar.
        The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
    63254N for the development of the marine mammal awareness,
    alert and response system.

    MK-48 torpedo technology development

        The budget request contained $15.9 million in PE 25632N for
    MK-48 torpedo advanced capability (TADCAP) development, but
    contained no funds for a post-launch communication system for
    use in the littorals.
        The committee understands that the Chief of Naval
    Operations has stressed that successful operations in shallow
    water is a critical necessity to counter submarine threats.
    Torpedo testing in shallow water has demonstrated that in-
    service MK-48 TADCAP has less than full capability in a shallow
    water engagement environment. The committee notes that
    traditional weighted and hollow flexible-hose and guidance wire
    communications technologies can not satisfy future operating
    environment requirements, and that a high bandwidth post-launch
    communications system is needed to ensure the MK-48 TADCAP is
    capable of meeting requirements in the littoral environment.
        The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE
    25632N for development of a post-launch communication system
    for the MK-48 TADCAP.

    Naval Ship Hydrodynamic Test Facilities, NSWC, Carderock

        The budget request contained $14.6 million in PE 63564N for
    ship preliminary design and feasibility studies but contained
    no funds to replace the wave makers at the Naval Ship
    Hydrodynamic Test Center, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC).
        The committee understands the wave makers at the NSWC are
    essential for assessing current and future naval ship designs.
    Also, the current wave makers are unable to produce consistent
    test waves and are in need of replacement.
        The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
    63564N for the replacement of the wave makers at the Naval Ship
    Hydrodynamic Test Center, Naval Surface Warfare Center.

    Navy strategy for maritime domain awareness

        The committee applauds the Navy for working to accelerate
    the deployment of a capability for achieving maritime domain
    awareness (MDA), which is vital for homeland protection and the
    projection of naval power. The committee is concerned at the
    lack of a clearly articulated Navy strategy for achieving both
    the near-term capabilities and long-range vision laid out in
    the ``National Plan to Achieve Maritime Domain Awareness''
    issued by the Department of Homeland Security, in October 2005.
        The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit
    to the congressional defense committees a report on his
    strategy for continued development of MDA capability within 180
    days after the date of enactment of this Act. This strategy
    shall address, at minimum, the following issues:
              (1) The definitions for spirals one and two
            (including descriptions of the capabilities to be
            delivered and the funding needed for these
            capabilities) and how are they linked to the ``National
            Plan to Achieve Maritime Domain Awareness;''
              (2) Capabilities planned for inclusion in future
            spirals for MDA;
              (3) A certification that current and future spirals
            will integrate into the enterprise Naval Networking
            Environment, as well as proposed future iterations;
              (4) An explanation of how technologies being
            developed in the science and technology community spin
            into future MDA spirals;
              (5) Supporting capabilities being provided by
            international or interagency partners (including
            funding levels), and a description of how these
            capabilities will be integrated into current and future
            spirals; and
              (6) The governance structure for determining program
            management oversight.
        Elsewhere in this title, the committee recommends the
    budget requested funding levels for the procurement and
    research and development programs necessary for development of
    MDA capability.

    Non-lethal weapons and technology

        The committee notes the increasing potential in the
    emerging role of non-lethal weapons and the continued
    development of non-lethal weapons technologies and
    capabilities. The committee believes that the use of these
    technologies could prove valuable in reducing risks to the
    warfighter and to non-combatants in areas of ongoing military
    operations and in potential future missions of humanitarian
    support, stability, and reconstruction operations, or defense
    support to civil authorities. In this regard, the committee
    urges the Department to pursue a greater number of development
    and employment strategies for the ultimate fielding of such
    systems and encourages the continued efforts toward developing
    active denial technologies, including the Active Denial System
    (ADS), optical incapacitation, and acoustic devices.
        The committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense
    to ensure that the non-lethal weapons science and technology
    base is adequately funded so that investments in these
    technologies can lead expeditiously to the development and
    deployment of advanced non-lethal weapons systems and
    capabilities that enhance the safety of U.S. armed forces and
    improve opportunities for mission success. The committee also
    encourages the Department to ensure that policy, doctrine, and
    tactics are developed in parallel through increased
    experimentation, as those elements are necessary to promote
    technology maturation and to ensure the rapid fielding of non-
    lethal systems.

    Recapitalization of anti-submarine warfare aircraft

        The budget request contained $1.2 billion for development
    and procurement of three P-8 developmental test aircraft. The
    budget request contained $301.5 million for development and
    procurement of P-3C modernization and sustainment programs. The
    Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded requirements list contained
    $100.0 million for P-8 Multi-Mission Aircraft (MMA) to
    accelerate replacement of the P-3C aircraft by nine months, and
    $448.3 million for P-3C unplanned aircraft grounding-item
    repairs.
        The committee understands the Navy recently determined that
    the P-3C fleet is experiencing structural fatigue in wing
    struts at a rate greater than originally estimated. As a
    result, thirty nine of 123 mission capable P-3C aircraft
    evaluated were grounded in November 2007.
        The committee understands that with implementation of a
    structural fatigue recovery plan, there is sufficient service
    life remaining in the P-3C fleet to provide needed operational
    capability until the replacement P-8 MMA reaches initial
    operational capability status in fiscal year 2013, and full
    operational capability status in fiscal year 2019, when the
    last aircraft of the P-3C fleet will be retired.
        The committee notes the Secretary of the Navy is
    contemplating accelerating initial operational capability
    status of the P-8 MMA by approximately nine months. Due to the
    two most recent Navy assessments of the contractor's
    performance as suboptimal, the committee is concerned with
    program acceleration. The committee notes that program
    officials conducted a $900.0 million baseline restructuring of
    the program in January 2007, and reduced the planned
    procurement of seven test aircraft to five aircraft. Even with
    the reduction in planned test aircraft, the testing schedule
    has not been modified, adding additional risk to the program.
        Due to these concerns, the committee expects the Secretary
    of the Navy and the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition,
    Technology and Logistics to review program execution prior to
    making a decision to accelerate P-8 MMA initial operational
    capability.
        The committee recommends $448.3 million in title XV of this
    Act for P-3C unplanned aircraft grounding-item repairs.

    Reliable Replacement Warhead

        The budget request contained $80.1 million in PE 11221N,
    Strategic Submarine and Weapons Systems Support, including
    $23.3 million for the proposed Reliable Replacement Warhead
    (RRW).
        According to the President's budget justification
    materials, these funds were requested to enable the Navy to
    support the RRW Phase 2a design and cost study, and to support
    RRW Phase 3 Engineering Development, in concert with the
    National Nuclear Security Administration. The committee finds
    that the activities described in the budget request are
    premature and not executable in fiscal year 2009. Subsequent to
    the release of the fiscal year 2009 budget request, the Office
    of the Secretary of Defense and the Navy described the
    requested funds as designed not to support the RRW program, but
    instead to support research on integrated Arming, Fuzing, and
    Firing (AF&F) systems that could be suitable with either an RRW
    or an existing weapon refurbished through a Life Extension
    Program. The committee understands that integrated AF&F designs
    with applicability across multiple platforms could yield
    important benefits.
        The committee recommends $74.5 million, a decrease of $5.6
    million, in PE 11221N for Strategic Submarine and Weapons
    Systems Support. Within this total for PE 11221N, the committee
    authorizes no funds for the RRW program. The committee
    authorizes $13.3 million within PE 11221N, Strategic Submarine
    and Weapons Systems Support, for research into integrated AF&F
    systems.

    Report on energetic materials research development and manufacturing
            technology

        The committee notes the recent reports on the advances in
    energetic materials research, development, and manufacturing
    technologies by foreign countries, and urges the Department of
    Defense (DOD) to conduct a risk assessment that would address
    national security threats arising from new and unanticipated
    energetic materials that may be developed by foreign
    governments. Additionally the committee is concerned that the
    investment required to adequately sustain a robust energetics
    research, development, and manufacturing technology program has
    not been maintained. The committee urges the Department to
    adequately invest in this area to ensure that the United States
    retains sufficient explosive production capacity, continues to
    develop future innovative munitions, and continues to develop
    the next-generation of energetics scientists and engineers. The
    committee believes a loss of this military-unique capability
    and crucial workforce would have significant ramifications for
    future weapons systems, military operations, and homeland
    security.
        Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, the
    Director of National Intelligence, and the Secretary of
    Homeland Security, to assess the current state of, and future
    advances in research, development, and manufacturing technology
    of energetic materials in both foreign countries and in the
    United States. At a minimum, the report shall include those DOD
    programmatic and budgetary recommendations that will ensure
    advanced energetic materials and equally critical energetic
    science and technology expertise are available to meet future
    national security requirements and should include the risk to
    national security if the funding level continues to decline.
        The committee recognizes the initial work done by the
    Department of the Navy in launching an energetics science and
    technology workforce revitalization initiative and encourages
    the Secretary of Defense to utilize that initiative as the
    basis for developing the report. The report shall be submitted
    to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2009.

    Ruggedized helicopter avionics displays

        The budget request contained $112.5 million in PE 63236N
    for warfighter sustainment advanced technology, but contained
    no funds to continue the development of ruggedized avionics
    displays for Navy and Marine Corps helicopter systems.
        The committee understands that helicopter vibrations and
    adverse environmental flying conditions reduce the useful
    service-life of helicopter displays, which increases display
    failure rate, increases maintenance personnel workload, and has
    the potential to decrease safety margins of aircrews during
    critical phases of flight. The committee notes that funding was
    appropriated in fiscal year 2008 to develop ruggedized
    helicopter displays and instrumentation for avionics.
    Ruggedized display systems should have the capability to
    operate in harsh conditions without the use of air vents for
    cooling, and should offer better performance, longer service-
    life, and reduced total life-cycle cost.
        The committee recommends an increase of $6.8 million in PE
    63236N for continued development of ruggedized avionics
    displays for Navy and Marine Corps helicopter systems.

    Sea-based strategic deterrent/undersea launched missile study

        The budget request contained $141.7 million in PE 63561N
    for advanced submarine system development but contained no
    funds for design and development of a sea-based strategic
    undersea launched missile.
        The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
    has no coherent plan for undersea launched strategic deterrent
    weapons systems to eventually replace the current undersea
    strategic force. The committee believes that research and
    development is necessary now to ensure undersea launched
    weapons capability is available in the future.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    63561N to begin initial studies and concept designs of future
    undersea launched weapons systems.

    Seafighter

        The budget request contained $55.1 million for force
    protection advanced technology but contained no funds for
    continuing the upgrades to make the research and development
    vessel Seafighter as deployable fleet asset.
        The committee is committed to the continued use of
    Seafighter as both a research and development craft and a
    deployable Navy asset. The design and development of Seafighter
    benefited the Navy and Coast Guard in the design and
    construction the Littoral Combat Ships and the National
    Security Cutter. Seafighter is a vital asset for continued
    research and development testing of emerging technologies
    useful in the littoral warfare environment.
        The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
    63123N to include the addition of offensive and defensive
    armament, the improvement of ship survivability systems, and
    the completion of command and control hull, mechanical, and
    electrical upgrades.

    SSGN/Virginia payload tube development

        The budget request contained $141.7 million in PE 63561N
    for advanced submarine system design but contained no funds for
    continued design and development efforts of a large diameter
    weapons launch tube for Virginia class submarines.
        The committee understands that development of a large
    diameter launch tube for Virginia class submarines will
    increase combat capability and reduce overall construction
    costs. The large diameter tube also has the potential to field
    new technologies, such as undersea autonomous vehicles, as
    those technologies mature.
        The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE
    63561N for design and development of a large diameter weapons
    launch tube for Virginia class submarines.

    Threat-D missile target development

        The committee is pleased to note the anticipated source
    selection for the development of a Threat D missile target
    development program in the summer of 2008. The committee
    remains concerned that the estimated initial operating
    capability of such a target in 2014 creates substantial risk
    during the interim period. The committee encourages the
    Secretary to accelerate the target development program to the
    maximum extent practicable. In addition, the committee directs
    the Secretary of the Navy to notify the congressional defense
    committees in writing if the estimated initial operating
    capability of the Threat D target is delayed more than 90 days
    or if the costs associated with such program exceeds 10 percent
    of programmed funding. The committee further directs the
    Secretary to provide such notification within 30 days, along
    with the reasons for such delay or cost overrun and a
    mitigation plan consisting of actions that could restore the
    program to its original timeline.

    Trigger and alert sonobuoy

        The budget request contained $5.9 million in PE 63216N for
    aviation survivability, but contained no funds for an in-buoy
    processor for a trigger and alert sonobuoy system.
        The committee understands that the Navy currently has a
    series of sonobuoys that require human intervention in order to
    be effective during mission operations. The committee notes
    there are efforts underway to test a sonobuoy system capable of
    autonomous operation that can classify, trigger, and send an
    alert message without human intervention. The committee notes
    that successful completion of this effort could provide a
    significant capability for anti-submarine warfare, diver
    detection, counter narco-terrorism, and harbor protection by
    using autonomous fields of sonobuoys that alert military
    personnel on specific cues.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
    63216N for development of an in-buoy processor that implements
    an autonomous trigger and alert sonobuoy system.

    Ultraviolet-cure structural repair adhesives

        The budget request contained $122.9 million in PE 25633N
    for aviation improvements, but contained no funds for
    development of ultraviolet-cure structural repair adhesives.
        The committee notes standard structural repair adhesives
    have extremely long cure times ranging 14 days for full cure at
    room temperature, to a forced cure at 180 degrees Fahrenheit
    for 2 hours. The committee understands ultraviolet-cure
    structural repair adhesives have been successfully demonstrated
    through the small business innovation research program and have
    cure times as low as five minutes, and could be developed for
    military aircraft and ground vehicles applications.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
    25633N for development of ultraviolet-cure structural repair
    adhesives for military use applications.

    Urban operations laboratory

        The budget request contained $59.0 million in PE 63635M for
    Marine Corps ground combat support systems, but contained no
    funds for the urban operations laboratory (UOL) program.
        The UOL program focuses on the development and enhancement
    of non-lethal capabilities for use in the urban environment to
    include vehicle stopping systems, bomb detection capabilities,
    and improvised explosive device detection capabilities. The
    committee is aware the Marine Corps has indicated this program
    is a critical, unfunded requirement for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
    63635M to accelerate the urban operations laboratory program
    and address the Marine Corps unfunded requirement.

    VH-71 presidential helicopter program

        The committee understands the need to replace the aging
    fleet of VH-3 and VH-60 helicopters currently in use by the
    executive office of the President of the United States. The
    committee also notes that the total acquisition costs for the
    VH-71 Presidential Helicopter replacement program are projected
    to increase from $6.5 billion to $11.2 billion.
        The committee notes that this cost increase is above a 25
    percent unit cost increase over the program baseline, commonly
    referred to as a ``Nunn-McCurdy breach,'' and will necessitate
    the certification requirements of section 2433 (e)(2)(A) of
    title 10, United States Code.
        The committee expects that the Secretary of Defense will
    submit an analysis of the potential advantages and
    disadvantages of conducting a re-competition for the program
    when the report, required by section 2433 (e)(2)(A), is
    forwarded to the Congress.

    Warfighter rapid awareness processing technology

        The budget request contained $36.4 million in PE 62131M for
    Marine Corps landing force technology development, but
    contained no funds for the development of warfighter rapid
    awareness processing technology.
        The committee recognizes warfighter rapid awareness
    processing technology could help to address the expeditionary
    warfighter's need for rapidly configured and deployable
    training environments that use virtual simulation technologies.
    The committee recognizes an integral part of these environments
    are physiologic monitoring technologies for assessing realism
    of the simulation and readiness of the warfighter. The
    committee is aware that warfighter rapid awareness processing
    technology could address a Marine Corps universal need
    statement for a full immersive live/virtual training
    environment.
        The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
    62131M for the development of warfighter rapid awareness
    processing technology.

             Air Force Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $28.1 billion for Air Force
    research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
        The committee recommends $28.2 billion, an increase of
    $171.7 million to the budget request.

                           Items of Special Interest

    B-2 Small Diameter Bomb Moving-Target-Kill integration

        The budget request contained $351.4 million in PE 64240F
    for development of technologies and upgrades for the B-2
    bomber, but contained no funds for continued development of
    Small Diameter Bomb Moving-Target-Kill (SDB/MTK) capability
    integration for the B-2.
        The committee notes that Congress appropriated $12.8
    million in fiscal year 2007 and $5.8 million in fiscal year
    2008 for integration and upgrades to unreliable and
    unsupportable cockpit displays for radar image display and
    targeting functions necessary to implement SDB/MTK capability
    on the B-2. The committee understands that a B-2 SDB/MTK
    capability that includes sensor improvements and integration of
    a low-observable data link capable weapon will provide the
    combat commander a new capability to covertly approach and
    strike moving targets.
        The committee recommends an increase of $10.3 million in PE
    64240F for continued development and integration of SDB/MTK for
    the B-2 bomber.

    C-130J development

        The budget request contained $52.4 million in PE 41132F for
    development of C-130J block upgrade activities, of which $25.0
    million was included for the international block upgrade.
        The committee understands that the international block
    upgrade is in excess to program requirements since it is not
    executable in fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommends $27.4 million in PE 41132F, a
    decrease of $25.0 million.

    Combat search and recovery vehicle-x

        The budget request contained $305.1 million in PE 64261F
    for the development of the combat search and recovery vehicle-X
    (CSAR-X). The budget request also contained $15.0 million in
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force for advance procurement of
    CSAR-X long-lead components.
        The CSAR-X program is developing the next-generation
    personnel recovery vehicle which will replace the current HH-
    60G Pave Hawk helicopter, and provide increased capabilities of
    speed, range, survivability, cabin size, and high-altitude
    hover operations. The Department of the Air Force anticipated
    beginning CSAR-X integration and demonstration activities early
    in fiscal year 2007, but these activities have been delayed by
    two bid protests, which were subsequently sustained, and have
    required the Department of the Air Force to re-solicit bids for
    the CSAR-X program. The committee understands that the contract
    award will not occur until late in the first quarter of fiscal
    year 2009. As a result of this delay, the committee notes that
    the Department of the Air Force has identified $40.0 million
    for development of the CSAR-X which exceeds fiscal year 2009
    requirements. Additionally, the committee notes that the
    Government Accountability Office identified $15.0 million for
    advance procurement of CSAR-X long-lead components which,
    according to Department of the Air Force CSAR-X program
    officials, is not required for fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommends $265.1 million, a decrease of
    $40.0 million in PE 64261F. The committee also recommends no
    funds in Aircraft Procurement, Air Force for the advance
    procurement of CSAR-X long-lead components, a decrease of $15.0
    million.

    Common vertical lift support platform

        The budget request contained $3.9 million in PE 64263F for
    system program office and management support of the common
    vertical lift support platform (CVLSP) program. The CVLSP
    program is a ``new start'' for fiscal year 2009 and would
    provide vertical lift for the Air Force Space Command's nuclear
    weapon security, and for mass passenger transport in the
    National Capital Region. The CVLSP would replace 62 UH-1N
    helicopters which are now used to perform these missions.
        The committee notes that the CVLSP requirements process is
    not complete, the acquisition strategy has not yet been
    developed, and the Department of the Air Force has not
    programmed any funds for this purpose beyond 2009. The
    committee believes that these actions should be taken before
    funds are authorized for this purpose. Therefore the committee
    recommends no funds for the CVLSP in PE 64263F, a decrease of
    $3.9 million.

    Cyber boot camp

        The budget request contained $109.5 million in PE 62702F
    for work to develop better command, control, and communications
    systems within the Air Force, including $1.1 million to support
    the Advanced Course in Engineering (ACE) Cyber Boot Camp summer
    program for the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps
    (ROTC).
        The committee applauds the efforts at the Air Force
    Research Laboratory Rome Research Site (AFRL/RRS) to develop
    educational curriculum to develop the future workforce of cyber
    operations experts. The mission of the ACE is to develop ROTC
    cadets into cyber officers and represents the only cyber
    education offered by the Department of Defense for ROTC cadets.
    ACE is a 10-week summer program consisting of classes, on-the-
    job mentoring, and officer development that targets the top
    students in computer-related disciplines, and teaches them to
    become original thinkers, problem solvers, and technical
    leaders. The committee recognizes that this program is vital to
    ensuring a robust information technology workforce that is
    capable of handling current and future cyber threats to our
    systems. The committee believes the ACE cyber boot camp should
    be expanded beyond the Air Force to include ROTC cadets from
    the other military services.
        The committee recommends $110.5 million, an increase of
    $1.0 million, in PE 62702F for AFRL/RRS to support the
    expansion of the ACE Cyber Boot curriculum to other service
    ROTC participants, and to provide for additional 10-week
    courses to accommodate this expansion.

    Global Command and Control System--Air Force

        The budget request contained $3.2 million in PE 33150F for
    the Global Command and Control System--Air Force.
        The committee is concerned over a lack of commitment by the
    services to transition from service stove-piped command and
    control systems to a joint architecture, such as the Network
    Enabled Command and Control system. The services can no longer
    sustain a multitude of disparate systems, from a technical
    management or financial perspective. Yet there appears to be no
    clear strategy articulated to senior decision makers showing
    how the services will move from multiple independent systems,
    to a joint, federated approach. This approach does not
    necessarily entail adopting a single system, but until the
    services commit to a unified approach to commonality, the
    military services will continue to waste funds and inhibit the
    benefits accrued by jointness.
        The committee recommends $2.2 million, a decrease of $1.0
    million in PE 33150F.

    High Accuracy Network Determination System

        The budget request contained $4.8 million in PE 63444F for
    the Maui Space Surveillance System, but no funds for High
    Accuracy Network Determination System (HANDS).
        HANDS addresses critical space situational awareness needs
    and reduces the potential for collisions of space assets by
    reducing errors in the current space-object maintenance
    catalog, as well as supplementing the catalog with system
    characterization information.
        The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
    63444F for the HANDS program.

    Improved reliability for optimized inspection

        The budget request contained $41.9 million in PE 63112F for
    the development of various advanced materials technologies for
    transition into Department of the Air Force systems, but
    contained no funds for development of improved reliability for
    optimized inspection for C-130 maintenance.
        The committee notes that regularly scheduled non-
    destructive inspection (NDI) and maintenance of Department of
    the Air Force aircraft require that the aircraft be removed
    from service for extended time periods. The committee
    understands that efforts undertaken to improve confidence in
    the reliability of NDI to assess damage without costly and
    time-consuming maintenance will increase aircraft availability
    and reduce maintenance costs over current practices.
        To improve the NDI inspection process, the committee
    recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63112F for
    development of improved reliability for optimized inspection
    for C-130 maintenance. The committee expects that these funds
    will be used to obtain samples of cracked C-130 parts,
    manufacture samples simulating cracked C-130 parts, perform
    controlled inspections of parts to validate models of
    inspections, and to validate a process for assessing and
    improving inspections.

    Intercontinental ballistic missile cryptography upgrade

        The budget request contained $65.6 million in PE 63851F for
    Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM), but contained no
    funds for the ICBM cryptography upgrade, increment II.
        The committee is aware that the ICBM cryptography upgrade,
    increment II, is an unfunded Air Force requirement.
        The committee recommends $70.6 million, an increase of $5.0
    million, for Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles for the ICBM
    cryptography upgrade.

    Joint cargo aircraft program

        The budget request contained $26.8 million in PE 41138F for
    development of the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA). The Chief of
    Staff of the Air Force also included $74.8 million on the
    unfunded requirements list for procurement of two special
    operations JCA. The committee notes that a Joint Requirements
    Oversight Council validated requirement for a special
    operations JCA does not currently exist within the Department
    of Defense.
        The committee notes that during the fiscal year 2008 budget
    cycle, the congressional defense committees raised concerns
    over the requirements for JCA, whether or not it is needed to
    fulfill Department of Defense intra-theater airlift
    requirements, and which service, either Army or Air Force,
    should operate the platform. As a result, the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
    restricted the program from obligating or expending
    appropriated funds until submission of six Department of
    Defense initiated studies to the congressional defense
    committees. The committee notes that none of these important
    studies were directed by Congress and could have informed JCA
    program decisions more effectively had they been timed prior to
    program Milestone C certification by the Undersecretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)).
        The committee understands that during the acquisition
    strategy review process, USD(AT&L) added a caveat to the June
    20, 2006 Memorandum of Agreement between the Services that
    directed further analysis be conducted to determine the
    appropriate JCA aircraft inventory. USD(AT&L) directed the
    Services to jointly perform an update to the Army Analysis of
    Alternatives, with an Air Force requirement to support both
    Departments by providing an Intra-theater Airlift Fleet Mix
    Analysis (IAFMA) to determine the Services' JCA inventory
    requirements. The IAFMA was completed and submitted to Congress
    in February 2008.
        The committee emphasizes that contrary to USD(AT&L) tasking
    and intent, the IAFMA did not assess the Army's time-sensitive
    cargo mission or requirements, and notes that the IAFMA makes
    an unsubstantiated statement in its findings that the Air Force
    should procure no more than 24 aircraft to meet the Army's
    time-sensitive cargo mission requirements. The committee also
    emphasizes that the IAFMA states that it is more cost-effective
    for the Air Force to procure the C-130J aircraft and found that
    the JCA was not effective in any of the 2005 Mobility
    Capabilities Study (MCS) scenarios. The committee also notes
    that in written testimony provided to the subcommittee on Air &
    Land Forces on April 1, 2008, the Commander, Air Mobility
    Command stated that the JCA is 60 to 70 percent less cost-
    effective than the C-130J in performing MCS missions.
        The committee is very concerned by the lack of analytical
    basis used to justify procurement of JCA and is discouraged by
    the decision-making process used by USD(AT&L) during the
    Milestone C process. The committee notes that the decision of
    USD(AT&L) on May 30, 2007, concerning the division of 78
    aircraft between the Army and Air Force was based on what each
    service had programmed at the time in the Future Years Defense
    Plan (FYDP), and not on analytical findings. Additionally, the
    committee notes that the Air Force's fiscal year 2007
    Capabilities Review and Risk Assessment study recommends that
    funding for JCA be reallocated for higher priority Air Force
    mobility programs.
        Finally, the committee is concerned by the cost difference
    of JCA, compared to the cost and capability of C-130J. The
    committee notes that the Air Force unit cost for JCA is $60.7
    million and the unit cost for a C-130J is $56.7 million. The
    committee further notes that the C-130J has twice the airlift
    capability of the JCA and has flight performance
    characteristics very similar to the JCA. The committee
    understands the Air Force plans to allocate 24 JCA among 6 Air
    National Guard basing locations in the states of Maryland,
    Ohio, Connecticut, North Dakota, Mississippi, and Michigan. The
    committee expects the Secretary of the Air Force to thoroughly
    review FYDP funding for JCA and determine if it is more cost-
    effective and prudent to utilize that funding for 24 additional
    C-130J aircraft to support future missions of the Air National
    Guard units programmed to receive JCA.

    Joint strike fighter

        The budget request contained $1.5 billion in PE 64800F, and
    $1.5 billion in PE 64800N, for development of the Joint Strike
    Fighter (JSF), but contained no funds for development of a
    competitive JSF propulsion system. The budget request also
    contained $136.9 million for F-35 advance procurement in
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force for the long-lead components
    necessary to procure 12 F-35A aircraft in fiscal year 2010, but
    contained no funds for advance procurement of competitive JSF
    propulsion system long-lead components.
        The competitive JSF propulsion system program is developing
    the F136 engine, which would provide a competitive alternative
    to the currently-planned F135 engine. In the committee report
    (H. Rept. 109-452) accompanying the John Warner National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, and once again
    in the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
    committee recommended increases for the JSF competitive
    propulsion system, and notes that in both cases, the other
    three congressional defense committees concurred. Despite
    section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), which requires the
    Secretary of Defense to obligate and expend sufficient annual
    amounts for the continued development and procurement of a
    competitive propulsion system for the JSF, the committee is
    disappointed that the Department of Defense (DOD) chose not to
    comply with both the spirit and intent of this provision by
    opting not to include funds for this purpose in the budget
    request.
        On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittees on Air and Land Forces
    and Seapower and Expeditionary Forces held a hearing at which
    the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
    Logistics (USD (AT&L)) and the Government Accountability
    Office's (GAO) Director of Acquisition Sourcing and Management
    testified. Witnesses were asked to provide an update to the
    independent lifecycle cost analysis of the JSF propulsion
    system required by section 211 of the John Warner National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
    364) based on the obligation of an additional $480.0 million
    authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 2008, performance
    of the competitive engine program to date, and the additional
    year of development. The GAO Director of Acquisition and
    Sourcing Management complied with the subcommittees' request
    and testified that the Department of Defense would recoup its
    initial investment costs with program savings of between 9 and
    11 percent, or about 1.3 percent less than the GAO reported in
    2007. He also testified that at least that amount of savings
    could be achieved in the long run based on analysis of actual
    data from the F-16 engine competition. Opting not to comply
    with the committee request, the USD (AT&L) testified that the
    Department did not direct the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense's Cost Analysis and Improvement Group to update its
    analysis from the previous year, and that there had been no
    significant changes to the program that would have resulted in
    any changes to their findings. Based on this testimony, the
    committee believes that a competitive propulsion system for the
    JSF offers the promise of long-term savings.
        The committee also notes that in August 2007, the
    currently-planned F135 engine experienced a hardware failure
    during test stand operations with the short take-off and
    vertical land (STOVL) lift fan engaged, and that a similar
    failure occurred again in February 2008, and that these engine
    failure will result in a currently-projected delay to the first
    flight of the F-35 STOVL variant by 30 to 60 days. While the
    committee understands that the F135 engine is still in
    development and test failures may occur, the committee believes
    that, over the long-term, a competitive JSF propulsion program
    will result in improved engine performance for all JSF
    variants. These test failure events and the subcommittees'
    hearing testimony cause the committee to remain steadfast in
    its belief that the non-financial factors of a two-engine
    competitive program such as better engine performance, improved
    contractor responsiveness, a more robust industrial base,
    increased engine reliability and improved operational readiness
    strongly favor continuing the competitive propulsion system
    program.
        For continued development of the competitive JSF propulsion
    system program, the committee recommends $1.8 billion, an
    increase of $247.5 million in PE 64800F, and $1.8 billion, an
    increase of $247.5 million in PE 64800N. The committee also
    recommends $167.9 million, an increase of $31.0 million for
    advance procurement of competitive JSF propulsion system long-
    lead components, for F-35 advance procurement in Aircraft
    Procurement, Air Force. Additionally, the committee strongly
    urges the Department of Defense to comply with the spirit and
    intent of section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) by including the
    funds necessary for continued development and procurement of a
    competitive JSF propulsion system in its fiscal year 2010
    budget request.

    Low profile arresting gear

        The budget request contained $28.9 million in PE 65978F to
    sustain the inventory of the Air Force Material Command's test
    and evaluation facilities, but contained no funds to test the
    low profile arresting gear (LPAG).
        The committee notes that numerous airports across the
    United States host both military and commercial flight
    operations concurrently. Many military tactical aircraft have
    arresting hooks for use in emergency situations; however
    installation of arresting equipment for military use may cause
    interference to large commercial aircraft due to the size of
    the arresting equipment engines and their close proximity to
    the runway. To address this problem, the Department of the Air
    Force has introduced the Airfield Obstruction Reduction
    Initiative (AORI) program. The committee understands that the
    LPAG would be consistent with the AORI requirements since it
    would minimize physical interference and obstructions to
    commercial aircraft, while providing the necessary arresting
    equipment for military tactical aircraft use.
        The committee recommends $29.9 million, an increase of $1.0
    million, in PE 65978F to test the LPAG.

    Metals affordability initiative

        The budget request contained $41.9 million in PE 63112F for
    advanced materials for weapon systems.
        The committee supports the continued government-industry
    collaboration provided through the Metals Affordability
    Initiative. It provides significant improvements in the
    manufacturing of specialty metals for aerospace applications
    for the government and aerospace industry, and provides
    improved affordability of aerospace materials.
        The committee recommends an additional $14.0 million in PE
    63112F for the Metals Affordability Initiative.

    Multiple unmanned aerial vehicle employment against a common objective

        The budget request contained $149.8 million in PE 35206F
    for airborne reconnaissance systems, but contained no funds for
    the employment of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV)
    against a common objective.
        The committee notes the operational utility of operating
    large numbers of UAVs, yet notes the increased difficulty of
    operating multiple UAVs in close proximity because of limited
    bandwidth availability. United States Central Command issued an
    operational need statement to meet an objective requirement for
    the Predator UAV to operate up to eight air vehicles
    simultaneously from a single ground station.
        The committee recommends an additional $10.0 million in PE
    35206F for demonstration and deployment of multiple UAV
    employment against a common objective.

    Next-generation tactical environmental clothing

        The budget request contained $5.7 million in PE 48011F for
    special tactics-combat control, but contained no funds for
    next-generation tactical environmental clothing for Air Force
    Special Operations Command (AFSOC) special tactics teams and
    combat controllers.
        The committee recognizes AFSOC special tactics teams and
    forward combat air controllers operate in harsh environments
    and conditions that require extreme physical exertion for
    extended periods of time. The committee is aware that recent
    developments in clothing technology could reduce the effects of
    moisture on the body and could provide superior antimicrobial
    characteristics. The committee believes these materials could
    benefit military personnel who operate in prolonged harsh
    combat conditions.
        The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
    48011F for the continued development and demonstration of next
    generation tactical environmental clothing for AFSOC special
    tactics teams and forward combat air controllers.

    Non-attribution of open source intelligence research

        The budget request contained funds in PE 31310F for the
    National Air Intelligence Center, but contained no funds to
    support expanded open source research to complement traditional
    intelligence analytical products.
        The committee recognizes that open source intelligence
    provides a critical complementary capability to traditional
    intelligence gathering and analysis. The committee is
    encouraged by the growing recognition within the military and
    intelligence communities of the value of open source
    intelligence which is punctuated by the establishment of the
    Open Source Center and the development of an Army field manual
    on open source intelligence.
        Efforts in this area will require collectors to operate in
    benign cyberspace domains, such as media websites and academic
    databases, as well as more hostile areas, such as foreign
    language blogging websites and even websites maintained by
    terrorist or state-actors groups. The committee is concerned
    about the ability of our adversaries to be able to track and
    attribute collection activities to U.S. and allied forces.
    Technology exists to provide non-attribution services to
    protect identities, especially source country of origin.
        The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure,
    through the use of all reasonable means, protection of
    government investigators involved in gathering open source
    intelligence. These means should include proven non-attribution
    services, as well as development of appropriate tactics,
    techniques and procedures that are incorporated into manuals
    and training programs.
        The committee also recommends an increase of $3.0 million,
    in PE 31310F to support the development of training packages
    for new analysts that address how to integrate open source into
    analytic products, as well as techniques for maintaining
    anonymity online when conducting research. This funding may
    also be used to support development of new tools to promote
    open source research, and associated experimentation and
    evaluation that may be needed to validate both the tools and
    training.

    Operationally responsive space

        The budget request contained $110.0 million in PE 64857F
    for operationally responsive space (ORS) programs.
        The committee remains supportive of ORS, but is concerned
    about the implementation of the ORS program office mandated by
    the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364). The committee observes that
    nearly two years after its establishment, the program office
    remains considerably understaffed with only 3 billets filled
    out of 20 authorized. In the near-term, the committee
    encourages efforts to leverage available technology for on-
    orbit demonstrations and investments in common components and
    interface standards to facilitate building a robust pipeline of
    ORS systems for on-demand space support and reconstitution.
    Responsive processes, coordination mechanisms, and acquisitions
    are equally important to the success of ORS. The committee also
    recognizes that a balance must be struck between near-term and
    future capabilities, particularly in the area of space launch
    vehicle (SLV) development. The committee is aware of several
    low-cost, responsive SLV concepts and encourages the Department
    to develop a longer-term strategy that includes opportunities
    for competition.
        The budget request for ORS contained no funds for the
    Operational Airborne Sensor In Space (OASIS) program. The
    committee notes that the United States Strategic Command has a
    stated mission need for operationally responsive day-night
    visual sensors on tactical space platforms. Accordingly, the
    committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for the
    development an electro-optical/infrared sensor for an ORS
    spacecraft.
        The committee recommends $120.0 million in PE 64857F for
    operationally responsive space, including $10.0 million for
    OASIS.

    RAND Project Air Force

        The budget request contained $28.7 million in PE 65101F for
    RAND Project Air Force.
        The committee notes with concern that funding requested for
    RAND Project Air Force declined significantly from fiscal year
    2007 levels. The committee is concerned with the lack of stable
    funding for this program, and encourages the Air Force to
    provide stable funding for RAND Project Air Force.
        The committee recommends $31.7 million, an increase of $3.0
    million, in PE 65101F for RAND Project Air Force.

    Single-mode optical connectors for advanced air vehicles

        The budget request contained $122.9 million in PE 62201F
    for aerospace vehicle technologies, but contained no funds for
    the development of single-mode optical connectors for advanced
    air vehicles.
        The United States aerospace vehicles (manned and unmanned)
    require processing of increasing amounts of data for
    communications, mission computers, and sensor and flight
    control systems in order to fly, fight, and win in increasingly
    dangerous aerospace environments. The committee notes that as
    the demand for bandwidth increases, so too does the need to
    protect this information from external threat such as
    electromagnetic interference (EMI). The development of single-
    mode multi-channel optical connectors in support of fly-by-
    light technology could lead to improvements in data
    transmission, reduced equipment costs, safer aircraft
    operations, and improved resistance to EMI.
        The committee recommends $124.4 million, an increase of
    $1.5 million, in PE 62201F for the development of single-mode
    optical connectors.

    Space control test capabilities

        The budget request contained $74.9 million in PE 64421F for
    counterspace systems, but contained no funds for the space
    control test capabilities program.
        The space control test capabilities program supports the
    development of an architecture analysis tool to address
    integration and optimization of space control systems.
        The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
    64421F for the space control test capabilities program.

    Third Generation Infrared Surveillance

        The budget request contained $149.1 million in PE 64443F
    for development of the Third Generation Infrared Surveillance
    (3GIRS).
        The 3GIRS program is designed to provide advanced
    capability in warning of ballistic missile attacks on the
    United States, its deployed forces, and its allies, while also
    supporting missile defense, battlespace awareness, and
    technical intelligence missions. The program, originally
    referred to as the Alternative Infrared Satellite System
    (AIRSS), was initiated in 2006, as a result of a Nunn-McCurdy
    review of the Space Based Infrared Systems (SBIRS)-High program
    to generate competition for the third SBIRS geosynchronous
    orbit (GEO) satellite and explore alternative technologies.
        With the Defense Acquisition Executive's decision to
    procure SBIRS GEO-3 in July 2007, and following congressional
    guidance, the Air Force has redirected AIRSS resources to
    pursue risk reduction, system definition, and ground tests to
    enable a third generation space based infrared program after
    the SBIRS GEO-3 satellite is delivered.
        Originally conceived as a low technical risk system, the
    3GIRS program now includes significant technology development
    and a potential flight test demonstration. Both activities add
    additional risk to the program and have limited benefits in the
    near-term. With the success achieved by the Space Based
    Infrared System highly elliptical orbit payload in 2007, the
    committee finds the 3GIRS development program is premature.
        The committee recommends $75.0 million, a decrease of $74.1
    million to the 3GIRS program, in PE 64443F to support continued
    development of wide field-of-view focal plane technology.

    Winglets for in-service aerial refueling aircraft

        The committee commends the Air Force for its efforts to
    increase aircraft fuel efficiency and decrease fuel
    consumption. The committee notes that initiatives such as re-
    engining aircraft, modifying in-flight profiles, and revising
    aircraft ground operations contribute to decreased fuel
    consumption and increased life-cycle savings.
        The committee is aware that winglet technology exists for
    aircraft to increase fuel efficiency, improve take-off
    performance, increase cruise altitudes, and increase payload
    and range capability. The committee notes that winglets are
    currently used on commercial aircraft and result in a five to
    seven percent increase in fuel efficiency. The committee
    believes that incorporating winglets on military aircraft could
    increase fuel efficiency on certain platforms and that the Air
    Force should examine incorporating this technology onto its
    platforms.
        In the committee report (H. Rept. 109-452) accompanying the
    John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2007, the committee directed the Secretary of the Air Force to
    provide a report to the congressional defense committees
    examining the feasibility of modifying Air Force aircraft with
    winglets. The Air Force report preliminarily concluded that
    between $36.0 million and $400.0 million in fuel savings could
    be achieved for the KC-135R tanker aircraft and between $12.0
    million and $221.0 million could be achieved for the KC-10
    tanker aircraft if modified with winglets. However, the
    committee notes that the report stated that it is not possible
    to know the actual modification costs and fuel savings without
    performing a detailed engineering analysis for each aircraft
    type.
        The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
    task a federally funded research and development center to
    conduct an engineering analysis on modifying KC-135R and KC-10
    tanker aircraft with winglets and submit a report to the
    congressional defense committees by May 1, 2009. For the
    engineering analysis and report, the Secretary of the Air Force
    shall: use current performance data for each aircraft; include
    a cost comparison analysis for the cost of winglet
    modifications compared to the return on investment realized
    over time for each aircraft during its programmed service-life;
    determine the market price of JP-8 aviation jet fuel at which
    incorporating winglets would be beneficial for each aircraft
    mission design series; assess all positive and negative impacts
    to aircraft maintenance and flight operations; and analyze
    investment strategies the Air Force could implement with
    commercial partners to minimize Air Force capital investment
    and maximize investment return.

    Wire integrity technology program

        The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 63680F for
    the development of manufacturing technology programs, but
    contained no funds for development of a wire integrity
    technology program.
        The committee understands that the Department of the Air
    Force currently relies on out-dated testing equipment and
    repair technologies to sustain aging aircraft wiring systems.
    To address this deficiency, the committee believes that a wire
    integrity technology program would develop and test new wire
    materials, develop advanced testing equipment to ensure
    accurate fault detection, develop processes and procedures for
    wire manufacturing technology, and improve workforce training
    in repair and analysis of aircraft wiring systems.
        The committee recommends $41.7 million, an increase of $2.0
    million, in PE 63680F for development of a wire integrity
    technology program, and believes that this program has the
    potential to reduce the approximately $300.0 million expended
    annually on wiring inspections, and improve weapon system
    reliability and safety.

            Defense Wide Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $21.5 billion for Defense Wide
    research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
        The committee recommends $20.8 billion, a decrease of
    $654.4 million to the budget request.

            Operational Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $188.8 million for Operational
    research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
        The committee recommends $188.8 million, the requested
    amount for fiscal year 2009.

                           Items of Special Interest

    Acquisition of foreign material for training purposes

        The budget request contained $62.8 million in PE 65117D8Z
    for foreign material acquisition and exploitation, but
    contained no funds to acquire quality, cost effective, and
    realistic training aids to be distributed evenly to the joint
    service explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) community.
        The committee understands the importance of realistic
    training aids in providing effective training for EOD
    technicians, especially considering the challenges faced in
    Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The
    insurgencies in those two nations have proven to be resourceful
    in the use of readily available materials, and highly adaptive
    in responding to our countermeasures. Lessons learning in those
    areas of responsibility are also rapidly proliferating to other
    areas due to the ubiquity of the internet to provide anonymous
    communications capacity. Without the ability to quickly acquire
    realistic systems and develop training packages for the EOD
    community, American forces will be unable to keep within the
    decision cycle of our adversaries, jeopardizing the lives of
    coalition forces and civilians.
        The committee recommends $67.8 million, an increase of $5.0
    million, in PE 65117D8Z.

    Advanced energy storage technology initiative

        The budget request contained $9.3 million in PE 63618D8Z
    for joint electronic advanced technology.
        The committee is aware of continuing requirements for
    innovative battery and non-battery power sources for a number
    of military applications. These military applications include
    power generation for soldiers, weapons, vehicles, and
    installations, which require energy storage technologies that
    meet unique performance and system integration specifications.
    The committee notes a number of developmental technologies that
    have the potential for meeting the requirements of the military
    services. These include the following: thin lithium-ion
    disulfide batteries; rechargeable lithium batteries; carbonate
    fuel cells; polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell auxiliary
    power units; mobile micro-grid energy storage devices; fuel
    cells and electrochemical energy storage; domestically-produced
    lithium-ion battery materials and safer lithium ion battery
    designs; lithium ion superpolymer battery systems for future
    vehicle power; novel zinc air power sources for soldier power;
    fuel cell demonstrations for backup power; fuel cell hybrid
    electrical generation systems; acid alkaline direct methanol
    fuel cell technology; and carbon nanotube enhanced power
    sources for space. The committee recommends that such
    technologies be considered for potential research, development,
    testing and/or demonstration funding. The committee recommends
    that the Director of Defense Research and Engineering select a
    technology or technologies on the basis of technical merit,
    cost-effectiveness, and the potential of a particular
    technology to meet service needs.
        The committee recommends $19.3 million, an increase of
    $10.0 million, in PE 63618D8Z for the advanced energy storage
    technology initiative.

    Analysis of the industrial base for space acquisitions

        The Cost Analysis Improvement Group (CAIG) within the
    Office of the Secretary of Defense recently conducted an
    analysis of the industrial base for the hardware elements of
    space programs that identified significant challenges. The
    committee believes this analysis should be maintained and
    updated on a regular basis. The committee also notes that
    current and planned space systems are software dependent, and
    recommends the industrial base study be broadened to analyze
    the industrial capabilities and capacity to respond to future
    software requirements.
        The committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to
    task the CAIG to analyze the industrial base that supports the
    development and production of space systems on a regular basis.
    The committee further directs the Secretary to provide a report
    to the congressional defense committees by October 1, 2008, on
    the health of the industrial base supporting space acquisitions
    and plans for monitoring the industrial base in the future.

    Army advanced hypersonic weapon

        The budget request contained $117.6 million in PE 64165D8Z
    for Prompt Global Strike Capability development, including no
    funds for the Army advanced hypersonic weapon.
        The committee is aware that the Army has been developing
    the advanced hypersonic weapon under the auspices of a separate
    Army program. The committee believes that the Army should
    continue its work in coordination with the Defense-wide Prompt
    Global Strike program.
        The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
    64165D8Z for Army advanced hypersonic weapon technology
    development.

    Ballistic missile defense

        The committee is concerned that the Missile Defense Agency
    remains too focused on the threat from long-range missiles and
    is not devoting sufficient resources and attention on threats
    from short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. Such short-
    and medium-range missiles represent the overwhelming ballistic
    missile threat to U.S. interests, deployed forces, and allies
    around the world. The Joint Capabilities Mix II study,
    sponsored by the U.S. Strategic Command in 2007, is just one
    example of combatant commanders reporting to Congress that the
    United States does not currently possess sufficient numbers of
    regional missile defense capabilities to counter the current
    and growing threat from short- and medium-range ballistic
    missiles.
        Elsewhere in this title, the committee has re-prioritized
    resources away from systems designed to address longer-term
    threats and focused them instead on closing existing capability
    gaps against short- and medium-range threats. As the Department
    of Defense begins to develop its fiscal year 2010 budget, the
    committee urges it to focus greater attention on the threat
    from short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.
                Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense
        The budget request contained $1.2 billion in PE 63892C, for
    the sea-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD), which is
    designed to defend against short-, medium-, and intermediate-
    range ballistic missiles.
        The committee notes its continuing concern that the Missile
    Defense Agency is not providing sufficient funds for Aegis BMD.
    Given the threat posed by short- and medium-range ballistic
    missiles, the committee is concerned that the 133 Standard
    Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptors that are currently planned will
    be insufficient. The committee's views are consistent with the
    results of the recently completed Joint Capabilities Mix Study
    II, which concluded that combatant commanders require nearly
    twice as many SM-3 interceptors than the 133 now planned.
    Elsewhere in this Act, the committee has increased funding for
    SM-3 production.
        The committee also notes its strong support for the United
    States-Japan Cooperative Development Program, which is co-
    developing the SM-3 Block IIA missile designed to counter
    longer-range ballistic missile threats. The committee expects
    the Missile Defense Agency to continue to support the
    development of the current unitary kill vehicle for that
    interceptor.
        The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE
    63892C for the purchase of additional ballistic missile signal
    processors. Furthermore, in accordance with section 223 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181), the committee recommends the transfer of $56.0
    million for procurement of SM-3 interceptors to title 1.
        The committee, therefore, recommends a total of $1.1
    billion, a decrease of $36.0 million, in PE 63892C for Aegis
    BMD.
                Airborne Laser
        The budget request contained $421.2 million in PE 63883C
    for the Airborne Laser (ABL) Capability Development program.
        The committee continues to have serious concerns about the
    ABL program. The ABL program has suffered numerous delays and
    cost increases since its inception in 1996, and is currently
    estimated to cost $5.1 billion, five times greater than the
    original cost estimate, from inception to completion of its
    first lethal shoot-down test, currently scheduled for 2009.
    Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated
    that it could cost as much as $36.0 billion to develop,
    procure, and operate a fleet of 7 ABL aircraft for 20 years.
        The committee notes several challenges remain for the ABL
    program that will not be addressed as part of the lethal shoot-
    down test in 2009, including ABL's inherent operational
    constraints. Additional testing is required to demonstrate
    operational capability and military utility. The committee is
    also concerned about the number of ABL aircraft required to
    maintain an operational ABL patrol.
        The committee notes that even if the 2009 shoot down
    demonstration is successful, it will not demonstrate whether
    ABL will be operationally effective, survivable, or affordable.
    Before a decision is made to begin procuring additional ABL
    aircraft, the committee believes that a full review of this
    program, and other potential boost phase defense systems, is
    required. Elsewhere in this title, the committee directs a
    review of options for boost phase missile defense systems. The
    committee therefore believes it is premature to begin planning
    for the procurement of a second ABL aircraft as requested in
    the budget request. Furthermore, the committee has also reduced
    funding for activities not directly required to achieve the
    2009 shoot down demonstration.
        The committee recommends $378.6 million, a decrease of
    $42.6 million, in PE 63883C for the ABL program, and authorizes
    no funding for a second ABL aircraft.
                Arrow Weapons System
        The State of Israel has indicated a requirement for a
    follow-on system to the existing Arrow Weapons System to
    improve its capability to engage ballistic missiles at longer
    ranges. It has also noted an interest in developing a new
    weapons system, the Arrow-3, to meet this requirement.
        The committee strongly supports ongoing cooperation with
    Israel in the area of missile defense. The committee, however,
    questions the necessity of developing a new program when
    current missile defense systems may be able to meet Israel's
    requirements. Recent analysis by the Missile Defense Agency
    indicates that existing missile defense systems such as the
    Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) would provide equal or better
    capability than the proposed Arrow-3. The SM-3 is a more
    mature, demonstrated technology that could provide capability
    for Israel on a faster timeline and at less cost.
        Before proceeding with the development of the Arrow-3, the
    committee urges Israel and the Department of Defense to conduct
    a full review of existing missile defense systems to determine
    the most cost-effective solution to meet the missile defense
    requirements of Israel and the United States.
                Ballistic missile defense discrimination radar in Israel
        The committee notes that the State of Israel faces a real
    and growing threat from short- and medium-range ballistic
    missiles from states such as the Syrian Arab Republic and the
    Islamic Republic of Iran. The committee believes that the
    deployment of a U.S. Army-Navy/Transportable-2 (AN/TPY-2)
    missile defense discrimination radar to Israel would greatly
    increase the capabilities of both Israel and U.S. forces
    deployed in support of Israel to defend against ballistic
    missile threats. Therefore, the committee urges the Department
    of Defense to begin discussions with Israel about the
    possibility of deploying an AN/TPY-2 radar on its territory at
    the earliest feasible date.
                Ballistic missile defense reductions
        The budget request contained $432.2 million in PE 63890C
    for Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Core, $86.4 million in PE
    91598C for Management Headquarters-Missile Defense Agency
    (MDA), $118.7 million in PE 63175C for ballistic missile
    defense technology, and $288.3 million in PE 63891C for Missile
    Defense Agency special programs.
        The committee recommends $412.2 million, a decrease of
    $20.0 million, in PE 63890C for BMD Core; $81.4 million, a
    decrease of $5.0 million, in PE 91598C for Management
    Headquarters-MDA; $113.7 million, a decrease of $5.0 million,
    for BMD technology; and $138.3 million, a decrease of $150.0
    million, in PE 63891C for MDA special programs to partially
    offset the additional funding for other higher priority defense
    programs.
                Ballistic missile defense sensors
        The budget request contained $1.1 billion in PE 63884C for
    ballistic missile defense sensors.
        The request for sensors included $97.8 million in title II
    for the proposed European Midcourse Radar (EMR). Elsewhere in
    this Act, the committee has reduced funding for the military
    construction of the proposed radar site out of concern over the
    ability to fully expend the funding in fiscal year 2009. The
    committee expects these changes will have an impact on the
    ability to execute research and development-funded activities
    according to the proposed schedule.
        The request also included funding for deployment and site
    preparation efforts to deploy Army-Navy/Transportable Radar
    (AN/TPY-2) #3, at a potential foreign location. According to
    Department of Defense budget documents, these funds will be
    used to assist with planning and coordination with the host
    nation and combatant commanders, radar site design, site
    construction, transport of the radar to an overseas site, radar
    set-up, calibration, site security, and activation. The
    committee finds this request to be premature, as the Department
    of Defense has not yet made an internal decision on where to
    place AN/TPY-2 #3, nor have negotiations begun with a potential
    host nation.
        The committee recommends $978.0 million, a decrease of
    $98.9 million, in PE 63884C including a reduction of $48.9
    million for the EMR and a reduction of $50.0 million for AN/
    TPY-2 #3.
                Ballistic missile defense system space program
        The budget request contained $29.8 million in PE 63895C for
    the ballistic missile defense (BMD) system space program,
    including funding for a proposed space test bed.
        According to the Missile Defense Agency, the purpose of the
    space test bed is to examine options for deploying space-based
    missile defense interceptors in the future. The committee does
    not support the deployment of space-based interceptors.
        The committee recommends $19.8 million for the BMD system
    space program, a decrease of $10.0 million, in PE 63895C and
    authorizes no funds for the proposed space test bed.
                European Ground-based Midcourse Defense component
        The budget request contained $2.1 billion in PE 63882C for
    the Ground-based, Midcourse Defense (GMD) program, of which
    $317.0 million is for the proposed GMD interceptor site in the
    Republic of Poland and associated equipment.
        In January 2007, the Administration announced negotiations
    with Poland and the Czech Republic about the possibility of
    deploying long-range missile defense interceptors and radars in
    their respective territories to defend against a potential
    long-range missile threat from the Islamic Republic of Iran.
    While the Administration reached a tentative agreement in April
    2008 with the Czech Republic, it has not concluded negotiations
    with Poland.
        The committee remains concerned about the potential
    effectiveness of the two-stage GMD interceptor to perform its
    mission in the European theater. The committee notes that the
    Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) has
    observed that the employment of the proposed two-stage
    interceptor in European defensive operations is not well
    understood, and has recommended additional testing of the two-
    stage interceptor, including against multiple, threat
    representative targets.
        The committee welcomes the Missile Defense Agency's recent
    decision to add an additional test of the two-stage
    interceptor, but notes that it is unclear at this point whether
    that third test will include all of the key recommendations
    made by DOT&E, including, for example, a recommended salvo
    test. Therefore, the committee directs the Director of the
    Missile Defense Agency and the Director of Operational Test and
    Evaluation to prepare a jointly agreed plan to ensure the
    European-based GMD assets can successfully accomplish their
    mission. The plan shall be submitted to the congressional
    defense committees by December 1, 2008.
        Section 222 of this title would limit the availability of
    funds for the acquisition of operational, two-stage GMD
    interceptors until the Secretary of Defense certifies that the
    interceptor has demonstrated, through operationally realistic
    testing, a high probability of operational effectiveness. The
    committee views such a certification as unattainable in fiscal
    year 2009, because the first of three tests of the system is
    not planned until the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009. In
    light of the time necessary for the three planned tests and
    subsequent certification, the committee views funding in fiscal
    year 2009 for operational interceptors premature.
        The committee notes that the proposed long-range
    interceptors in Poland would not be able to protect the
    southern portions of Europe against existing Iranian short- and
    medium-range ballistic missiles. The committee is concerned
    that it may be premature to move forward at the pace
    recommended by the Administration given the fact that the long-
    range missile threat from Iran has yet to emerge and neither
    the United States nor our North Atlantic Treaty Organization
    allies have sufficient regional missile defense capabilities to
    meet current short-and medium-range Iranian ballistic missile
    threats.
        The committee has long advocated the need to win NATO
    support for the proposed deployment, and welcomes the
    Alliance's April 3, 2008, Bucharest Summit Declaration which
    recognized the ``substantial contribution to the protection of
    Allies from long-range ballistic missiles to be provided the
    planned deployment of European-based United States missile
    defence assets.'' The committee encourages further actions to
    ensure that United States and NATO missile defense systems are
    fully integrated in the future.
        Elsewhere in this Act, the committee has reduced funding
    for the military construction of the proposed European GMD
    interceptor site out of concern over the ability to fully
    expend the funding in fiscal year 2009. The committee expects
    these changes will have an impact on the ability to execute
    research and development-funded activities according to the
    proposed schedule.
        In view of these concerns, the committee recommends $1.9
    billion, a decrease of $182.0 million, in PE 63882C for the
    proposed GMD interceptor site in Poland and associated
    equipment.
                Kinetic Energy Interceptor
        The budget request contained $386.8 million in PE 63886C
    for the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI).
        The KEI program has been described by the Missile Defense
    Agency as both a potential boost phase defense system and a
    follow-on to the current generation of Ground-based Midcourse
    Defense (GMD) system. The Missile Defense Agency's current
    emphasis for the KEI program is as a follow-on to the current
    GMD program.
        The committee questions the urgency of a GMD follow-on
    program at this time. The Missile Defense Agency has only just
    begun deploying the existing GMD interceptors in Alaska and
    California. The committee understands those interceptors have
    an expected service-life of at least 20 years. Given the
    limited number of long-range missile threats that the United
    States will likely face in the near-to mid-term from rogue
    states, the planned inventory of 54 GMD interceptors should be
    sufficient to address that threat.
        The committee believes some investment in a follow-on
    system is warranted, but not at the level requested. Therefore,
    the committee recommends $286.8 million, a decrease of $100.0
    million, in PE 63886C for KEI.
                Missile defense force structure
        The committee is concerned about how the Department of
    Defense sets its force structure and establishes inventory
    requirements for missile defense. The committee does not
    believe that the Missile Defense Agency has the appropriate
    expertise to set missile defense force structure requirements.
    The committee notes a general lack of transparency and
    methodology in the development of current missile defense force
    requirements. The committee is concerned that the Department
    has not yet determined the production quantities and
    operational force level requirements to address the full-range
    of ballistic missile threats that confront the United States.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a
    comprehensive plan for setting future missile defense force
    structure and inventory requirements. The committee directs the
    Secretary of Defense to submit a report by April 15, 2009, to
    the congressional defense committees which identifies:
              (1) The methodology for determining current and
            future missile defense force structure and inventory
            requirements;
              (2) The Department's specific process for making
            decisions related to force structure and inventory
            requirements;
              (3) The expected roles and responsibilities of all
            relevant organizations for analyzing force structure
            and inventory requirements, including the Joint Staff,
            the military services, Missile Defense Agency,
            combatant commands, intelligence organizations, and the
            Director, Program Analysis and Evaluation; and
              (4) Which elements (e.g., Missile Defense Agency, the
            military services) within the Department will be
            responsible for procuring additional missile defense
            inventory.
                Missile defense program element structure
        The committee continues to believe that the Missile Defense
    Agency program element (PE) structure is too broad, and that
    this structure needs to be further refined to provide Congress
    greater transparency into missile defense programs.
        Therefore, starting with the fiscal year 2010 budget
    submission, the committee directs the Director of the Missile
    Defense Agency to provide separate PE numbers for each specific
    element in the Terminal Defense Segment and within Ballistic
    Missile Defense Sensors. These new PE numbers should include:
    Terminal High Altitude Area Defense; Israeli Cooperative
    Programs; Upgraded Early Warning Radars; Sea-based, X-Band
    radar; Army-Navy/Transportable Radars; and European Midcourse
    Radar.
                Missile defense program oversight
        In 2002, the Secretary of Defense granted the Missile
    Defense Agency (MDA) unusual flexibility to deploy an initial
    missile defense system for the United States, including an
    exemption from the normal Department of Defense requirements
    process. Now that the initial system has been developed and
    deployed, the committee believes there is less rationale for
    maintaining this flexibility. The committee believes the
    Missile Defense Agency must begin to transition into more
    normal defense planning and budget processes.
        In August 2007, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
    Staff and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC)
    Chairman recommended that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    transition the Missile Defense Agency back into standard
    departmental processes and direct the JROC to provide oversight
    of MDA. Rather than implement this proposal, the Department of
    Defense established a new senior-level group, the Missile
    Defense Executive Board (MDEB), in March 2007, to improve
    oversight and integration of MDA activities.
        The committee is concerned that these processes may not
    enable the JROC and the services to effectively validate
    missile defense requirements. Therefore, the committee directs
    the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in his capacity
    as chairman of the JROC, and the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to provide a report to
    the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
    on Armed Services within 180 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act that assesses whether the newly established MDEB
    process:
              (1) Allows the JROC to provide effective military
            advice to validate missile defense capabilities;
              (2) Facilitates the synchronization of MDA-fielded
            assets with other air and missile defense capabilities
            being developed; and
              (3) Enables the military departments to appropriately
            plan and program resources for the fielding and
            sustainment of MDA-fielded assets.
                Missile defense testing and targets
        The budget request contained $665.4 million in PE 63888C
    for ballistic missile defense test and targets.
        The committee is concerned about the testing program for
    the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) program. The Missile
    Defense Agency (MDA) conducted a successful intercept test of
    GMD in September 2007, its second successful intercept since
    2002. However, the committee believes that more frequent and
    rigorous testing of the system is needed to demonstrate the
    system's operational effectiveness.
        The Director of the Department of Defense Operational Test
    and Evaluation (DOT&E) office has raised similar concerns,
    noting in the DOT&E fiscal year 2007 annual report, ``GMD
    flight testing to date is not sufficient to provide a high
    degree of statistical confidence in its limited capabilities .
    . . additional flight test data under realistic conditions is
    necessary to validate models and simulations and to increase
    confidence in the ability of these models and simulations to
    accurately assess system capability.''
        The committee is also concerned with the MDA targets
    program, and notes the failure to produce sufficient reliable
    targets has become the pacing item of the Missile Defense
    Agency's entire test program. The committee notes that the
    Flexible Target Family (FTF) has become more complex and
    expensive than originally estimated.
        The committee, therefore, recommends $690.4 million, an
    increase of $25.0 million, in PE 63888C for target development.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Missile Defense Agency
    to re-assess both its testing program for the GMD program and
    target acquisition strategy including the FTF initiative. The
    committee directs the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to
    deliver a report within 180 days after the date of enactment of
    this Act to the congressional defense committees describing the
    results of this assessment and a plan to:
              (1) Increase the frequency and rigor of GMD testing;
            and
              (2) Increase the quantity and reliability of missile
            defense targets.
                Multiple Kill Vehicle
        The budget request contained $354.5 million in PE 63894C
    for the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program.
        The committee supports research into options for ultimately
    replacing the unitary exo-atmospheric kill vehicles (EKV) on
    the existing and future fleet of long-range, mid-course
    interceptors. However, the committee believes the Missile
    Defense Agency is moving forward too quickly with development
    of the MKV program, and notes that Missile Defense Agency has
    not yet fully demonstrated the capabilities of the existing
    EKV.
        The committee also notes that the Missile Defense Agency
    intends to support two vendors to examine alternative MKV
    technology concepts. The committee believes there is
    significant technical risk that must be addressed in the MKV
    program and understands the approach of maintaining two vendors
    to reduce technology risk. However, the committee is concerned
    about the financial implications of maintaining two vendors
    indefinitely.
        The committee recommends $254.5 million, a decrease of
    $100.0 million, in PE 63894C for MKV. In addition, within 90
    days after the date of enactment of this Act, the committee
    directs the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to provide a
    report to the congressional defense committees that provides
    criteria and a clear path for down-selecting between vendors as
    the MKV program matures and meets its established knowledge
    points.
                Short-range ballistic missile defense
        The budget request contained $44.8 million in PE 63881C for
    short-range ballistic missile defense or ``David's Sling''
    program.
        The short-range ballistic missile defense program is being
    jointly designed by the United States and the State of Israel
    to provide an affordable and effective defense against the
    threat from long-range artillery rockets and short-range
    ballistic missiles.
        The committee recommends $54.8 million, an increase of
    $10.0 million, in PE 63881C to support the continued
    development of the short-range ballistic missile defense
    program.
                Space Tracking and Surveillance System
        The budget request contained $242.4 million in PE 63893C
    for the Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS).
        The committee notes that the Missile Defense Agency plans
    to launch two STSS demonstration satellites in November 2008,
    to demonstrate the ability to track ballistic missiles from
    space. The committee is supportive of this effort. The
    committee notes it is premature, however, to begin development
    of a follow-on constellation of satellites before these two
    demonstration satellites have demonstrated any capability to
    track ballistic missile targets.
        The committee recommends $217.4 million, a decrease of
    $25.0 million, in PE 63893C for STSS, and authorizes no funds
    to begin work on an STSS follow-on constellation.
                Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
        The budget request contained $864.8 million in PE 63881C
    for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system,
    which is designed to protect against short-, medium-, and
    intermediate-range ballistic missiles.
        For several years, combatant commanders have expressed
    strong support for THAAD. The 2007 Joint Capabilities Mix Study
    II concluded that combatant commanders require nearly twice as
    many THAAD interceptors as the 96 now planned. The committee
    also notes that the Army's original requirement for THAAD
    included 8 fire units and 1,250 interceptors. Under a separate
    title of this Act, the committee has increased funding for
    THAAD procurement.
        In accordance with section 223 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
    the committee recommends the transfer of $65.0 million for
    advanced procurement of THAAD Fire Units #3 and #4 from PE
    63881C to title 1.
        The committee recommends $799.8 million, a decrease of
    $65.0 million, in PE 63881C for THAAD.

    Blood cell storage

        The committee is aware that the military requires blood-
    containing viable platelets necessary for effective hemorrhage
    control. The committee notes that unlike other blood components
    like plasma and red cells, platelets can only be stored at room
    temperature and only for a few days. Currently, the quality of
    platelet concentrates is determined by a subjective visual
    check or by taking random samples directly from the platelet
    storage bag to measure the degree of acidity (pH) of the
    sample, as pH is considered to be a good indicator of platelet
    quality. However, taking a sample breaks the sterility of the
    bag and the respective unit of platelets can no longer be used.
        The committee seeks to ensure that the best medical
    treatment is available for warfighters wounded in combat and
    other military operations. Therefore, the committee directs the
    Secretary of Defense to conduct a study and pilot project on
    technology and methods for improving the shelf-life and
    viability of blood platelet storage. Such a study shall include
    examining methods of closed-loop pH monitoring for platelets.
    The committee directs the Secretary to submit to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services a summary of his findings and recommendations, by
    March 31, 2009.

    Center for Technology and National Security Policy at the National
            Defense University

        The budget request contained $34.5 million in PE 65104D8Z
    for technical studies, support, and analysis, but contained no
    funds for analyses for the Center for Technology and National
    Security Policy (CTNSP) at the National Defense University.
        The committee recognizes that CTNSP provides valuable
    support to the Department through the development of a wide
    range of studies and analyses. The committee has also been the
    beneficiary of the critical mass of knowledge and expertise at
    CTNSP, having both received written products such as the 2006
    ``Report to Congress on the Information Technology Program''
    and oral testimony on a range of topics from experts at CTNSP.
    The committee encourages the researchers at CTNSP to continue
    to explore issues of importance to the Department and the
    nation. The synergy created between the academic research and
    operational experience the CTNSP is an asset that provides
    advice to policy makers in shaping national security direction.
        The committee recommends $36.0 million, an increase of $1.5
    million, in PE 65104D8Z for the CNSTP.

    Chemical and biological defense basic and applied research and advanced
            technology development initiative

        The budget request contained $594.8 million for chemical/
    biological defense science and technology, including $53.2
    million in PE 61384BP for basic research, $203.7 million in
    applied research, and $337.9 million in advanced technology
    development.
        The committee recommends continuation of the chemical and
    biological basic research, applied research, and advanced
    technology development initiatives established in the Ronald W.
    Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
    (Public Law 108-375). These initiatives would provide
    opportunities for emerging technologies and concepts to compete
    for funding on the basis of technical merit and on the
    contribution that such technologies could make to the chemical
    and biological defense capabilities of the armed forces and to
    homeland defense.

    Chemical/biological defense advanced technology development initiative

        The committee recommends that the projects and technologies
    to be considered for funding under the advanced technology
    development initiative include, but are not limited to the
    following:
              (1) Chemical and biological protective clothing;
              (2) Protective self-decontaminating surface
            technology;
              (3) Nano porous regenerative filters;
              (4) Rapid bio-detection and early warning systems;
              (5) Antioxidant micronutrient countermeasures;
              (6) Anthrax skin patch vaccine; and
              (7) Wide area surveillance and warning systems.
        The committee recommends $358.9 million in PE 63384BP, an
    increase of $20.0 million for the chemical/biological defense
    advanced technology development initiative.

    Chemical/biological defense applied research initiative

        The committee recommends that the projects and technologies
    to be considered for funding under the applied research
    initiative include, but are not limited to the following:
              (1) Self-decontaminating polymers;
              (2) Sample preparation;
              (3) Standoff multispectral imaging detection;
              (4) CBRNE detection sensor network design;
              (5) Multi-agent vaccine development;
              (6) Bio-terror shield for yellow fever, dengue, and
            West Nile virus;
              (7) Biosurety development and management;
              (8) Enhanced chemical and biological protective
            clothing;
              (9) Smallpox biodefense therapeutic; and
              (10) Mass decontamination technology.
        The committee recommends $218.7 million in PE 62384BP, an
    increase of $15.0 million for the chemical/biological defense
    applied research initiative.
                Chemical/biological defense basic research initiative
        The committee recommends that the technologies to be
    considered for funding under the basic research initiative
    include, but are not limited to the following:
              (1) X-ray beamline determination of molecular
            structures;
              (2) Standoff chemical detection;
              (3) Anti-biowarfare medicines; and
              (4) High-speed network for infectious diseases.
        The committee recommends $58.2 million in PE 61384BP, an
    increase of $5.0 million, for the chemical/biological defense
    basic research initiative.

    Cyberterror protection expansion for the Department of Defense

        The committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 urged
    the Department of Defense to implement the successful Air Force
    model for enterprise license agreements throughout the
    Department. The committee directs the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to report
    back to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
    Committee on Armed Services within 90 days after the date of
    enactment of this Act on the steps taken by the Department to
    comply with these recommendations. The report shall include an
    assessment of future compliance plans intended by the
    Department.

    Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

        The committee applauds the overall progress in the defense
    science and technology program, particularly that of the
    Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The
    committee also recognizes that this year marks the 50th
    anniversary for DARPA as a defense agency and notes that DARPA,
    since 1958, has had notable success with performing its
    original role to find and develop advanced technology to
    prevent technological surprise by other nations. The committee
    is pleased with DARPA's current efforts to find and rapidly
    field advanced innovative technologies to meet critical
    operational needs of our forces.
        The committee understands that much of DARPA's success is
    due to several factors including its team of top-notch
    technical experts, a flat organization with greater management
    flexibility, and a rigid performance-based business model.
    Under the performance-based model, the committee understands
    that funds are withheld until the performer passes a
    significant, agreed upon milestone. While this model can give
    the impression of poor obligation rates throughout the year,
    the committee finds that DARPA continually under executes a
    significant portion of its budget each year. For example, with
    two quarters remaining for the obligation of fiscal year 2008
    funds only 14.2 percent has been obligated. This trend
    continues despite a congressional rescission of $144.0 million
    of funds appropriated for fiscal year 2007 and a reduction of
    $129.0 million to the fiscal year 2008 budget request.
        The committee does not believe that additional program
    growth is justified at this time and recommends funding DARPA's
    fiscal year 2009 program at a level consistent with current
    expenditures in the fiscal year 2008 program.
        The committee makes a series of recommendations for general
    reductions in DARPA programs:

    62383E--Biological Warfare Defense......................    $-15,000,000
    62702E--Tactical Technology.............................     -30,000,000
    62715E--Materials and Bio Technology....................     -10,000,000
    62716E--Electronics Technology..........................     -15,000,000
    63287E--Space Program and Technology....................     -10,000,000
    63739E--Advanced Electronics Technology.................     -10,000,000
    63760E--Command, Control and Communications Systems.....     -10,000,000

        These recommendations are made without prejudice to the
    particular account identified.

    Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency relocation

        The committee recognizes the unique requirements for the
    Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) physical
    location. Among these requirements are an immediate proximity
    to the Pentagon and other extramural research organizations;
    the direct availability of a large cadre of highly qualified
    scientists and engineers; non-governmental technical support
    staff experts and facilities; nearby housing and quality of
    life amenities needed to attract and recruit high-quality
    technical program managers; accessibility that balances force
    protection with the need to be open to new performers who have
    never done business with the Department of Defense or the
    federal government; and access to public transportation and
    airports to facilitate travel of these employees and DARPA's
    partners in research. For these reasons, the 2005 Base Closure
    and Realignment Commission voted unanimously to overturn the
    Secretary of Defense's recommendation to relocate DARPA outside
    of Northern Virginia.
        The committee believes that DARPA's mission could
    potentially be undermined if the relocation fails to meet these
    requirements. Therefore, the committee urges the General
    Services Administration to continue to work with DARPA to
    ensure that the source selection process works best to meet
    DARPA's unique agency requirements. The committee supports the
    Department and the General Services Administration's existing
    plans for DARPA's relocation.

    Defense Agencies Initiative sustainment

        Section 1005 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) pertained to the
    financial transformation initiative for the defense agencies.
    This section called for the creation of a Defense Agencies
    Initiative to do two things:
              (1) To eliminate or replace financial management
            systems that are duplicative, redundant, or fail to
            comply with financial management standards; and
              (2) To transform budget, finance, and accounting
            operations of the defense agencies to achieve accurate
            and reliable financial information for accountability
            and effective decision making.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct
    an assessment on the Defense Agencies Initiative and submit the
    report to the congressional defense committees within 90 days
    after the date of the enactment of this Act. This report shall
    offer a sustainment plan for the first phase, or wave one,
    capability being developed under the Initiative. It shall also
    include both an implementation plan for all additional waves
    associated with the overall solution deployment and a funding
    profile and timeline.

    Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research

        The budget request contained $2.8 million in PE 61114D8Z
    for the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive
    Research (DEPSCoR).
        The committee notes that projects under DEPSCoR are
    intended to expand research capabilities and opportunities in
    states that traditionally receive the least funding in federal
    support for university research. The committee further notes
    that DEPSCoR was originally authorized by section 257 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1995 (Public
    Law 103-337) to enhance the capabilities of institutions of
    higher education to develop, plan, and execute science and
    engineering research that is competitive under a peer-review
    system for awarding federal research assistance. The committee
    applauds the Department for its sound execution of the program.
    The committee also recognizes the many DEPSCoR contributions in
    support of our national security and for building national
    infrastructure for research education.
        The committee is concerned that despite the success of the
    program, the Department's budget requests for the program has
    significantly declined from the fiscal year 2007 request of
    $9.5 million to $2.8 million in the fiscal year 2009 request.
    The Department informed the committee that no funds will be
    requested for DEPSCoR in fiscal year 2010 and in future year
    budget requests.
        The committee strongly urges the Department to fund
    DEPSCoR, at an adequate level, to continue expanding the
    national research infrastructure. The committee recommends
    $12.8 million, an increase of $10.0 million, in PE 61114D8Z for
    DEPSCoR.

    Defense Information System for Security

        The committee applauds the interagency effort between the
    Department of Defense and the intelligence community to reform
    and improve the security clearance process. The Joint Security
    and Suitability Reform Team, utilizing Lean Six Sigma and other
    business process modernization techniques, has made a number of
    suggestions that will revolutionize how the Department, other
    federal agencies, and the intelligence community administer,
    vet, and issue security clearances.
        The committee is aware that this significant revamping of
    the system has necessitated the Defense Information System for
    Security (DISS), which was established under the Defense
    Security Service but transitioned to the Business
    Transformation Agency, to undergo a strategic pause. The
    committee recognizes that this is necessary so that the
    recommendations of this process reform can be better understood
    and translated into requirements for DISS. In addition to its
    ability to enable this change within the Department, the
    committee encourages the strategic alignment of DISS
    capabilities with the information technology needs of the
    federal-wide reform effort.
        The committee recognizes that taking such actions will have
    an impact on the ability of these programs to execute funds in
    a timely fashion. The committee supports any associated pause
    in these programs that may be necessary in order for a solution
    that achieves these goals to be realized.

    Department of Defense bandwidth requirements for the future

        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to
    the congressional defense committees a report within 180 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act outlining Department
    bandwidth needs in the near-term (next two years) and the
    longer term (eight years and beyond). The report shall detail
    the Department's plan for addressing increasing demands,
    including:
              (1) Current data transport capabilities (including
            terrestrial cable, as well as military and commercial
            satellite communications, both protected and
            unprotected) and current demands;
              (2) Future planned data transport capabilities
            (including terrestrial cable, as well as military and
            commercial satellite communications, both protected and
            unprotected) and projected demands;
              (3) Synchronization of future planned data transport
            capabilities to bandwidth needs for future systems
            (such as the Future Combat System, Naval Networking
            Environment, etc.); and
              (4) Proposed mitigation strategies should future
            planned data transport capabilities not become
            available when scheduled.
        The committee is concerned that the Department lacks an
    organization to conduct comprehensive assessments and trades of
    communications bandwidth requirements, and capabilities and
    acquisition strategies to meet those requirements. Therefore,
    the committee recommends the Department consider identifying or
    creating an organization responsible for defense-wide bandwidth
    management and synchronization with the following activities:
              (1) Develop a near-, mid-, and far-term defense-wide
            communications architecture;
              (2) Conduct strategic communications bandwidth
            analysis with requirements, capability, schedule, and
            cost trade studies;
              (3) Provide bandwidth analysis on whether future
            acquisitions of systems and platforms are properly
            scoped into the current and planned communications
            architecture; and
              (4) Provide the milestone decision authority with
            acquisition recommendations based on whether the
            proposed capability can be supported and integrated
            into the communications architecture.

    Energy technology investment roadmap

        The committee is aware that a recent Defense Science Board
    (DSB) task force on Department of Defense Energy Strategy
    recommended that the Department increase investments in energy
    efficient and alternative energy technologies, and maintain a
    level of funding commensurate with operational and financial
    value. A separate study released in April 2007 and commissioned
    by the Office of Force Transformation and Resources of the
    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, found that
    numerous federal and commercial energy research and development
    initiatives exist but lack coordination and metrics for
    integration with an energy-efficient future operational
    concept.
        The committee believes the Department should embrace a more
    coordinated and energy-efficient future operational concept.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    prepare an energy technology investment roadmap. The roadmap
    shall consider, among other things, the DSB recommendations for
    accelerated development of those technologies for blended wing
    body aircraft, variable speed tilt rotor vertical lift,
    lightweight composite `blast-bucket' tactical vehicles,
    advanced electro-mechanical actuators, semi-rigid lighter-than-
    air high-altitude lifting bodies, advanced micro-generators,
    biomimetic design for platform components and very high
    efficiency electronics for soldier system and other combat
    systems applications. The roadmap shall also consider the DSB
    recommendation to support mobile, in-theater fuel production
    processes with operational applications. Finally, the roadmap
    shall make recommendations to ensure that all energy technology
    investments across the services are prioritized, coordinated,
    and are not duplicative of other efforts with the Department,
    other federal agencies, or the commercial sector.
        The Secretary shall submit the energy technology investment
    roadmap to the congressional defense committees by September 1,
    2009.

    Foliage penetration capability

        The budget request contained $79.9 million in PE 63122D8Z
    for combating terrorism technology support, but contained no
    funds for the development, demonstration, or transition of
    foliage penetrating technology.
        The committee notes that the ability to see through mature
    jungle canopy to identify and locate structures associated with
    terrorism and other high-value targets requires advanced
    foliage penetration (FOPEN) capability. The committee is aware
    of the Department's recent successes with demonstrating various
    FOPEN capabilities, but is concerned about the current funding
    levels to adequately support continued development of FOPEN
    technology and transition to operational use. The committee
    notes that our armed forces and U.S. civilians are engaged
    globally and must have the capability to operate in a wide
    range of environmental conditions, including in regions with
    dense foliage. The committee is concerned that the combatant
    commands lack the full-spectrum intelligence, surveillance, and
    reconnaissance capability they need to adequately carry out
    their missions. The committee urges the Department to make
    rapid transition of FOPEN technology a high priority.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    63122D8Z for the continued development, demonstration, and
    rapid transition of promising foliage penetration technology.
        The committee encourages the Director, Rapid Reaction
    Technology Office, within the office of the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, within 90
    days after the date of enactment of this Act, to brief the
    congressional defense committees on the Department's current
    capability and plans to develop, procure, and deploy FOPEN
    systems. The brief should address the results of any tests of
    FOPEN systems, to include when, where, and type of system
    tested; the capability of the sensor technology, processing
    algorithms, and analytical suite; the transitional or
    operational funding identified and secured for the FOPEN
    system; and any future testing and acquisition planning and
    associated costs.

    Green information technology standards

        The committee is aware of an effort within the Pentagon to
    reduce the energy and environmental impact of the Department of
    Defense information technology (IT) enterprise. IT systems,
    including all of the desktop computing, servers, routers, and
    associated equipment consume significant quantities of power.
        The committee supports the goals of this ``green IT''
    initiative, sponsored by the office of the Pentagon Chief
    Information Officer (CIO), to work within existing budgets and
    authorities to adopt smart business practices that will help
    reduce the energy consumption of IT resources. In addition,
    this effort has the opportunity to reclaim physical space that
    can be used for other purposes.
        The committee encourages the Pentagon CIO to maintain
    robust metrics on power, cost, and space savings made through
    this effort and to socialize the benefits of this program so
    that it might be adopted more broadly throughout the
    Department, as well as the rest of the federal government.

    Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving
            Institutions

        The budget request contained $15.2 million in PE 62228D8Z
    for the Historically Black College and Universities and
    Minority Serving Institutions (HBCU/MI) infrastructure support
    program.
        The committee is concerned about the limited effort that
    the Department of Defense has undertaken in developing,
    funding, and expanding the HBCU/MI program. Specifically, the
    budget request for this program has not increased since the
    inception of the program under the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510).
    The committee believes that inadequate funding could have
    direct and indirect effects in ensuring future generations of
    minority students are trained to meet the challenges in
    developing future defense capabilities.
        As noted elsewhere in this title, the committee supports
    the Department's commitment to reshape its science and
    technology approach for developing non-kinetic capabilities to
    enable mission success in irregular warfare environments. These
    capabilities include elements of net-centric operations,
    behavioral and social sciences, information assurance, modeling
    and simulation, and bio-inspired research. The committee
    believes that the minority serving institutions have strong
    research capabilities in these areas and urges the Department
    to include the HBCU/MI program as part of this important
    reshaping.
        The committee remains committed to ensuring that the
    Department adequately supports the training and development of
    minority students who are an increasing part of the foundation
    that the future of our national security rests upon. The
    committee recognizes the critical need of the Department to
    take the necessary steps to enhance the HBCU/MI and other
    related programs across the Department. Section 232 in this Act
    requires the Secretary of Defense to carry out an assessment of
    the capability of minority serving institutions to participate
    in research, development, test and evaluation activities for
    the Department. To strengthen the HBCU/MI program, the
    committee urges the Department to explore other proven
    methodologies, such as creating centers-of-excellence and
    expanding the Mentor Protege program to include minority
    serving institutions.
        The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
    62228D8Z for the enhancement of the HBCU/MI infrastructure
    support program. The committee encourages the Department, in
    its future defense budget submissions, to include an increase
    to the HBCU/MI program to, at a minimum, reflect the rate of
    inflation.

    Human, social, and cultural behavioral modeling advanced development

        The budget request contained $9.4 million in PE 63670D8Z
    and $6.0 million in PE 64670D8Z for human, social, cultural,
    and behavior (HSCB) modeling advanced development.
        The committee notes that today's military forces are
    involved in a growing number of complex missions from
    counterinsurgency to security and stability operations. These
    missions are best served by a security force that understands
    and appreciates the individual, tribal, cultural, ethnic,
    religious, social, economic, and other aspects of the human
    terrain. The committee supports the Department's effort to
    reshape their approach to research, training, and doctrine to
    adapt to the current irregular warfare environment. The
    Department's creation and deployment of Human Terrain Teams
    (HTT) that employ cultural awareness and analysis practices
    notes one approach toward adapting to complex military
    operations.
        In title XV of this Act, the committee notes the
    contributions of the prototype HTTs currently supporting
    operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and believes that sound
    research and resulting tools are key technology enablers for
    success of these teams now and in the future.
        The committee recommends $13.4 million, an increase of $4.0
    million, in PE 63670D8Z and $8.0 million, an increase of $2.0
    million, in PE 64670D8Z for the continued development,
    demonstration and rapid transition of key technologies
    supporting human terrain understanding and forecasting to
    include, Mapping the Human Terrain Joint Capability Technology
    Demonstration and the Conflict Modeling, Planning and Outcome
    Experimentation Program.

    Human, social, and cultural behavior modeling research

        The committee supports efforts to further human, social,
    and cultural behavioral (HSCB) modeling research activities,
    but believes greater planning coordination and concept
    development is necessary to yield a productive program.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary for
    Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to establish a Department
    of Defense User Community Advisory Group (UCAG) to provide
    input to the Department on the utility of existing HSCB
    research efforts, to include determining the research direction
    for future programs in this area. Advisory group members shall
    include researchers from the scientific and engineering world
    and members from operational disciplines, such as special
    operations, intelligence, and provincial reconstruction team
    specialists. The advisory group shall not only provide input on
    future research directions, but shall also be used as a peer
    review group to provide feedback on existing HSCB programs
    managed by the services and agencies.
        The committee further directs the Under Secretary for
    Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to submit to the
    congressional defense committees within 90 days after the date
    of enactment of this Act a report outlining the charter,
    functions, and proposed membership of this group.

    Human systems integration

        The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181) contains a provision requiring the
    Department of Defense (DOD) to establish a single office to
    coordinate the planning, management, and expectation of human
    systems integration (HSI) activities throughout all DOD
    acquisition programs. The provision also requires the
    Department to identify and recommend resource requirements for
    all HSI activities.
        The committee continues to support HSI as an affordability
    initiative for reducing overall life cycle costs of weapon
    systems and improving training regimes of military personnel.
    As noted in the committee report (H. Rept. 106-616)
    accompanying the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2001, significant savings in defense
    systems ownership costs are possible with wisely targeted
    science and technology investments. The committee views HSI as
    an integral part of this approach, continues to support these
    affordability efforts, and urges the Department to commit
    further to HSI activities.
        The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to develop a
    comprehensive plan for funding and implementing HSI through all
    phases of science, research, and acquisition. This plan shall
    include the development of policy, requirements, and
    recommendations on methods for incorporating HSI concerns
    throughout all phases of systems acquisition. The committee
    also expects the plan to include a specific method for
    determining and tracking the implementation of HSI activities
    to ensure adherence with stated Department goals and policy
    objectives. The committee directs the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to submit the
    report by March 15, 2009 to the congressional defense
    committees.

    Increase in basic research

        The committee applauds the Department's increased
    investment in basic research as noted in the fiscal year 2009
    budget request. The committee also recognizes that in a
    difficult budget environment, this request represents a 2
    percent increase over the appropriated amount for fiscal year
    2008 and a 16 percent increase in real terms over the
    Department's fiscal year 2008 request for basic research. The
    committee supports this increase and reminds the Department
    that the committee noted strong concerns in the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) over the continued decline in Department of Defense basic
    research budgets and its impact to national security and our
    future science and engineering workforce. The committee
    strongly urges the Department to sustain this increase.

    Independent verification and validation for financial management
            systems

        The committee believes that the financial management goal
    of the Department of Defense should be to provide quality, high
    confidence, and real-time financial data consistent with
    national security objectives. The committee also believes that
    efforts to improve the consistency, quality, and timeliness of
    financial data will improve the stewardship of government funds
    and improve overall decision making. The committee believes
    such transparency has the potential to result in significant
    cost savings over time.
        The committee understands that a key aspect of achieving
    this vision will be to clearly mandate the roles and
    responsibilities for independent verification and validation
    (IVV) for financial data.
        As a result, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to draft and provide the congressional defense committees a
    Department of Defense directive articulating the roles and
    responsibilities for IVV for the financial management process.
    The committee further directs delivery of the directive within
    180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

    Information technology clearinghouse

        The budget request contained $5.3 million in PE 33169D8Z
    for information technology (IT) rapid acquisition, but
    contained no funds for the development of the clearinghouse for
    rapid identification and dissemination of commercial
    information technologies.
        As noted in the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146)
    accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2008, the committee remains concerned that the Department
    of Defense's budgeting and acquisition processes continue to
    struggle to keep pace with the IT innovation cycle. As a result
    of legislative action by the committee, the Department
    established a clearinghouse for rapid identification and
    dissemination of commercial information technologies that
    leveraged technology being developed in parallel under the
    emerging technology demonstration. Both of these programs are
    showing promising results, and the committee supports continued
    development in order to ensure the Department can provide the
    best, most modern IT systems to meet its mission requirements.
        The committee recommends $12.3 million, an increase of $7.0
    million, in PE 33169D8Z for the development of the
    clearinghouse for rapid identification and dissemination of
    commercial information technologies.

    K-12 computer sciences and mathematics education

        The budget request contained $195.6 million in PE 61101E
    for basic research in the Defense Advanced Research Projects
    Agency, including $2.0 million for the Computer Futures
    program. The committee notes that the Computer Futures program
    supports kindergarten through 12th grade educational programs
    to develop and foster students of computer science and
    mathematics at an early age in order to create a pipeline to
    support the nation's future scientific and engineering needs in
    these areas.
        The committee is concerned about reports such as the
    National Academy of Science study ``Rising Above the Gathering
    Storm'' which indicate that the United States may not be
    producing sufficient numbers of scientists and engineers (S&E)
    to meet our future technology needs. The committee believes
    that if the nation is unable to provide for its demands in
    S&Es, it will have severe detrimental effects on the defense
    sector and the broader economic health of the nation. Facing a
    similar challenge 50 years ago, President Eisenhower increased
    investments in science and mathematics education that continue
    to pay dividends today. In that same spirit, Defense Advanced
    Research Projects Agency's Computer Futures program is an
    investment in the nation's intellectual capital that the
    committee believes will reap significant rewards in the future.
        The committee recommends $195.6 million, an increase of
    $1.0 million, in PE 61101E for Defense Advanced Research
    Projects Agency's Computer Futures program to create and
    validate additional curriculum covering new topics, and to
    expand the program into new school systems.

    Lean Six Sigma process analysis within the Office of Undersecretary of
            Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics

        The committee approves of the Department's designation of a
    process improvement officer (PIO) tasked with applying Lean Six
    Sigma process improvement techniques to the business practices
    of the Department. The committee believes such techniques must
    be utilized on a continuous basis to ensure that the Department
    does not become trapped by process, rather than having
    processes adapt over time to changing realities. The committee
    recommends that the Department's PIO examine the processes for
    rapid acquisition activities that have been established since
    the initiation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and
    determine if there are lessons learned from this analysis that
    might be integrated into the Department's main acquisition
    process.

    Managing and extending Department of Defense asset lifecycles

        The budget request contained $5.1 million in PE 64016D8Z
    for Department of Defense (DOD) corrosion programs, but
    contained no funds for the managing and extending DOD asset
    lifecycles (MEDAL) initiative.
        Aging assets within the Department require DOD planners to
    aggressively pursue technologies and innovative concepts to
    maintain and improve mission capability rates and reduce life-
    cycle costs. The MEDAL initiative would provide a comprehensive
    enterprise review of investment in technologies such as asset
    health and logistics processes, condition-based maintenance
    opportunities, material aging research, and sustainment and
    remanufacturing education. It will identify savings, reduce
    costs, and increase systems availability to meet mission
    requirements.
        The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
    64016D8Z for the MEDAL initiative.

    Nanocrystal source display

        The budget request contained $177.0 million in PE 61102A
    for defense research sciences, containing $7.2 million for
    advanced sensors research supporting the development of
    flexible displays.
        The committee notes that flexible display technology
    developed at the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) is being
    applied to significantly improve the compact, ruggedized
    displays for the Army's future force. The committee notes that
    much of the research laboratory's success with advancing
    flexible display technology is attributed to their effort to
    integrate strategically important technologies from industry,
    academia, and government in the development of the displays.
    The committee encourages ARL, using a similar approach, to
    begin developing a small-scale manufacturing capability for
    flexible displays.
        The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE
    61102A to continue the development and small-scale
    manufacturing of flexible display technology.

    Naval Postgraduate School

        The committee notes the strong contribution made by the
    Naval Postgraduate School in conducting research programs
    relevant to the Navy and the Department of Defense. The
    committee strongly supports these research initiatives and
    understands them to be consistent with the principles and
    policies of other Department of Defense research programs such
    as the Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation
    scholarship for service program.

    Open source software systems

        The committee is concerned by the rising costs and
    decreasing security associated with software development for
    information technology (IT) systems. These rising costs are
    linked to the increasing complexity of software, which has also
    resulted in increasing numbers of system vulnerabilities that
    might be exploited by malicious hackers and potential
    adversaries. While the Administration has put forth a plan to
    increase cybersecurity within the larger enterprise of federal
    IT systems, a focus and assessment of fundamental software
    engineering practices is not apparent.
        Open source software (OSS) is a set of practices on how to
    write software, based on the open availability and right to use
    software code. This process provides greater rigor in the
    software development process by making it available to a
    diverse community of programmers for review, testing, and
    improvement. The Linux operation system and Internet Protocol
    internet addressing system are examples of high quality
    products developed within the business sector using the OSS
    standard.
        The committee encourages the Department to rely more
    broadly on OSS and establish it as a standard for intra-
    Department software development. The committee acknowledges the
    availability of proprietary software and encourages its
    development and acquisition as necessary and appropriate. The
    committee believes, however, the wide-spread implementation of
    an OSS standard will not only lead to more secure software, but
    will also foster broader competition by minimizing traditional
    constraints imposed by an over-reliance on proprietary software
    systems.

    Post-detonation nuclear forensics

        The budget request contained $211.1 million in PE 62718BR
    for weapons of mass destruction defeat technologies.
        The committee believes that a rapid global nuclear
    forensics capability is critical to support attribution and
    response following a nuclear detonation and will serve as a
    deterrent to reduce the threat of nuclear terrorist attacks.
    The committee is aware that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency
    (DTRA) would play an essential role in the time-critical
    attribution process and collection of radioactive material
    samples for forensics analysis. According to a recent study
    entitled ``Nuclear Forensics: Role, State of the Art, and
    Program Needs'' by the American Association for the Advancement
    of Science and the American Physical Society, ``specialized
    field-deployable equipment that could save days in making
    results available to decision makers is either not available or
    incompletely tested.'' The study identifies a particular need
    for automated, field-deployable instrumentation that can
    conduct rapid and accurate sample analysis. The committee is
    aware that DTRA has identified several technologies that could
    help meet this need as unfunded requirements.
        The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
    62718BR for accelerated research and development of post-
    detonation nuclear forensics technologies.

    Pre-Key Decision Point-B system vulnerability assessment

        Recognizing the increased vulnerability of the United
    States' national security space systems that was highlighted by
    the Chinese test of a direct ascent anti-satellite weapon on
    January 11, 2007, the committee directs the Department of
    Defense to prepare a system vulnerability assessment for each
    new or revised space system prior to Key Decision Point-B. The
    vulnerability assessment should be prepared by an organization
    independent of the system program office.
        The committee further directs the Secretary to report to
    the congressional defense committees on the Department's
    actions to integrate vulnerability assessments into the
    acquisition process by March 31, 2009.

    Printed circuit board technology

        The committee remains concerned with sustaining a robust
    domestic printed circuit board (PrCB) manufacturing capability
    as well as ensuring access to new PrCB technology. The
    committee notes the Report on Department of Defense
    Implementation of the National Research Council Committee on
    Manufacturing Trends in Printed Circuit Technology
    Recommendations and supports the suggestion to establish an
    executive agent to carry out the recommended actions of the
    Council. The committee supports this recommendation and
    strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to establish an
    executive agent for PrCB technology.
        The committee believes the executive agent should be
    responsible for:
              (1) Monitoring the manufacturing materials,
            processes, and component vulnerabilities for PrCBs;
              (2) Development of a PrCB Technology Roadmap;
              (3) Evaluation or recapitalization and investment
            requirements of Department of Defense PrCB facilities;
              (4) Development of funding strategies;
              (5) Advocacy for continuing PrCB domain knowledge,
            expertise, and organic PrCB capabilities; and
              (6) Development of methods to assure the availability
            of needed technical data.
        The committee also notes that the Report, which was
    submitted to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and House
    Committee on Armed Services on March 3, 2008, suggested
    establishing the executive agent oversight by the Navy through
    the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division. The committee
    strongly supports this recommendation. The committee notes,
    however, that the Report did not include estimated
    implementation funding and timelines, as requested by the
    conference report accompanying the John Warner National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364),
    and understands that preliminary funding estimates were
    developed by the Department. The committee recommends that the
    Department provide such funding as is necessary to implement
    the recommendations of the Report in the fiscal year 2010
    budget request and in future years.

    Review of cost reimbursements on defense research grants and contracts

        The committee strongly supports federally-sponsored
    research and believes the relationship between the Department
    of Defense (DOD), universities, and other research institutions
    depends on each party bearing a fair share of the costs of
    conducting research. The committee believes that such
    partnerships should also rely on deliberate policies and
    procedures to ensure that taxpayer dollars are well used and
    that research institutions and scientists are adequately
    reimbursed for the costs of the research performed.
        The committee is obligated to ensure that taxpayer dollars
    are properly executed and that federal policies and procedures
    governing payments and reimbursements for research costs are
    sound. The committee therefore directs the Comptroller General
    to conduct a review of the existing Office of Management and
    Budget (OMB) policies, practices, and procedures, as well as
    those included in the federal acquisition regulations. At a
    minimum, this report shall:
              (1) Describe the OMB rules and regulations that guide
            research institution's facilities and administration
            (F&A) cost reimbursements on DOD research grants and
            contracts;
              (2) Describe and assess the F&A costs that are
            reimbursable under current rules and explain if similar
            payments for such costs are made to support industry
            and federal laboratories that conduct research and
            development research on behalf of the government;
              (3) Assess the extent to which the rules for
            reimbursement of F&A costs are different for the
            Department of Defense than for other federal agencies;
              (4) Assess trends in negotiated F&A rates and
            effective (based on actual reimbursement) F&A rates for
            universities that receive DOD extramural research
            grants and contracts;
              (5) Assess the impact to F&A costs as a result of
            increased federal regulations such as environmental,
            security, and visa issues, assess trends in actual
            payments by the Department of Defense for direct and
            indirect costs on DOD extramural research grants;
              (6) Document current procedures DOD uses to ensure
            compliance with OMB guidance in reimbursing F&A costs;
            and
              (7) Report on the methodology used by the government
            entities responsible for determining F&A rates--the
            Department of Health and Human Services, Division of
            Cost Allocation, and the Department of Defense, Office
            of Naval Research--to review, audit, negotiate, and
            ensure that F&A rates are fair and equitable to the
            federal government.
        The report shall be submitted to the congressional defense
    committees within 12 months after the date of enactment of this
    Act.

    Science and technology for strategic communication

        The budget request contained $20.7 million in PE 65799D8Z
    for the Force Transformation Directorate, but contained no
    funds for science and technology (S&T) to support the
    Department's strategic communication mission.
        The committee supports the findings of the recent Defense
    Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Strategic Communication, as
    well as of the National Science and Technology Council report,
    ``Research and Development Challenges for Regional Stability
    and Capacity Building.'' The committee believes that the
    Department should devote more S&T effort to support this
    mission. The Department already has underway a variety of
    programs that could be used to support the operational needs of
    the strategic communication and public diplomacy community. The
    committee believes the Department should leverage these efforts
    to designate an S&T thrust area for strategic communication and
    focus on critical S&T opportunities, such as those identified
    by the DSB.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
    report to the congressional defense committees within 90 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act. This report shall
    describe current S&T efforts within the Department, services,
    and agencies that could be linked together to form the basis of
    a program supporting these needs, including an analysis of gaps
    not addressed by current programs.
        The committee also recommends an increase of $8.0 million
    in PE 65799D8Z for the Force Transformation Directorate.

    Social science research within the Department of Defense

        As noted elsewhere in this title, the committee is
    encouraged by the effort within office of the Director for
    Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E) to place an increasing
    focus on the human, social, and cultural behavior (HSCB)
    elements of research. The committee is further encouraged by a
    corresponding emphasis within the science and technology (S&T)
    programs of the respective services.
        The committee has also been encouraged by the success of
    integrating social science expertise into Department of Defense
    operations via the Human Terrain Teams (HTT), which provide
    culturally relevant advice to military decision makers. As has
    been pointed out in recent testimony before the committee,
    these teams provide value added to traditional military
    operational planning and have been instrumental in saving lives
    in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The
    committee believes that more programs in the future should be
    informed by social science research.
        Despite this recent emphasis on efforts such as HSCB and
    the deployment of HTTs, the committee is concerned about the
    dearth of social scientists within the Department's S&T
    community and especially within program management leadership
    positions. The committee believes the Department should take
    steps to leverage social scientist expertise existing within
    other parts of the federal government, such as the National
    Science Foundation.

    Sustainment of Business Transformation Agency programs

        The committee notes that the Business Transformation Agency
    was established in order to improve the efficiency of
    Department of Defense business process by accelerating the
    development and deployment of transformational capabilities.
    The committee understands that a key element of that process
    has been to transition programs of record to the Business
    Transformation Agency for management oversight, but the
    committee is concerned that there is no apparent transition
    strategy to move these capabilities to other organizations that
    might be better positioned to maintain and sustain these
    efforts once mature.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a
    report on a transition strategy for programs managed by the
    Business Transformation Agency for the sustainment of systems
    that have reached a defined level of maturity. This report
    shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees
    within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act. This
    transition strategy shall include:
              (1) An evaluation process for determining the
            maturity of a program;
              (2) Exit criteria defining at what point a program
            has reached a maturity level to transition out of the
            Business Transformation Agency for sustainment
            purposes;
              (3) A process defining how the Business
            Transformation Agency will continue to be involved in
            these mature programs in order to help guide them as
            they need to go through update cycles; and
              (4) A transition path, including transition partners,
            for all of the programs currently being managed by the
            Business Transformation Agency.

    Technology to improve future spectrum management usage

        The committee is concerned that Operation Iraqi Freedom and
    Operation Enduring Freedom have exposed a looming challenge
    related to the availability of usable spectrum for defense
    applications. The proliferation of electronic devices that
    utilize radio frequency (RF) spectrum to communicate is a
    function of the information revolution, and is, in large part,
    driving the Department's development and employment of network-
    centric operations. The downside of this proliferation is that
    it places increasing demands on a finite resource made scarcer
    by the auctioning of spectrum for commercial applications, and
    the further competition with commercial systems like cellular
    phones and wireless computing networks.
        The committee believes that technological solutions exist
    that can alleviate these concerns. In one example, the Defense
    Advanced Research Projects Agency has demonstrated the
    applicability of dynamic spectrum access technologies in its
    neXt Generation (XG) communications program. The XG program
    demonstrated the ability to utilize portions of the spectrum
    that are currently being unused, and to adapt to changing
    conditions within the RF spectrum. Technology and concepts
    developed under the XG program are already being adopted into
    current military radio programs, and are being explored further
    for adoption to networking applications.
        The committee urges the Defense Advanced Research Projects
    Agency to conduct an assessment of the state-of-the-art of
    technologies that can be applied to improve our access to
    available spectrum in the near-term, as well as future research
    directions. This assessment should also examine existing
    regulatory barriers that might impede the development or
    deployment of such technologies.

    Transformational Medical Technology Initiative

        The budget request contained $337.9 million in PE 63384BP
    for chemical and biological defense advanced technology
    development, including $217.3 million for the Transformation
    Medical Technology Initiative.
        The committee commends the Department of Defense's recent
    progress toward developing broad-spectrum medical
    countermeasures and notes that after just two-and-a-half years
    of development, the Department expects to file for six
    investigational new drug (IND) applications and one new drug
    application with the Food and Drug Administration in fiscal
    year 2009.
        The fiscal year 2009 budget request marks an increase of
    $157.0 million, or 260 percent, over amounts provided in fiscal
    year 2008. The committee is aware that IND filings represent a
    move toward Phase I clinical trials and consequently requires a
    significant funding increase to support this stage of
    development. The committee, however, is concerned that the 2009
    budget request is excessive given the unlikelihood that all six
    anticipated INDs will be ultimately filed by the Department and
    approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
        The committee recommends $167.3 million for the
    Transformational Medical Technology Initiative, a decrease of
    $50.0 million in the 2009 request or a 177 percent increase
    over the fiscal year 2008 level.

    Wounded Warriors as information technology, scientific, and engineering
            specialists

        The committee recognizes the improvements the Department of
    Defense has made to the care and management of wounded service
    members, and understands that the process is ongoing with more
    improvements yet to be implemented. These improvements have
    resulted in increased survival rates and improved quality of
    life for many wounded warriors by lessening the impact of
    disability through the application of new technologies and
    treatments.
        The committee continues to hear from wounded service
    members regarding their desire to continue military service by
    leveraging their knowledge and experience, even if it means
    entering into new mission specialties. The committee believes
    that the military cannot afford to lose such devoted personnel
    with years of vital military operational experience, and more
    years to give. As such, the committee believes that wounded
    service members would be excellent candidates to support
    information technology, scientific, or engineering activities.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the
    feasibility of identifying and providing education and training
    to selected wounded service members to continue their military
    service as information technology, scientific, or engineering
    specialists and submit a report with the findings of the study
    to the congressional defense committees within 180 days after
    the date of enactment of this Act.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                  Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

                  Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations

        This section would establish the amounts authorized to be
    appropriated for research, development, test, and evaluation
    for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2009.

             Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology

        This section would establish basic, research, applied
    research, and advanced technology development funding levels
    for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2009.

        Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

      Section 211--Additional Determinations to be Made as Part of Future
                        Combat Systems Milestone Review

        This section would amend section 214 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for 2007 (Public Law 109-
    364) by adding additional determinations to be made by the
    Secretary of Defense during the Future Combat Systems program
    review.

     Section 212--Analysis of Future Combat Systems Communications Network
                                  and Software

        This section would require the Assistant Secretary of
    Defense, Networks and Information Integration, to conduct an
    independent study and report to the congressional defense
    committees by July 1, 2009, on possible vulnerabilities of the
    Future Combat Systems (FCS) communications network. The purpose
    of this study is to inform the review of the FCS program
    mandated by section 214 of the John Warner National Defense
    Authorization Act for 2007 (Public Law 109-364).

       Section 213--Future Combat Systems Manned Ground Vehicle Selected
                              Acquisition Reports

        This section would require the Secretary of the Army to
    submit to the congressional defense committees selected
    acquisition reports as defined in section 2432(c) of title 10,
    United States Code, on each of the eight Future Combat Systems
    manned ground vehicle variants. The reports are required by
    February 15 of each year from 2009 to 2015.

    Section 214--Separate Procurement and Research, Development, Test, and
      Evaluation Line Items and Program Elements for Sky Warrior Unmanned
                             Aerial Systems Project

        This section would require establishment of a program
    element for the Army's ``Sky Warrior'' Unmanned Aerial System
    program.

      Section 215--Restriction on Obligations of Funds for the Warfighter
                     Information Network--Tactical Program

        This section would restrict obligation of eighty percent of
    research and development funds authorized for appropriation for
    the Warfighter Information Network--Tactical, Increment 3
    program until 15 days after receipt by the congressional
    defense committees of certification from the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics that the
    program has an approved acquisition program baseline, a new
    independent cost estimate is complete, and the Director,
    Defense Research and Engineering has completed a technology
    readiness assessment.

      Section 216--Limitation on Source of Funds for Certain Joint Cargo
                             Aircraft Expenditures

        This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Army from
    funding initial spares, support equipment, training simulators,
    post production modifications, and system engineering and
    management items through the Operations and Maintenance, Army
    appropriation account.

                      Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs

         Section 221--Independent Study of Boost Phase Missile Defense

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within
    90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to enter into
    an agreement with a Federally Funded Research and Development
    Center to conduct an independent assessment examining the costs
    and benefits of missile defense systems designed to intercept
    ballistic missiles in their boost phase.
        This study would examine the operational capabilities of
    the Airborne Laser and the Kinetic Energy Interceptor programs
    to counter short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic
    missile threats to the deployed forces of the United States and
    its friends and allies from rogue states; and to defend the
    territory of the United States against limited ballistic
    missile attack.

       Section 222--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Procurement,
           Construction, and Deployment of Missile Defenses in Europe

        This section would limit the availability of funds
    authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense in
    this and subsequent acts from being obligated or expended for
    site activation or construction of Ground-based Midcourse
    Defense interceptors and associated radars in Europe until
    certain conditions are met.
        This section would also limit the availability of funds for
    the acquisition or deployment of operational missiles for the
    proposed European deployment until the Secretary of Defense
    certifies that the two-stage interceptor proposed for European
    deployment has demonstrated, through successful, operationally
    realistic testing, a high probability of operational
    effectiveness.

                           Subtitle D--Other Matters

    Section 231--Oversight of Testing of Personnel Protective Equipment by
                   Director, Operational Test and Evaluation

        This section would clarify the authorities of the Director,
    Operational Test & Evaluation with respect to personnel
    protective equipment by repealing the authority to provide
    guidance and consultation to the Secretary of Defense for force
    protection equipment and adding authority for the Secretary, or
    his designee, to designate an item of personnel protective
    equipment as a covered system for the purposes of survivability
    testing under section 2366 of title 10, United States Code. The
    Director, Operational Test and Evaluation currently has the
    authority to monitor and review testing conducted under the
    authority of section 2366. This section would also require, in
    the event that personnel protective equipment is fielded for
    operational use prior to the completion of survivability
    testing or a decision to proceed beyond low rate initial
    production, the Director to submit the required report on
    survivability testing to the Secretary of Defense and the
    congressional defense committees as soon as practicable.
        The committee intends to clarify the Secretary's
    authorities to direct his principal advisor on operational test
    and evaluation and live-fire testing, Director, Operational
    Test and Evaluation, to monitor and review survivability test
    data for selected equipment in order to promote greater use of
    consistent, defensible test standards and, through the
    establishment of such standards, accelerate the testing of
    personnel protective equipment. Likewise, as threats to our
    warfighters continue to evolve, the committee urges the
    Secretary to make use of all appropriate acquisition
    authorities to ensure urgent operational needs are fulfilled
    without undue delay, including, if circumstances warrant the
    prudent use of waivers to field personnel protective equipment
    prior to the completion of survivability testing if substantial
    evidence exists that such equipment would provide greater
    levels of protection. If the current acquisition authorities
    are not sufficient to ensure urgent operational needs are met,
    the Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services and the House Committee on Armed Services within 45
    days as to why.

        Section 232--Assessment of the Historically Black Colleges and
             Universities and Minority Serving Institutions Program

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    carry out an assessment of the capability of minority serving
    institutions to participate in research, development, test and
    evaluation (RDT&E) programs for the Department of Defense
    (DOD). The report, to be submitted to the congressional defense
    committees within 12 months after the date of enactment of this
    Act, shall describe and assess the current activities within
    the Office of the Secretary of Defense, military departments,
    and defense agencies intended to increase opportunities for
    these institutions to participate in and benefit from DOD RDT&E
    programs. Matters such as metrics, lessons learned, capability
    gaps, and other areas deemed appropriate by the Secretary
    should be addressed. The report should also include, as
    directed by Executive Order 13256, the Department's effort to
    establish an annual plan with clear goals for how it intends to
    increase the capacity of historically black colleges and
    universities to compete effectively for DOD grants, contracts,
    or cooperative agreements.

     Section 233--Technology-Neutral Information Technology Guidelines and
      Standards to Support Fully Interoperable Electronic Personal Health
     Information for the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans
                                    Affairs

        This section would require the Director of the Department
    of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Interagency Program
    Office to report within 12 months after the date of enactment
    of this Act on the development of information technology
    infrastructure guidelines and standards for use by the
    Departments of Defense (DOD) and Veterans Affairs (VA) to
    enable fully interoperable electronic personal health
    information.
        For more than 15 years, the committee has been urging the
    Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs to
    develop this capability. The committee believes that a
    standards-based approach is a vital prerequisite to having a
    capability to generate, maintain, and seamlessly update
    electronic health records, regardless of which department is
    treating the service person. With the growing number of wounded
    warriors entering the DOD and VA medical systems, the need for
    this capability is imperative in order to prevent the health
    system from becoming overwhelmed.

    Section 234--Repeal of Requirement for Technology Transition Initiative

        This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to assess the
    feasibility of consolidating technology transition accounts
    into a unified effort managed by a senior official of the
    Department of Defense. This section would repeal certain
    subsections of section 2359a title 10, United States Code,
    which required the Secretary of Defense to carry out the
    Technology Transition Initiative.
        The committee believes that effective technology transition
    remains vital for making the right technology available to the
    warfighter as quickly as possible and at the lowest cost. The
    Government Accountability Office notes that a number of
    commercial best practices, such as strategic planning at the
    corporate level, are good enablers for technology transition.
    The Government Accountability Office has observed that despite
    a number of Department of Defense initiatives aimed at
    technology transition, the reach of these initiatives is
    limited and there is no unified, corporate approach to using
    them. The Government Accountability Office also states that the
    Department's approach to funding transition is flawed and that
    multiple, small funding sources for specific transition
    activities offer a piecemeal solution to a more systemic
    problem.

                      Section 235--Trusted Defense Systems

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    assess the vulnerabilities in the supply chain for certain
    acquisition programs' information processing systems. This
    section would further require the assessment to identify the
    appropriate lead for the development of a strategy to ensure
    trust in the supply chain for certain acquisition programs.
    Finally, this section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    implement an interim policy requiring certain Department of
    Defense (DOD) major systems to utilize a trusted source to
    design, prototype, and fabricate integrated circuits.
        The committee notes that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    approved a Defense Trusted Integrated Circuits Strategy on
    October 10, 2003. Further, the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration
    jointly issued interim guidance on trusted suppliers for
    application-specific integrated circuits on January 27, 2004.
    The Under Secretary's interim guidance referenced policy that
    was in development to require certain trusted systems to employ
    on trusted foundry services. The interim guidance provided
    specific examples of ``Top DOD Candidate Programs for Trusted
    Foundry.'' Nevertheless, the committee understands that after
    more than four years in coordination within the Department, the
    policy referenced in the Under Secretary and Assistant
    Secretary's memo remains in draft form. Moreover, only 1
    program out of the 14 identified as top candidates for trusted
    foundry services, has utilized the foundry funded by the
    Department of Defense and the National Security Agency. While
    the use of trusted microcircuits is only a single step in
    ensuring the warfighter has trusted systems, the committee
    strongly encourages the Department to take greater advantage of
    trusted foundries for integrated circuits as an iterative step
    and to potentially foster greater industrial interest and
    competition.
        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit, within 12 months after the date of enactment of this
    Act, a report to the congressional defense committees on the
    vulnerability assessment and strategy.

     Section 236--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for Enhanced AN/TPQ-36
                   Radar System Pending Submission of Report

        This section would limit the amount of funds provided to
    the program until the Secretary of the Army provides the
    congressional defense committees with a plan to rapidly
    transition the Counter-Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (C-RAM)
    program to a program of record.
        The committee notes the remarkable and unprecedented
    success of C-RAM systems in protecting a limited number of
    forward operating bases in the Republic of Iraq. According to
    commanders in the field, C-RAM is a force multiplier that is
    saving lives. The committee believes that lessons learned from
    Iraq demonstrate that the indirect fire threat to fixed sites
    is enduring and will likely proliferate, requiring: deployment
    of additional C-RAM systems; continuous improvements to its
    capabilities; and integration of the system into the Army's
    future force. The C-RAM system was rapidly developed and
    fielded in response to an urgent wartime need. It is not a
    program of record and therefore lacks the complete and
    necessary doctrine and support for training, operations, and
    manning. The committee does not direct a material solution, but
    does believe there is a requirement void that must be met as
    soon as possible.
        The committee understands that the Army has proposed to
    transition the C-RAM program into the Indirect Fire Protection
    Capability (IFPC) program of record. Given the success of the
    C-RAM system and the urgent need for additional systems and for
    system enhancements, the committee encourages the Army to
    complete this transition immediately. This transition will
    allow the new IFPC program to rapidly deploy capability to the
    field and to minimize development costs by evolving the C-RAM
    command and control and by capitalizing on the substantial
    investment of the Army in future force indirect fire sensors
    and intercept technologies. Immediate transition to the IFPC
    program of record will also enable funding for the IFPC program
    to begin in fiscal year 2010, thereby accelerating the fielding
    of IFPC to both the current and future force.

    Section 237--Capabilities Based Assessment to Outline a Joint Approach
         for Future Development of Vertical Lift Aircraft and Rotocraft

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense and
    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff conduct a capabilities-
    based assessment that outlines a joint approach to the future
    development of vertical lift aircraft and rotorcraft for all of
    the military services.

    Section 238--Availability of Funds for Prompt Global Strike Capability
                                  Development

        This section would limit the use of funds for prompt global
    strike in fiscal year 2009 to only those activities expressly
    delineated in the expenditure plan for fiscal years 2008 and
    2009, that was required by section 243 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) and
    transmitted to the congressional defense committees on March
    24, 2008, or those activities otherwise expressly authorized by
    Congress. This section would also require the Secretary of
    Defense to submit a report on prompt global strike concepts to
    the congressional defense committees concurrently with the
    President's budget request for fiscal year 2010.
        The committee expects the execution of the expenditure plan
    to be consistent with prompt global strike plans presented
    informally by the Department of Defense to the committee in
    April 2008. The committee anticipates near-term receipt of the
    research, development, and testing plan required by section 243
    of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181) and intends to review it for consistency
    with the basic approaches presented to the committee in April
    2008.

                      TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                                    OVERVIEW

        The budget request contained approximately $179.8 billion
    in operation and maintenance funds to ensure the Department of
    Defense can train, deploy, and sustain U.S. military forces.
    The budget request increased the operation and maintenance
    account by $15.6 billion over the fiscal year 2008 enacted
    level, resulting in a 7.1 percent increase after accounting for
    inflation. The committee recommends additional funding for
    readiness needs and operations and maintenance expenses in this
    title and also title XV of this Act.
        The fiscal year 2009 budget request seeks to improve full-
    spectrum ground combat training, but due to inflation and cost
    increases, it results in reductions in other areas. The fiscal
    year 2009 budget request reduces some air, ground, and sea
    training to below the level required to maintain military
    standards. Vital to training for full-spectrum missions are
    Combat Training Center rotations, sustained air crew training,
    and increased ship-deployed steaming days. The fiscal year 2009
    budget request significantly increases tank training miles over
    fiscal year 2008, but not above the fiscal year 2007 level.
    Flying hours slightly increase for the Navy and decline for the
    Air Force, but all are well below the levels for fiscal year
    2007. Ship steaming days remain at the level adopted in fiscal
    year 2008, which is below the deployed steaming days goal of
    51.
        The committee is gravely concerned with the continuing
    decline in the readiness of the armed forces. More than six
    years of continuous combat operations have placed a significant
    strain on the services, and this strain has begun to manifest
    itself in declining readiness trends across many aspects of
    U.S. military forces. Equipment shortfalls hamper the ability
    to train and deploy ground forces. Personnel shortfalls drive
    lengthy deployment periods, less than desirable dwell periods
    and a reliance on sailors and airmen to perform missions
    typically carried out by soldiers. Resource shortfalls and
    aging equipment reduce the mission capability of U.S. air
    forces. Shortfalls in maintenance have created significant
    equipment readiness deficiencies in the Navy's surface fleet.
    These problems indicate a military under significant strain as
    it supports ongoing operations.
        Readiness problems appear to be most severe in the ground
    forces, particularly the Army. Department of Defense readiness
    reports indicate that every non-deployed Army and Army National
    Guard combat brigade would face significant challenges
    completing their assigned full-spectrum combat missions if they
    were called upon to fight. Readiness shortfalls in equipment
    availability and training assessments can be attributed to the
    challenges of increased operational tempo on both equipment and
    personnel.
        Marine Corps readiness has declined since 2001, as
    continuous combat operations have consumed readiness. The
    nature of current combat operations has forced the Marine Corps
    to draw from equipment in non-deployed units and afloat stocks
    to meet operational needs, resulting in less equipment
    available for training. Added to this is the fact that the
    Marines, like the Army, are focusing heavily on counter-
    insurgency operations in their training, resulting in an
    overall reduction of full mission capability.
        Readiness strains are also appearing in the Navy, where two
    surface warfare ships recently were found to be unfit for
    sustained combat. While Navy officials expect to find problems
    during inspections, the scale and scope of these material
    deficiencies raise questions about the sufficiency of the
    Navy's inspection process, especially during a time of
    increased deployment tempo and as Department of Defense
    officials underscore the reliance upon the Navy and Air Force
    as the nation's strategic reserve force and global deterrent.
        The Air Force continues to struggle with maintaining the
    full mission capability of its aircraft. Operational tempo for
    the Air Force has remained high since the first Gulf War,
    placing continued strain on the Air Force's aging aircraft
    fleet. Maintenance challenges have reduced overall mission
    capability rates below levels seen in prior years and are
    particularly troubling given that procurement programs for new
    aircraft will not fill capability gaps until the years beyond
    the Future Years Defense Plan.
        The committee continues to be concerned about the status of
    prepositioned stocks of combat equipment. The Army and Marine
    Corps have been forced to draw down these stocks to support
    ongoing operations and to fill shortfalls across the force.
    This drawdown has increased the time it will take to deploy
    equipment to a contingency. The committee notes that the
    intended restoration timeline of 2015 increases strategic risk
    for a significant period of time. For this reason, the
    committee strongly urges the Army and the Department of Defense
    to move rapidly to restore prepositioned stocks earlier than
    the current 2015 timeline.
        It is critical for the United States to provide the
    resources necessary to properly train and equip its men and
    women in uniform, to care for servicemembers and their
    families, and to prepare the military to fight today's battles
    while deterring and defending against future threats. The
    committee believes that the current funding levels for
    operation and maintenance are not sufficient to fully address
    the Department of Defense's needs while the military is engaged
    in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The
    committee has made significant adjustments to the budget
    request in order to address some of the most urgent shortfalls.
        The committee has added additional funds for: depot
    maintenance of ground equipment, ships, and aircraft; increased
    training of critical skills, exporting training from the combat
    training centers, and increased battle command training;
    increased ground force operational training; redistribution of
    equipment to fill shortages; and maintenance of missiles and
    ammunition stocks. The committee has directed funding to fill
    shortages in the prepositioned stocks and to repair and
    maintain barracks and troop housing in all of the services.
        The committee is very concerned about these readiness
    shortfalls expanding beyond fiscal year 2009 as stress on the
    operation and maintenance budget continues. Also disturbing is
    that the strategic risk presented by the degraded readiness
    posture shows no sign of improving in the near future.
    Readiness will improve only in the out years with intensive
    management and resourcing as the services require funding to
    reset and retrain their forces. For this reason, the committee
    strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to use every available
    authority to accelerate restoration of a strong readiness
    posture to reduce risk as soon as possible.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                           Budget Request Adjustments

        The committee recommends the following adjustments to the
    fiscal year 2009 amended budget request:

    Operation and Maintenance, Army Adjustments:
        BA 1 Army Force Generation Synchronization Tool...........      +2.0
        BA 1 Cognitive Air Defense Trainer System (CAD-TS)........      +1.0
        BA 1 M--Gator.............................................      +1.0
        BA 1 Army NETCOM Unjustified Growth.......................    (10.0)
        BA 1 Army Asymmetric Warfare Office--IED Defeat Division--
          EOD.....................................................     +24.3
        BA 1 CASEVAC Medical Equipment Set (MES) Conversion Kits
          (Ground & Air)..........................................      +3.5
        BA 1 M24 Sniper Weapons System Upgrade....................      +5.4
        BA 1 Depot Maintenance Increase...........................    +257.7
        BA 1 Integrated Training Area Management..................      +9.0
        BA 1 Training Support Centers--Fabricate Training Aids and
          Devices.................................................     +10.0
        BA 2 Army Manufacturing Technical Assistance Production
          Program (MTAPP).........................................      +2.5
        BA 3 Critical Skill Training TRADOC-TFNC..................     +48.0
        BA 3 Military Training Support Allotment MTSA--Additional
          School Travel...........................................     +19.0
        BA 3 Leadership for Leaders at Fort Leavenworth...........      +2.0
        BA 3 United States Army Sergeants Major Academy Lecture
          Center Audio Visual Equipment Replacement...............      +0.6
        BA 3 Operational/Technical Training Validation Test Bed...      +4.0
        BA 3 Arabic Strategic Language Program North Georgia
          College and SU..........................................      +0.4
        BA 4 Army Directed Redistribution of Equipment to Fill
          Unit Shortfalls.........................................     +50.0
        BA 4 Support Missile Stockpile Reliability Inspections and
          Parts Obsolescence Issues...............................     +57.0
        BA 4 Condition Based Maintenance Information Management...      +5.0
        BA 4 Ammunition Readiness and Management..................     +60.0
        BA 4 Information Technology Agency Unjustified Growth.....    (10.0)
        BA 4 Army Knowledge Online Helpdesk.......................      +2.9
        BA 4 Army NETCOM Unjustified Growth.......................     (5.0)
        1BA 4 Fort Bliss Data Center COOP.........................      +5.0
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy Adjustments:
        BA 1 Airframe Depot Maintenance...........................     +63.0
        BA 1 Ship Depot Maintenance...............................    +120.0
        BA 1 Mark 75 Maintenance Facility Support and Upgrade.....      +3.0
        BA 1 NULKA Support........................................      +2.0
        BA 1 Base-level Information Infrastructure (OCONUS)
          Unjustified Growth......................................    (10.0)
        BA 3 Naval Sea Cadet Training.............................      +0.3
        BA 4 Secretary of the Navy Organizational Restructuring...     (3.2)
        BA 4 Navy Enterprise Office...............................     (2.4)
        Undistributed--Unobligated Balances Estimate..............   (115.0)
        Undistributed--Overstatement of Civilian Pay..............   (110.0)
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Adjustments:
        BA 1 Clothing and Flame Resistant Organizational Gear.....     +44.9
        BA 1 Cold Weather Layering System (CWLS)..................      +4.0
        BA 1 Mobile Corrosion Prevention and Abatement Program....      +7.6
        BA 1 Consolidated Storage Program.........................     +14.1
        BA 1 BV206 Maintenance....................................      +2.0
        BA 4 Heroes and Healthy Families..........................      +1.0
        BA 4 Total Force Structure Management System (TFSMS)......      +2.9
        BA 4 Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP).............      +6.3
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Adjustments:
        BA 1 MBU-20A/P Oxygen Masks with Lights...................      +2.0
        BA 1 Contract Logistics Support...........................    (20.0)
        BA 1 Network Defense......................................    (10.0)
        BA 1 Other Costs..........................................     (2.0)
        BA 1 B-2 Depot Maintenance................................     (2.0)
        BA 1 F-15 Maintenance Support.............................   (447.0)
        BA 1 Base Communications..................................     (5.0)
        BA 1 Contract Logistics Support...........................     (7.0)
        BA 1 Weapon System Evaluation Program (WSEP)..............     (3.0)
        BA 1 Air Sovereignty Alert System.........................     +34.0
        BA 1 Tactical Intel and Other Special Activities--Other
          Contracts...............................................    (20.0)
        BA 1 Launch Facilities--Other Contracts...................     (2.0)
        BA 1 Management Professional Services.....................     (2.0)
        BA 2 Airlift Operations--Other Contracts..................    (20.0)
        BA 2 Management Professional Services.....................     (2.0)
        BA 3 Engineering Training and Knowledge Preservation
          System..................................................      +3.0
        BA 4 Wage Modification for Employees in Azores............      +0.2
        BA 4 Secure Site at Ely NV Radar Site (Edwards AFB).......      +0.7
        Undistributed--Unobligated Balances Estimate..............   (120.0)
        Undistributed--Overstatement of Civilian Pay..............   (220.0)
    Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide Adjustments:
        BA 4 National Guard Youth Challenge.......................      +5.0
        BA 4 Starbase.............................................      +1.0
        BA 4 SORTS Reduction......................................    (22.0)
        BA 4 Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities...      +5.0
        BA 4 Restoration of Staffing..............................     +10.5
        BA 4 Global Training and Equipment........................   (200.0)
        BA 4 Security and Stabilization Assistance................   (100.0)
        BA 4 Industrial Security Program..........................     +20.0
        BA 4 DOD Impact Aid.......................................     +50.0
        BA 4 World War II Museum..................................     +10.0
        BA 4 Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight.............     +20.0
        BA 4 Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
          (REPI)..................................................     +21.0
        Undistributed--Unobligated Balances Estimate..............   (124.0)
        Undistributed--Interdisciplinary Critical Language and
          Area Studies............................................      +3.5
        Undistributed--Family Support Programs....................     +15.0
        Undistributed--Emergency and Extraordinary Expenses.......     (0.3)
    Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve Adjustments:
        BA 1 Mobile Corrosion Prevention and Abatement Program....      +4.8
        BA 1 Increase in Full Time Reservists.....................     +12.0
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve Adjustments:
        BA 1 Air Force Reserve DPEM...............................     +60.0
    Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard Adjustments:
        BA 1 Increase in Full Time National Guard.................     +19.0
        BA 1 Mobile Corrosion Prevention and Abatement Program....      +4.8
        BA 4 Delaware Valley Continuing Education Initiative......      +1.0
    Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard Adjustments:
        BA 1 Depot Provided Equipment Maintenance.................     +50.0
    Miscellaneous Appropriations Adjustments:
        Cooperative Threat Reduction (formerly former Soviet Union
          threat reduction).......................................     +31.0

                             Air Sovereignty Alert

        The budget request contained no funds for the Air
    Sovereignty Alert (ASA) mission undertaken by the Air National
    Guard.
        The committee strongly supports the ASA mission and is
    concerned that by providing no funding in the budget request,
    the Air Force is not fully committed to this mission, which
    puts the ability of the Air National Guard to support it at
    risk.
        The committee recommends $34.0 million to fund this
    critical mission. In section 354 of this Act, the committee
    requires that future budget justifications include a specific
    break-out for ASA funds.

                               Cheyenne Mountain

        The budget request contained $1.2 million for contract
    logistics support for Global C3I and early warning, $7.9
    million of which included contractor logistics support for an
    increase in Cheyenne Mountain reconfiguration management and
    project engineering. The committee remains concerned that the
    U.S. Northern Command is proceeding with relocation of the
    North American Aerospace Defense Command center without full
    analysis of the cost and benefits of such relocation.
        The committee recommends a decrease of $7.0 million from
    the requested increase for Cheyenne Mountain support to ensure
    sufficient time to provide additional information on cost and
    benefits of the relocation. In section 1062 of this Act, the
    committee requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
    and certify that the relocation does not increase risk to the
    mission or functions.

           Defense Contract Management Agency Restoration of Staffing

        The budget request contained $1.1 billion for the Defense
    Contract Management Agency (DCMA).
        The committee is concerned that from fiscal year 2000 to
    fiscal year 2007, the DCMA sustained a 79 percent increase in
    workload simultaneous with a 22 percent reduction in staff. In
    addition, the committee is aware that, if funded at the level
    of the budget request, the DCMA will lose funding for an
    additional 102 full time employees.
        The committee recommends $1.1 billion, an increase of $10.5
    million, for the Defense Contract Management Agency to restore
    staffing to fiscal year 2008 levels.

                                F-15 Maintenance

        The budget request contained $497.0 million for repairs of
    the F-15 A/D fighters as a result of cracks in the longerons
    resulting from stress. The committee recognizes that the
    repairs are essential; however, the committee believes that the
    costs of repairs have been overestimated. The committee
    recommends a decrease of $447.0 million as unjustified growth.

                    Navy Headquarters Organizational Changes

        The budget request contained $5.6 million for the creation
    of new positions and standup of a new organization within the
    Navy headquarters. The proposed Deputy Under Secretary would
    advise the Secretary of the Navy on Maritime Domain Awareness
    support issues and coordinate policy with the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense. The proposed special assistant to the
    Secretary of the Navy would serve as senior advisor for policy
    relating to Navy undersea strategy. The proposed Navy
    Enterprise Office would ``assure standardization and
    coordination among all Navy enterprises.'' The committee
    believes the responsibility for requirements generation lies
    correctly within the purview of the Office of the Chief of
    Naval Operations. Additionally, the Navy did not provide the
    committee sufficient justification information regarding the
    authorities and responsibilities of the requested positions.
    The committee believes these functions are sufficiently covered
    by current Navy headquarters organizational structure and
    leadership.
        The committee recommends a decrease of $5.6 million to Navy
    servicewide support, administration.

                                Other Contracts

        The budget request contained additional funds for several
    line items entitled ``other contracts,'' ``other costs,'' and
    ``management professional services.'' In many instances, the
    funding increases are substantial. The committee is concerned
    that there is no transparency to allow for effective oversight
    when funds are consolidated in these categories. The committee
    notes that section 806 of the National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), which requires
    service contracts to be broken out separately in the budget
    justification materials, was intended to obtain greater
    fidelity on these categories as related to service contracts.
        Where there was a substantial but unexplained growth, the
    committee recommends the following decreases: $2.0 million from
    Other Costs, Combat Communications (line 050); $20.0 million
    from Other Contracts, Tactical Intel and Other Special
    Activities (line 140); $2.0 million from Other Contracts,
    Launch Facilities (line 150); $2.0 million from Management
    Professional Services, Other Space Operations (line 190); $20.0
    million from Other Contracts, Airlift Operations (line 240);
    $2.0 million from Management Professional Services, Airlift
    Operations C3I (line 250).

               Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative

        The budget request contained $39.8 million for the
    Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI).
        The committee expects the secretaries of the military
    departments to use the authority and funding available through
    the REPI program to partner with public and private entities to
    establish protective buffer zones around military installations
    that have impending encroachment pressures. The committee
    recognizes the benefits of REPI, including its ability to
    enhance military readiness, increase protection of key military
    spaces and natural habitats, foster public safety standards,
    and encourage economic growth.
        The committee recommends $60.8 million, an increase of
    $21.0 million, for the Readiness and Environmental Protection
    Initiative.

                              Readiness Shortfalls

        Budget justification materials provided to the committee
    demonstrated readiness shortfalls across the military services,
    in both the active-duty and reserve components. For depot-level
    maintenance, the committee recommends the following increases
    to improve readiness by reducing maintenance shortfalls and
    deferrals across various platforms:
              (1) Army Land Forces Depot Maintenance, $257.7
            million to repair and recapitalize equipment including
            communications electronics; missile end items; other--
            construction ships, rails, bulldozers; combat vehicles;
            M88A1; and armored combat earth mover; and to increase
            the capacity and efficiency of the depots;
              (2) Navy Airframe Depot Maintenance, $63.0 million;
              (3) Navy Ship Depot Maintenance, $120.0 million;
              (4) Air Force Reserve Depot Provided Equipment
            Maintenance, $60.0 million; and
              (5) Air National Guard Depot Provided Equipment
            Maintenance, $50.0 million.
        To address other concerns related to the declining
    readiness posture of the Army, the committee has recommended
    increases of $117.0 million for Army missile and ammunition
    maintenance, $50.0 million to redistribute Army equipment and
    fill unit shortages; and $110.3 million for training.
    Additionally, the committee has recommended an additional $70.2
    million for unfunded Marine Corps operation and maintenance
    needs.

                                  Secure Site

        The budget request contained no funds for security
    enhancements at isolated range tracking sites located near
    Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB). The committee is concerned about
    potential unauthorized entry at these sites.
        The committee recommends $0.7 million to fund security
    enhancements at these radar sites and to demolish buildings at
    an EAFB radar site near Ely, Nevada.

                                 Energy Issues

                              Energy Conversation

        The committee commends the considerable efforts of the
    Secretary of Defense to improve the energy security of the
    United States. The Department of Defense has been at the
    forefront of federal government efforts to promote, develop,
    and implement energy conservation, energy efficiency, and
    advanced energy technologies, including renewable energy. In
    particular, the committee acknowledges the efforts of the
    Department to support the Energy Conversation, begun in 2006,
    to facilitate and accelerate the adoption of energy-related
    policy changes to maintain U.S. military superiority and
    enhance U.S. national security. These policy objectives include
    reducing energy intensity, reducing reliance upon imported oil,
    and developing domestic, renewable energy sources for energy
    needs. Recent programs sponsored by the Energy Conversation
    include: the development of a public and government-wide portal
    for collaborative exchange of energy developments; the creation
    of a government directory of individuals with energy
    portfolios; and the drafting of an energy manual for educating
    current and rising leaders about the costs and consequences of
    energy-related decisions in their jobs.
        The committee finds that the Energy Conversation
    initiatives reduce transaction costs and unnecessary
    duplication of energy-related decisions by connecting stove-
    piped federal government policymakers and informing the public
    about the costs and consequences of energy-related decisions.
    The committee recognizes that the Energy Conversation
    facilitates solutions to the energy security challenges faced
    by the nation because a single agency cannot overcome them.

                   Energy Security on Military Installations

        The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
    appears to lack a coherent strategy for energy security on
    military installations. Despite the absence of a coherent
    strategy, the committee recognizes numerous individual efforts
    by the military services to address energy security on
    installations. The committee believes that these efforts
    reflect the services' willingness to take the initiative and
    creatively apply their authorities. While the committee is
    pleased with the leadership shown by the services, the
    committee would prefer to see the Department of Defense
    centralize leadership, ensure collaboration of efforts, and
    implement a coherent and comprehensive installation energy
    security strategy. In addition, the committee believes that the
    Department of Energy should take a greater role in initiating
    clean alternative energy programs across the federal
    government.

       Improving Energy Efficiency in Reset and Recapitalization Programs

        The committee is aware that the Department of Defense
    spends billions of dollars each year to reset and recapitalize
    its operational systems. The reset program includes actions to
    not only repair equipment, but also to enhance or replace
    equipment used in support operations for current conflicts.
    Additionally, the committee is aware that a recent Defense
    Science Board report ``More Fight--Less Fuel'' is consistent
    with a number of preceding reports that conclude there are
    operational benefits to deploying technologies that enable
    systems to use fuel more efficiently, and technical options
    available for doing so.
        The committee recognizes value in the inclusion of analyses
    of new energy technologies in the Department's decisions to
    upgrade and modify systems during reset. Such technologies
    should be valued in terms of operational capability and an
    economic business case using the fully burdened cost of fuel to
    determine the benefits.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services a report by March 1, 2009, on
    technologies that are suitably mature to be integrated into
    reset and recapitalization programs that, if deployed, could
    reduce energy consumption. Such a report shall include the list
    of reset and recapitalization programs planned by the military
    services through the Future Years Defense Program, and a
    description of technologies capable of improving systems'
    energy efficiency considered to have reached an appropriate
    technology readiness level to enable integration in the reset
    program without causing undue delay in the fielding of critical
    systems to the warfighter.

                              Environmental Issues

            Marine Mammal Protection Act National Defense Exemption

        The committee notes that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    invoked a two-year national defense exemption from the Marine
    Mammal Protection Act (Public Law 92-522), under the authority
    provided by section 1361-1421h of title 16, United States Code,
    on January 23, 2007. In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146)
    accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2008, the committee directed the Secretary of the Navy to
    submit a report on those activities undertaken under the
    authority of the exemption. This report was received February
    5, 2008.
        The committee is aware that the Department of the Navy
    intends to achieve full compliance with the Marine Mammal
    Protection Act (MMPA) and other environmental laws by issuing
    environmental impact statements (EIS) addressing sonar use on
    all training ranges and operating areas before the expiration
    of the exemption.
        For the second year of the two-year exemption, the
    committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit a report
    on specific activities undertaken under the authority of the
    exemption to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2009. The
    report shall include the estimated number and species of marine
    mammals injured and killed as a result of those activities
    undertaken under the authority of the exemption and an estimate
    of the population level effect on these species. The committee
    also directs the Secretary to report on the status of each of
    the range and operating area EISs, including a strategy and
    schedule for achieving long-term compliance with MMPA and other
    relevant environmental laws if it has not already been
    achieved.
        The committee is concerned that naval force readiness may
    be affected by a growing number of environmental statutes
    beyond the Marine Mammal Protection Act. For example, the
    committee is aware of litigation resulting in an injunction
    under the National Environmental Policy Act (Public Law 91-190)
    limiting fleet training exercises to the extent that the Chief
    of Naval Operations (CNO) concluded ``unacceptably risks the
    training of naval forces for deployment to high-threat areas
    overseas.'' The committee welcomes the CNO's view of the
    readiness implications of future federal court rulings limiting
    naval force training and will carefully review the outcome of
    all pending cases.

           Measurement of Encroachment Impacts on Military Readiness

        In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
    committee directed the Comptroller General to report on whether
    exemptions granted under environmental laws resulted in a
    measured increase in military readiness. In March 2008, the
    Comptroller General issued a report recommending that the
    Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and
    Environment and the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
    Personnel and Readiness jointly develop a sound business case
    that includes detailed qualitative and quantitative analyses
    assessing the associated benefits, costs, and risks of proposed
    exemptions from environmental laws. The committee believes that
    the ability to measure the effects of encroachment on military
    readiness is a key element of such a business case.
        The committee is aware that the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense (OSD) and the military services are developing systems
    to measure the effects of encroachment on training ranges. For
    example, OSD is working to develop the capability of the
    Defense Readiness Reporting System to identify the extent to
    which encroachment factors affect a range's ability to support
    various operational capabilities. The Department of Defense
    plans to pilot test this new functionality during calendar year
    2008. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit
    a report on the findings of the pilot effort and how
    encroachment affects the training and readiness levels of
    tactical units of the military services. In addition, the
    committee directs the Secretary to summarize the status of the
    individual services' reporting systems, and assess whether
    requirements for these individual systems are sufficiently
    consistent so that information produced will serve both the
    Department's and services' needs. The Secretary shall submit
    these reports to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2009.

                  Environmental Management Information Systems

        The committee is aware that Executive Order 13423,
    ``Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
    Transportation Management,'' requires federal officials to
    implement sustainable practices for greenhouse gas emissions
    and environmental management on installations. The executive
    order also recognizes the successful use of environmental
    management systems within organizations and requires more
    widespread use of that management framework to implement,
    measure, and improve upon sustainable practices. The committee
    is aware of the time and costs associated with paper-based
    environmental management systems and encourages the Department
    of Defense to develop and deploy a web-based environmental
    management information system to achieve uniform policies and
    practices for sustainable environmental compliance and
    reporting.

                           Workplace and Depot Issues

                        Army Rail Shop Relocation Study

        The committee notes that the Department of Defense's sole
    capability for depot-level repair and maintenance of rail stock
    and rail equipment, as well as certain types of large-scale
    power-generation equipment, is managed by the U.S. Army Tank
    and Automotive Command at facilities located at Hill Air Force
    Base (AFB), Utah, which has been operating under a tenant
    support agreement with the Air Force. The Air Force has
    notified the Army of its intent, under terms of the support
    agreement, to terminate the Army's occupancy of the current
    rail shop facilities within an approximate five-year time frame
    in order to facilitate the Air Force's master plan for the
    Westside Development project at Hill AFB. This termination will
    necessitate the relocation of this core maintenance capability.
    The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Army to
    report to the congressional defense committees by March 30,
    2009, on the primary considerations involved in relocating the
    rail shop core capabilities. The report shall include a
    discussion of the core capabilities, the cost and manpower
    implications of such a move, and a list of the most practical
    relocation alternatives. The alternatives shall include
    consideration of Tooele Army Depot's central rail location, its
    inherent rail operations capabilities, and its history as the
    rail shop prior to consolidation to Hill AFB in the early
    1990s.

                          Post-Reset Depot Maintenance

        Section 2464 of title 10, United States Code, requires the
    Department of Defense (DOD) to retain the core logistics
    capabilities needed to ensure a ready and controlled source of
    technical competencies and resources necessary to ensure
    effective, timely response to mobilization, national defense
    contingency situations, and other emergency requirements. In
    light of the increased reliability and maintainability of
    military weapons systems and equipment, the committee must
    understand what enduring depot capabilities will be needed to
    support long-term national security needs through peacetime,
    persistent conflict, and future surge contingencies. These
    depot capabilities include facilities, skills, and equipment.
        The Government Accountability Office noted that previous
    DOD efforts have not provided Congress with the information
    necessary to assess what the Department requires in terms of
    enduring depot capability and the legislative framework in
    which this capability should exist to establish a long-term,
    cost-effective approach. In June 2007, the Government
    Accountability Office reported: ``DOD has not set forth all the
    information needed to effectively guide the military depots
    into the future. Without a comprehensive baseline that
    identifies the current state of the depots and outlines the
    actions that will be needed to ensure the military depots are
    postured, resourced and equipped with the necessary facilities,
    equipment, technical capabilities and skilled workforce, the
    depots may not be prepared to support long-term national
    security needs.''
        The committee believes that when wartime operations in the
    Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan cease,
    and supplemental appropriations for depot-related maintenance
    are reduced, DOD depots must not return to the post-Cold War
    environment where public- and private-sector facilities fought
    for limited available workload to the detriment of both.
    Therefore, the committee has included in this Act a provision
    requiring that the Department enter into a contract for an
    independent study of the organic capability needed to provide
    depot-level maintenance in the post-reset environment.

                       Inherently Governmental Functions

        The committee is concerned about a range of issues
    involving the proper role of contractors in supporting the
    mission of the Department of Defense (DOD), including the
    extent to which contractors may be performing inherently
    governmental functions. In general, the committee believes that
    agencies must be properly staffed with government employees,
    both civilian and military, to perform not only functions
    identified as those which must be performed by government
    employees (including oversight of the work being performed by
    private sector contractors), but those commercial-type
    functions that should be performed by government employees in
    order to retain certain core capabilities as a matter of
    national policy. Recognizing this need, Congress created, in
    section 804 of the Ronald Reagan National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) another category
    of functions applicable only to the Department of Defense,
    ``functions closely associated with inherently governmental
    functions.'' Furthermore, section 324 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
    required defense agencies, to the maximum extent practicable,
    to bring in-house positions performing inherently governmental
    functions, or those closely associated with inherently
    governmental functions.
        The Subcommittee on Readiness held a hearing on this issue
    on March 11, 2008, during which the subcommittee heard from
    various witnesses about the Department's increased reliance on
    services provided by contractors. The committee recognizes that
    there are both advantages and disadvantages associated with
    this development, and that determining which functions should
    only be performed by government employees may be difficult.
    That task is made even more difficult by the lack of a single
    definition and accompanying guidance on what constitutes an
    ``inherently governmental function.'' Currently, the Federal
    Acquisition Regulation defines that term in multiple places,
    the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 also defines
    the term, and there is yet another definition in the Federal
    Activities Inventory Reform Act (Public Law 105-270). There
    also is the additional DOD-specific definition of ``closely
    associated with inherently governmental functions.''
        While these various definitions are similar, they are not
    consistent in all respects. The committee believes that an
    essential first step in reaching consensus on what functions
    are inherently governmental is to have a single, consistent
    definition of that term. To that end, the committee proposes
    legislation in section 322 of this Act that would require the
    Office of Management and Budget to develop a single definition
    of ``inherently governmental'' and ensure that it is used
    consistently in all implementing guidance and regulations. This
    will assist the Department and all federal agencies in
    achieving the goal of minimizing potential conflicts of
    interest in the government's decisionmaking process. Finally,
    the committee encourages the Department to ensure that DOD
    internal implementing guidance is sufficiently specific in
    order to facilitate appropriate staffing decisions within the
    Department.

         Report on Actions Taken Related to Public-Private Competitions

        Section 325 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) prohibited the Department
    of Defense from undertaking, preparing for, continuing, or
    completing public-private competitions in fulfillment of any
    requirements for such competitions at the direction of the
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The provision also
    prohibited the Office of Management and Budget from issuing
    such directions to the Department. In addition to the
    restrictions on OMB influence, section 323 of Public Law 110-
    181 overturned mandatory requirements, outlined in OMB Circular
    A-76, for recompetitions of employees in a Most Efficient
    Organization after a period of five years.
        The committee regrets that the Department has not issued
    guidance to implement either section in compliance with
    congressional intent. The committee is aware that the
    Department has denied military commands' requests to cancel
    competitions, or to defer or reduce the scope of competitions
    where sections 323 or 325 have been cited among the commands'
    rationale.
        Of further concern to the committee is a March 20, 2008,
    memorandum by the Under Secretary of Defense which reaffirms
    the Department's commitment to public-private competitions as
    part of the President's Management Agenda, as enforced by the
    Office of Management and Budget. This memorandum also stresses
    that recompetitions should be continued. As a result, the
    committee believes that both section 323 and 325 are being
    disregarded by the Department.
        Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense to
    immediately issue implementation guidelines and honor such
    requests for cancellations, deferrals, or reductions in scope
    of competition in accordance with the provisions included in
    Public Law 110-181. Furthermore, the committee directs the
    Secretary of Defense to report by October 1, 2008, to the
    Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
    Armed Services on all competitions initiated since May 30,
    2007, as well as all requests for cancellations, deferrals, or
    requests for reductions in scope by military commands, and any
    actions taken in regard to the requests, including
    justifications for any refusals.

                                 Other Matters

                      Army Logistics Modernization Program

        The Logistics Modernization Program (LMP) is the Army's
    enterprise resource planning system for achieving an integrated
    supply chain. To date, the Army spent $637.3 million developing
    and transitioning to LMP, and the program cost through fiscal
    year 2015 is projected to be $2.1 billion. The committee
    understands that relying on legacy information systems is not a
    long-term solution to logistics support, but is concerned that
    future implementation of LMP at Army depots could disrupt depot
    operations and crucial warfighter support during a time of
    conflict. Such disruption was experienced in 2003 at Tobyhanna
    Army Depot due to implementation of LMP. Additionally, the
    committee is concerned that the intended system capability end-
    state is not understood by all relevant parties, from depot
    production-line employees to Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel
    Command (AMC).
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
    to submit a report on LMP implementation at Army depots and
    expected end-state capabilities of LMP to the Senate Committee
    on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services,
    and the Comptroller General, by January 31, 2009. This report
    shall include:
              (1) Expected LMP capabilities at the levels of depot
            production, business operations and financial
            management, and Headquarters, AMC;
              (2) Specific LMP capabilities implemented at each
            depot;
              (3) Date of expected implementation at each depot;
              (4) Description of how LMP will forecast future
            maintenance capacity and drive budgetary decisions;
              (5) Percentage of workforce at each depot expected to
            be proficient on the system;
              (6) Strategy to educate and train depot employees on
            system capabilities and the new business approach to
            resource planning and supply chain management as a
            result of LMP implementation;
              (7) Detailed plan for ensuring 100 percent of each
            depot's operating files are loaded by the planned date
            of implementation at each depot;
              (8) Leveraging of lessons learned from previous
            implementations; and
              (9) Detailed risk-mitigation strategy to support
            current production in the event that LMP implementation
            is not as successful as planned.
        The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
    States to review the report submitted by the Secretary of the
    Army for completeness and provide a report to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by March 31, 2009. The committee directs the Secretary
    of the Army to certify to the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services and the House Committee on Armed Services that each
    Army depot is prepared for the transition to LMP. This
    certification must be applied 30 days prior to any transition
    to LMP.

       Clarification of Department of Defense Transportation Regulations

        The committee is aware that a policy directive related to
    the transport of Department of Defense (DOD) cargo within the
    United States issued by the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition Technology and Logistics in 1998 to all DOD
    components was intended to move the Department and the military
    services to the same mode-neutral, time-definite delivery model
    successfully being used by the commercial transportation
    industry. However, a subsequent Air Mobility Command regulation
    conflicts with DOD policy by requiring the use of aircraft for
    shipment even when it makes little economic sense. The
    committee proposes a legislative requirement, in section 356 of
    this Act, to address this inconsistency.
        The committee also notes the confusion between the terms
    ``air carrier'' and the term ``air freight forwarder,'' as well
    as a lack of understanding of the contractual conditions
    required by the Surface Distribution and Deployment Command
    under which ``air freight forwarders'' operate. The committee
    understands this confusion to be generated by lack of clear
    guidance, uncertain definitions of terms, and poor training,
    which results in transportation inefficiencies and unnecessary
    cost to the taxpayers. The committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense to clarify the Department's transportation regulations
    to provide specific definitions for the various transportation
    carriers, and provide additional guidance and training to
    ensure that all DOD entities use commercial best practices when
    shipping any DOD cargo. A copy of the additional guidance shall
    be provided to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services by September 30, 2008.

                        Corrosion Control and Prevention

        The committee is disappointed that the Department of
    Defense (DOD) failed to submit, with its fiscal year 2009
    budget materials, the report on the corrosion control and
    prevention strategy and funding requirements as stipulated in
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181).
        The Government Accountability Office's (GAO) review of the
    fiscal year 2009 budget submission, as required by Public Law
    110-181, shows total funding of $14.1 million for the DOD
    Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office against a fiscal year
    2009 requirement of $33.8 million, including $28.5 million for
    projects. The Government Accountability Office reported to the
    committee on April 3, 2008, that the Department calculated an
    overall 40-to-1 return on investment (ROI) for corrosion
    control projects. Using DOD requirements data and overall ROI
    averages, the Government Accountability Office calculated that
    if all fiscal year 2009 validated requirements were funded, the
    total ROI would be $1.2 billion.
        The committee is disappointed that requirements for systems
    and services, rather than ROI and readiness, drive corrosion
    prevention and control program funding levels in the
    Department's annual budget process. For example, current depot-
    maintenance requirements for corrosion abatement on F-22 Raptor
    aircraft are extensive, and result from decisions made during
    program development. The committee finds such an approach to
    corrosion prevention to be fiscally short-sighted and
    detrimental to readiness.
        In order to move the Department to sustainment-based
    outcomes regarding corrosion control and prevention versus
    budget-driven decisions, the committee has included a provision
    in this Act that would require the Department to examine
    corrosion control and prevention for improvements in system
    acquisition.
        Additionally, the committee disputes the military services'
    practice of relying upon congressionally directed funding for
    specific corrosion control programs. This strategy places
    corrosion abatement and equipment readiness at risk. The
    committee expects the services to program for corrosion control
    and prevention projects in future annual budget requests.

                             Defense Travel System

        The committee is concerned that the Defense Travel System
    (DTS) still books less than one-third of Department of Defense
    temporary duty (TDY) travel despite the Department's spending
    approximately $500.0 million over 10 years in an effort to
    field a comprehensive TDY travel management system. The system
    in large part does not support users at remote locations
    isolated from large military installations, such as reserve,
    national guard, and Army Corps of Engineer travelers. The
    committee believes remote users would benefit most from a user-
    friendly, comprehensive web-based system, yet these users must
    rely on inefficient legacy travel systems. The committee
    recognizes that improvements have been made, and acknowledges
    expert testimony that the DTS, despite its problems, remains
    the Department's best option for a future user-friendly,
    efficient system capable of capturing necessary financial data.
        In that regard, the committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense to aggressively pursue efforts to: make DTS user-
    friendly with minimal training; implement DTS for remote users,
    Navy ships afloat, and permanent change of station travel;
    mandate the discontinuance of all legacy systems; review and
    simplify complex travel rules where possible; and explore the
    use of restricted air fare tickets. The committee further
    directs the Secretary to establish timelines to accomplish
    these measures and directs the Secretary to report on the
    Department's progress in meeting these timelines, and any
    legislative changes he considers necessary, to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by December 31, 2008.

    Report on Feasibility of Department of Defense Civilian Law Enforcement
                                     Force

        The committee is concerned with the military services,
    particularly the Department of the Army, over-relying on
    contractors to provide security at military installations. It
    is the committee's position that the creation of a Department-
    wide professional law enforcement force would ensure
    consistency in training standards, provide incentives for
    civilians to consider such positions as a long-time career, and
    enhance security at military installations. The committee
    directs the Secretary of Defense to review the feasibility of
    establishing a corps of civilian police and security officers
    under the authority and direction of the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense and report on the results of this review.
    The report shall include findings and recommendations of the
    Secretary that address the following:
              (1) Current and future security needs and functions,
            including security guards, at all military
            installations;
              (2) Feasibility and cost-effectiveness of
            consolidating all civilian police and security officers
            of the military defense departments and defense
            agencies into a single civilian corps of police and
            security officers under the authority of the Secretary;
              (3) Recruitment, training, and equipment standards
            necessary for Department of Defense (DOD) employees who
            perform law enforcement and security functions;
              (4) Personnel infrastructure necessary to oversee the
            establishment and management of a DOD civilian corps of
            police and security officers;
              (5) Anticipated interaction with other federal,
            state, and local law enforcement agencies, including
            rendering assistance upon request; and
              (6) Any statutory, regulatory, or policy changes
            affecting pay, benefits, and law enforcement powers.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
    report on his findings, recommendations, and any necessary
    statutory changes, to the congressional defense committees by
    March 30, 2009.

    Report on Improving Supply Chain Management to Enhance Joint Logistics
                                   Capability

        The committee is concerned about the risk associated with
    the Department of Defense's supply-chain management. The
    committee notes that the Comptroller General identified supply-
    chain management as one of the Department's high-risk areas and
    initiated a review of the Department's progress in improving
    supply chain management. The committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense to submit a report, by March 1, 2009, to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services on the Department's plan to improve defense logistics
    capability, particularly to meet the demands of the combatant
    commanders in a joint and globally responsive fashion. The
    report shall include, at a minimum: implementation plans for
    the joint logistics capability portfolio management; long-term
    strategies for improving joint logistics; and recommendations
    for statutory, regulatory, or organizational changes needed to
    facilitate improved supply-chain management and enhanced joint
    logistics capability.

     Space-Available Priority for Military Retirees with Specialty Medical
                                 Care Referral

        Section 374 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) addresses the space-
    available (Space-A) priority level of military retirees
    residing in the U.S. territories who need to travel from the
    territory to receive special medical care. The committee
    directs the Secretary of Defense to report on implementation of
    section 374 to include the number and frequency of affected
    military retirees who have availed themselves of Space-A seats
    in the previous year, and those who requested transportation
    under this authority but were not accommodated. The Secretary
    shall submit his report, along with any recommendations for
    improvements, to the congressional defense committees by
    February 1, 2009.

                          Space Wargames and Exercises

        The committee is concerned that our armed forces have had
    relatively little experience in dealing with the loss or
    degradation of key space capabilities. The committee notes the
    Schriever wargame series managed by Air Force Space Command is
    the primary Department of Defense wargame that examines space
    operations and the only wargame focused on space protection
    across the national security space enterprise. However, as a
    major command wargame, it is limited to examining future space
    capabilities and concepts of operations for the Air Force. The
    committee believes wargames and exercises can improve our
    military and policymakers' preparedness to cope with conflicts
    involving space. The committee therefore encourages the
    Department to: embed space capability effects in joint and
    service-level wargames and exercises; incorporate scenarios
    that deny space capabilities in a realistic manner; seek
    greater participation from the defense, intelligence, civil,
    commercial, and international sectors; and adequately fund such
    events.

    Tactical and Medium-Altitude Unmanned Aerial Systems Pilot Training and
                                   Management

        The committee is aware that there are disparate military
    service approaches to training and managing unmanned aerial
    systems (UAS) operators in the Department of Defense. As one
    example, the Army certifies enlisted operators through a common
    core program that is comprised of approximately nine weeks of
    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) compliant instruction and
    testing. Graduates of the program receive FAA Ground School
    certification and go on to an additional 12 weeks of ground,
    simulator, and flight training if they are to operate Shadow or
    Hunter UASs. Sky Warrior UAS operators receive up to 25 weeks
    of additional instruction following the Common Core program,
    which includes instruction on the National Airspace System.
    Operators must pass an FAA instrument written examination to
    achieve certification.
        Conversely, the Air Force requires medium-altitude UAS
    operators to be pilots and has historically filled UAS operator
    billets with rated officers who have previously flown aircraft
    such as F-16s or F-15s. Recent press reports have indicated
    that UAS operator manning shortfalls, driven by increased
    demand for UAS support of on-going combat operations, have
    resulted in substantial force management problems for the Air
    Force. Under current Air Force policy, completion of
    Undergraduate Pilot Training takes approximately one year.
    Follow-on UAS training requires approximately four months. If
    the Air Force continues to mandate manned-aircraft experience
    prior to assignment as a UAS operator, development and training
    is increased by another four and one-half years. Consequently,
    it can take the Air Force approximately six years to produce a
    UAS operator.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to provide for an independent assessment of the training and
    force management policies of the military services with regard
    to UAS operators, to be conduced by a federally-funded research
    and development center selected by the Secretary. The
    assessment shall be provided to the congressional defense
    committees by September 30, 2009, and shall examine each of the
    military services' current standards and practices to include:
              (1) Current and planned UAS mission operator
            requirements and the ability of current military
            service programs to produce sufficient UAS operators to
            meet current and planned UAS programs;
              (2) Qualifications needed for UAS operators compared
            to current qualifications established by each military
            service for those operators, and whether the
            establishment of a common qualification standard and
            training system is justified in terms of cost of
            training UAS operators and length of time to produce a
            fully qualified UAS operator;
              (3) Historical performance and proficiency in terms
            of accident and safety data associated with UAS
            operations, to include specific accident data for UAS
            systems that do not have automatic landing capability;
              (4) Recommendations for the feasibility and
            advisability of changing the current individual
            military service's UAS training system to include
            options such as a creation of a modified Undergraduate
            Pilot Training course that would serve as a joint
            training environment to produce well trained,
            certified, and ready UAS operators;
              (5) Recommendations for improving force management,
            retention, and recruiting to support UAS operator
            requirements for the Department; and
              (6) Recommendations for reducing accidents and
            improving safety, with specific considerations for
            reducing accidents in the landing/recovery phase.

                               Tire Privatization

        The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
    implemented the Tire Commodity Management Privatization
    initiative in compliance with the Base Closure and Realignment
    Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-510) as amended. Under this
    initiative, the Department shifted responsibility for the
    supply, storage, and distribution for all tires managed by the
    Department from the Defense Logistics Agency to a contractor
    who would be in charge of procuring and distributing all ground
    and air military tires worldwide for the Department and the
    military services.
        The committee recognizes the initiative's intent was to
    lower costs and streamline and improve the process of getting
    tires to the warfighter. The Defense Logistics Agency has
    created incentives for the qualification of additional
    suppliers on tires that are currently obtained from a single
    source, and has required the contractor to ensure that a
    minimum of 35 percent of all tires purchased under the program
    come from suppliers other than the prime contractor for tire
    types where more than one supplier exists. The committee is
    aware that the Defense Logistics Agency is continuing to
    examine whether the 35 percent minimum requirement is
    sufficient to maintain the domestic industrial base for
    military tire manufacturing; support future innovations for
    military tires; and preserve a competitive environment for
    current and future competitions. As part of this effort, the
    committee understands that the Defense Logistics Agency is
    undertaking a Milestone C evaluation for cost and performance
    of the tire privatization contract, which is expected to be
    completed in June 2008. The committee directs the Director of
    the Defense Logistics Agency to provide a copy of the
    evaluation to the congressional defense committees within 30
    days after the completion of the evaluation.
        Furthermore, the committee reiterates its concern that the
    current contract was awarded to the prime contractor in a
    manner similar to that of using a ``lead systems integrator,''
    which is an acquisition strategy the committee has addressed in
    several previous defense bills. The committee is concerned that
    such an approach may not provide all qualified tire
    manufacturers equal footing in the defense market. The
    performance period of the current contract, which is structured
    to have a five-year base and a five-year option, could prove
    detrimental to the industrial base and follow-on competitions.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                  Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

                 Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding

        This section would authorize $154.5 billion in operation
    and maintenance funding for the military departments and
    defense-wide activities.

                      Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions

     Section 311--Authorization for Department of Defense Participation in
                         Conservation Banking Programs

        This section would authorize the Department of Defense to
    participate in conservation banking programs as defined in
    ``Guidance for the Establishment, Use, and Operation of
    Conservation Banks'' (68 Federal Register 24753, May 2, 2003),
    or to make an `in-lieu-fee' payment for habitat conservation
    purposes as defined in ``Federal Guidance on the Use of In-
    Lieu-Fee Arrangements for Compensatory Mitigation Under Section
    404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and
    Harbors Act'' (65 Federal Register 66915, November 7, 2000).
    Conservation banking and in-lieu-fee arrangements are
    additional tools to help the Department mitigate the impacts of
    military activities on the environment.

       Section 312--Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for
     Certain Costs in Connection with Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site,
                             Moses Lake, Washington

        This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    transfer not more than $64,049.40 to the Moses Lake Wellfield
    Superfund Site 10-6J Special Account. This transfer is to
    reimburse the Environmental Protection Agency for its costs in
    overseeing a remedial investigation/feasibility study performed
    by the Department of the Army under the Defense Environmental
    Restoration Program at the former Larson Air Force Base, Moses
    Lake Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington.

     Section 313--Expand Cooperative Agreement Authority for Management of
            Natural Resources to Include Off-Installation Mitigation

        This section would amend section 103a(a) of the Sikes Act
    (16 U.S.C. 670c-1(a)) to expand the authority of the
    secretaries of the military departments to enter into
    cooperative agreements with states, local governments,
    nongovernmental organizations, and individuals for the
    maintenance and improvement of natural resources located off of
    military installations or to undertake mitigation measures
    necessary to address potential natural resource impacts caused
    by Department of Defense activities. Such cooperative
    agreements are expected to be complimentary with other relevant
    natural resource management strategies affecting the
    Department's installations, such as Integrated Natural Resource
    Management Plans, and with broader landscape conservation
    initiatives, such as State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
    Plans. This section would not waive any requirement under
    federal or state law.

                     Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues

    Section 321--Time Limitation on Duration of Public-Private Competitions

        This section would restrict to 540 days the time from the
    beginning of preliminary planning to the rendering of the
    performance decision for any public-private competitions
    conducted pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular
    A-76. The time period would take into account any delays
    resulting from a protest before the Government Accountability
    Office or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The committee does
    not intend this language to be used by the Department of
    Defense to stop an A-76 competition that has overrun the 540
    days and then be restarted at a later date.

         Section 322--Comprehensive Analysis and Development of Single
         Government-wide Definition of Inherently Governmental Function

        This section would require the Director of the Office of
    Management and Budget and appropriate representatives of the
    Chief Acquisition Officers Council and the Chief Human Capital
    Council to review the existing statutory and regulatory
    definitions of ``inherently governmental'' functions and to
    develop a single consistent definition. The single definition
    should address any deficiencies in the current definitions and
    be sufficiently generic to enable federal agencies to determine
    which functions or positions should be performed only by
    government civilian or military personnel. Criteria should be
    developed to enable federal agencies to identify the functions
    and positions that, though not falling within the definition of
    inherently governmental, should nevertheless be performed by
    government employees. In developing the single government-wide
    definition, public comment should be solicited. This section
    also requires a report on the actions taken to develop the
    single definition and make recommendations for any necessary
    legislative actions. The report shall be submitted one year
    after date of enactment of this Act to the appropriate
    committees of Congress. Implementing regulations shall be
    issued 180 days after submission of the report.

                 Section 323--Study on Future Depot Capability

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    provide the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
    Committee on Armed Services an independent, quantitative
    assessment of the organic capability that will be required to
    provide depot-level maintenance in the post-reset environment.
    The study would examine all active and reserve capability in
    the public and private sectors involved in lifecycle
    sustainment of weapons systems. It also would examine relevant
    Department of Defense guidance, regulations, and applicable
    federal law and would address the current and future lifecycle
    sustainment maintenance strategy, implementation plan, and
    maintenance environment.
        The report provided by the independent entity would include
    recommendations on the requirement for an enduring organic
    depot capability, appropriate changes to law, and incentives to
    achieve efficiency and cost-effectiveness. It also would
    include a proposed roadmap to meet materiel readiness goals of
    availability, reliability, total ownership cost, and repair
    cycle time. The Comptroller General shall review the report and
    provide findings within 90 days of submission.
        Within funds contained in this Act for analysis and support
    for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the committee
    recommends that not more than $1.5 million of these funds shall
    be available for the required study.

          Section 324--High-Performing Organization Business Process
                                 Reengineering

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    develop guidelines for establishing high-performing
    organizations conducted through a business process
    reengineering initiative. Such guidance shall include an
    assessment of the affected number of employees, functions to be
    included, the high-performing business location, and timeline
    for implementation of the high-performing organization. This
    section would impose certain requirements prior to the
    establishment of a high-performing organization, including
    compliance with collective bargaining statutes and a 45 day
    congressional notification. This section also would require an
    annual performance evaluation, with a report to the
    congressional defense committees.

        Section 325--Temporary Suspension of Studies and Public-Private
      Competitions Regarding Conversion of Functions of the Department of
       Defense Performed by Civilian Employees to Contractor Performance

        This section would suspend public-private competitions
    within the Department of Defense until the end of fiscal year
    2011. The committee is concerned that the turbulence caused by
    the Department's efforts to increase the services' end
    strengths; implementation of the 2005 Base Closure and
    Realignment decisions; and execution of transformational
    initiatives while concurrently conducting sustained combat
    operations could impede sound out-sourcing decisions. The
    committee, therefore, recommends the suspension to ensure that
    the Department is not making force-management decisions at a
    time of substantial transition and transformation.

    Section 326--Consolidation of Air Force and Air National Guard Aircraft
                                  Maintenance

        This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Air Force
    from consolidating Air National Guard with active-duty Air
    Force maintenance activities and facilities without first
    consulting with, and obtaining the consent of, the National
    Guard Bureau. It would require the Secretary of the Air Force
    to report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services on the assumptions and
    criteria used to evaluate the feasibility of consolidation.
    Before any consolidation actions are taken, this section would
    require the Secretary of the Air Force to report to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services on the feasibility study findings and recommendations,
    the Air Force's assessment of the findings and recommendations,
    any plans developed for implementation, and all infrastructure
    costs anticipated as a result of implementation.

    Section 327--Guidance for Performance of Civilian Personnel Work Under
                Air Force Civilian Personnel Consolidation Plan

        This section would provide guidance to the Air Force as it
    proceeds with its consolidation of personnel management
    functions. This section would require that the Air Force, in
    making determinations, consider the size and complexity of the
    civilian workforce and the impact that any consolidation may
    have on accomplishment of the mission at an installation. This
    section describes certain functions being performed at large
    civilian centers that may not be included in any personnel
    management consolidation.

      Section 328--Report on Reduction in Number of Fire Fighters on Air
                                  Force Bases

        This section would require a report by the Secretary of the
    Air Force on the effect of the reduction in fire fighters on
    Air Force bases as a result of Program Budget Decision (PBD)
    720. The report would include an evaluation of risks, if any,
    associated with the reductions and the adequacy of fire
    fighting capabilities within the surrounding communities to
    respond to an aircraft fire. Additionally, the section requires
    a plan to restore personnel if it is determined that PBD 720
    negatively impacted the mission. The report would be submitted
    to Congress within 90 days after the date of enactment of this
    Act.

                          Subtitle D--Energy Security

        Section 331--Annual Report on Operational Energy Management and
                 Implementation of Operational Energy Strategy

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, acting
    through the Director of Operational Energy Plans and Programs
    as established within title IX of this Act, to submit an annual
    operational energy management report to the congressional
    defense committees on operational energy consumption and
    initiatives. The committee is aware that buildings and
    facilities account for approximately one quarter of the
    Department of Defense's annual energy consumption, and the
    remaining three-quarters of the energy consumption is for
    operational purposes. While the Deputy Under Secretary of
    Defense for Installations and Environment produces an annual
    energy management report for installations, no similar product
    exists for energy required to support military operations. This
    section seeks to correct this apparent reporting disparity.

     Section 332--Consideration of Fuel Logistics Support Requirements in
         Planning, Requirements Development, and Acquisition Processes

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    consider the fully-burdened cost of fuel and energy efficiency
    in planning, capability requirements development, and
    acquisition processes. This section would require the Secretary
    to prepare a plan for implementation of the requirements of
    this section within 180 days after the date of enactment of
    this Act. Lastly, this section would establish a deadline for
    implementation of within three years of the date of enactment
    of this Act.

        Section 333--Study on Solar Energy for Use at Forward Operating
                                   Locations

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report on the feasibility of using solar energy to
    provide electricity at forward operating locations. The report
    shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees by
    March 1, 2009.

                   Section 334--Study on Coal-to-Liquid Fuels

        This section would require a study on alternatives to
    reduce the life cycle emissions of coal-to-liquid fuels. The
    study shall be conducted by a federally funded research and
    development center and shall be submitted to the congressional
    defense committees and the Secretary of Defense by March 1,
    2009.

                              Subtitle E--Reports

      Section 341--Comptroller General Report on Readiness of Armed Forces

        This section would require the Comptroller General of the
    United States to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services and the House Committee on Armed Services a report on
    the readiness of the regular and reserve components of the
    armed forces. The committee is concerned with the state of
    readiness of the armed forces and requires this review to
    determine the current state of readiness and what actions the
    services are taking to increase their readiness posture.

     Section 342--Report on Plan to Enhance Combat Skills of Navy and Air
                                Force Personnel

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report on the plans of the Secretary of the Navy and
    the Secretary of the Air Force to improve the combat skills of
    the members of the Navy and the Air Force, respectively. The
    committee is concerned about combat training being conducted by
    the Navy and the Air Force, both in support of the current
    operations and as the services posture themselves for future
    missions. Ground combat training is already being conducted by
    the Army and Marine Corps to a high level of proficiency on
    installations with robust infrastructure to support this type
    of training. The committee is concerned that the Navy and Air
    Force will seek to duplicate training facilities and schools
    without maximizing the use of existing expertise and
    infrastructure. The committee strongly urges the Secretary of
    Defense to oversee this expansion of combat training to ensure
    that the services do not reinvent existing capabilities or
    create multiple standards for ground combat operations.

    Section 343--Comptroller General Report on the Use of the Army Reserve
                  and National Guard as an Operational Reserve

        This section would require the Comptroller General of the
    United States to submit a report to the Senate Committee on
    Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the
    use of the Army Reserve and National Guard forces as an
    operational reserve. This report would include a description of
    current and programmed resources, force structure, and
    organizational challenges that the Army Reserve and National
    Guard forces may face serving as an operational reserve. This
    would include an examination of:
              (1) Equipment availability, maintenance, and
            logistics issues;
              (2) Manning and force structure;
              (3) Training constraints limiting facilities and
            ranges, access to military schools and skill training,
            or access to the Combat Training Centers; and
              (4) Any conflicts with requirements under title 32,
            United States Code.
        The Commission on the National Guard and Reserves noted
    that Congress should examine the use of the reserve forces as
    an operational reserve. The committee recognizes that the
    expanded use of the Army Reserve and National Guard may require
    an additional investment by the Army to meet their training,
    manpower, and equipment needs. This report would assist the
    committee in understanding those needs in making future policy
    and resourcing decisions.

    Section 344--Comptroller General Report on Link Between Preparation and
       Use of Army Reserve Component Forces to Support Ongoing Operations

        This section would require the Comptroller General of the
    United States to analyze and report on the preparation and
    operational use of the Army's reserve component forces. The
    report shall contain an analysis of the Army's ability to train
    and employ reserve units for both wartime missions and non-
    traditional missions to which the units are assigned. The
    report shall also consider how mobilization and deployment
    laws, goals, and policies impact the Army's ability to train
    and employ reserve component units for combat or non-combat
    missions. The committee would like to ensure that the Army's
    reserve component units are receiving all required training and
    resources prior to employment in combat. Ongoing combat
    operations in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of
    Afghanistan have required the re-missioning of many types of
    units. This report would examine the employment of reserve
    units to determine if there are any factors limiting the
    preparation of these units for ongoing operations.

        Section 345--Comptroller General Report on Adequacy of Funding,
    Staffing, and Organization of Department of Defense Military Munitions
                                Response Program

        This section would require the Comptroller General of the
    United States to report on the adequacy of the funding,
    staffing, and organization of the Department of Defense's
    Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP). The report would
    also include an assessment of the MMRP mechanisms for the
    accountability, reporting, and monitoring of the progress of
    munitions response projects and suggested methods to reduce the
    time such projects take to complete. This report would be
    submitted to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services within one year after the
    date of enactment of this Act.

      Section 346--Report on Options for Providing Repair Capabilities to
                       Support Ships Operating Near Guam

        This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
    estimate the requirement for voyage repairs to U.S. Navy
    vessels operating at or near Guam. Additionally, this section
    would require the Secretary to assess voyage repair options for
    ships operating at or near Guam, including the anticipated
    costs and strategic and operational risks associated with each
    option. The Secretary shall report by March 1, 2009, to the
    Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
    Armed Services on the voyage repair options along with the plan
    and schedule for implementing a course of action to ensure that
    the required voyage repair capability will be available by
    October 2012, in order to support the relocation of U.S.
    military forces from Okinawa to Guam.

                           Subtitle F--Other Matters

        Section 351--Extension of Enterprise Transition Plan Reporting
                                  Requirement

        This section would extend the requirement for the Business
    Transformation Agency to report to Congress on the Enterprise
    Transition Plan for the Department of Defense until 2013.
    Without legislative action, that requirement would currently
    expire in 2009.

    Section 352--Demilitarization of Loaned, Given, or Exchanged Documents,
        Historical Artifacts, and Condemned or Obsolete Combat Materiel

        This section would amend section 2572, title 10, United
    States Code, to clarify that any item authorized to be donated
    under this section should be considered as demilitarized
    materiel and made unserviceable in the interest of public
    safety.

    Section 353--Repeal of Requirement that Secretary of Air Force Provide
      Training and Support to Other Military Departments for A-10 Aircraft

        This section would repeal outdated language regarding fleet
    support and depot maintenance for A-10 aircraft. The committee
    notes that there are no Department of Defense users of A-10
    aircraft other than the Department of the Air Force, nor are
    there plans for any in the future.

    Section 354--Display of Annual Budget Requirements for Air Sovereignty
                                 Alert Mission

        This section would require a consolidated budget
    justification by the Secretary of Defense on all programs and
    activities for the Air Sovereignty Alert (ASA) mission of the
    U.S. Air Force. The report would be submitted to Congress as
    part of the defense budget materials for each fiscal year. The
    committee is aware that while the Air National Guard has
    volunteered to undertake this critical mission, funds for the
    program must come from the active duty Air Force accounts and
    have not been properly prioritized or allocated on a timely
    basis. This has led to a 34 percent shortfall for the ASA
    mission for Fiscal Year 2009. This section would facilitate the
    committee's oversight to ensure sufficient resources are
    budgeted to fully execute this priority mission.

      Section 355--Sense of Congress that Air Sovereignty Alert Missions
                Should Receive Sufficient Funding and Resources

        This section would express the sense of Congress that the
    Air Force should ensure that the air sovereignty alert mission
    of the Air National Guard is provided with the necessary
    resources to perform this priority mission. The committee also
    proposes a provision, at section 354 of this Act, which would
    require a consolidated budget justification by the Secretary of
    Defense on all programs and activities for the air sovereignty
    alert mission of the U.S. Air Force.

        Section 356--Revision of Certain Air Force Regulations Required

        This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
    to bring the Air Freight Transportation Regulation No. 5,
    issued by the Air Mobility Command, into full compliance with
    Department of Defense transportation regulations requiring
    commercial best practices.

      Section 357--Transfer of C-12 Aircraft to California Department of
                          Forestry and Fire Protection

        This provision would allow the Secretary of the Army to
    transfer three surplus C-12 aircraft to the California
    Department of Forestry and Fire Protection at no cost to the
    United States.

       Section 358--Availability of Funds for Irregular Warfare Support
                                    Program

        This section would require as much as $75.0 million to be
    made available for the Irregular Warfare Support (IWS) program
    from funds made available for the Joint Improvised Explosive
    Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) in fiscal year 2009.
        The committee applauds the achievements resulting from the
    IWS-JIEDDO collaborative partnership in support of both
    unconventional and irregular approaches to warfare. The
    committee further applauds JIEDDO's practice of leveraging IWS
    initiatives to thwart the threat of improvised explosive
    devices. The committee believes that the IWS program has both
    the promise and potential to make a greater contribution in
    pursuit of national security objectives.
        The committee notes that the Irregular Warfare Support
    program leverages ongoing research efforts at Special
    Operations Command and other parts of the federal government to
    analyze, modify, design, and demonstrate enduring technical and
    operational capabilities. Promising projects include: counter-
    motivation, counter-enterprise, counter-infrastructure,
    counter-financing, and sanctuary-denial methodologies for the
    tactical and operational warfighter. IWS personnel and agents
    alternatively provide both a mentoring and a support role to
    uniformed personnel performing in the field or in analytical
    and command positions. The committee supports efforts to
    further mature this concept.
        A separate provision in title IX of this Act requires the
    Secretary of Defense to designate an Assistant Secretary of
    Defense to be responsible for overall management and
    coordination of irregular warfare. The committee believes
    funding certainty, programmatic stabilization, and a more
    focused management regime would enhance and improve future IWS
    activities and strategies. The committee believes the
    designation of a responsible assistant secretary will provide
    appropriate and necessary management oversight. The committee
    also strongly believes appropriate management and funding
    certainty is necessary to improve and properly focus the
    Department's efforts. As a result, the committee further urges
    the Department to provide stable and adequate funding levels
    beyond fiscal year 2009 and submit them to the congressional
    defense committees for consideration.

        Section 359--Sense of Congress Regarding Procurement and Use of
                                   Munitions

        This section would express the sense of the committee that
    the Department of Defense should develop methods to account for
    the full life-cycle costs of munitions, including the cost of
    failure rates on the cost of disposal. This provision also
    suggests that the Department review live-fire training
    practices to reduce munitions-constituent contamination.
    Military readiness should remain the prime consideration in the
    procurement and use of munitions and ammunition.
        The committee is aware of the high cost of cleaning up
    munitions constituent contamination on ranges and formerly used
    defense sites in the United States. A review and modification
    of procurement and use of military munitions with the intention
    of limiting future contamination may also reduce the cost of
    future munitions-constituent remediation.

     Section 360--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for Air Combat Command
                            Management Headquarters

        This section would prohibit the Commander, Air Combat
    Command from obligating each quarter in fiscal year 2009 more
    than 80 percent of the average obligation of the preceding
    fiscal year's corresponding quarter until the Secretary of the
    Air Force complies with section 137 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
    and the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional
    defense committees that the Department will program funding in
    the Air Force Future Years Defense Plan for 76, commonly
    configured B-52 aircraft by the submission of the fiscal year
    2010 President's budget request to Congress.

      Section 361--Increase of Domestic Sourcing of Military Working Dogs
                       Used by the Department of Defense

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, acting
    through the Executive Agent for Military Working Dogs, to
    identify the Department of Defense's requirements for military
    working dogs and take steps to ensure that this requirement is
    met. This section would require the Department to coordinate
    with federal, state, or local agencies as well as nonprofit
    organizations, universities, or private sector entities to
    increase the training capacity for military working dog teams.
    This section also would require the Secretary work toward the
    goal of procuring all military working dogs from domestic
    breeders while maintaining quality and best value for the U.S.
    Government.

                  TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                                    OVERVIEW

        The committee commends the Secretary of Defense for
    proposing to permanently increase the authorized end strength
    for the active Army to 547,000, and to 202,000 for the active
    Marine Corps by fiscal year 2012, and to accelerate efforts to
    increase the permanent end strength for the Army in fiscal year
    2009 by 5,100. The committee also recognizes the Secretary for
    his efforts to include the cost of the permanent end strength
    increase within the base budget in fiscal year 2009. The
    committee is pleased that the Department of Defense finally
    recognizes the importance of increasing the end strength of the
    Army and the Marine Corps to meet current operational
    requirements placed on these services. The increase in end
    strength for the Army and the Marine Corps will help reduce the
    pressure on the current forces and will hopefully reduce the
    deployment lengths for the Army as well as reduce the number of
    deployments for service members.
        The committee remains concerned that, despite the
    requirement in section 721 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
    that prohibited further military-to-civilian conversions within
    the military health care system, the President's budget request
    included further conversions and failed to provide funds to
    support the restoration of military positions that are required
    by law. Congress took this vital action because of the concerns
    that such conversions are having an adverse impact on access
    and quality of care being provided to service members and their
    families. The committee continues to hear directly from
    military families who face difficulties accessing care at
    military treatment facilities. The committee expects the
    services to meet both the intent and spirit of the law, and
    restore the military medical positions that are proposed for
    conversion in fiscal year 2009, restore positions that were
    converted in earlier years that have not been filled as of
    October 1, 2008, and plan and budget accordingly to restore
    military positions that were proposed for conversion beginning
    in October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2012, as required by
    law. In order to ensure that the intent of the law is met, the
    committee extends the current prohibition of conversion within
    title VII of this Act.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                           Subtitle A--Active Forces

                  Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces

        This section would authorize the following end strengths
    for active duty personnel of the armed forces as of September
    30, 2009:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    FY 2008              FY 2009                   Change from
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Service                                                 Committee      FY 2009      FY 2008
                                                   Authorized    Request    Recommendation    Request     Authorized
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Army........................................      525,400      532,400        532,400             0        7,000
    Navy........................................      329,098      325,300        326,323         1,023       -2,775
    USMC........................................      189,000      194,000        194,000             0        5,000
    Air Force...................................      329,563      316,600        317,050           450      -12,513
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
        DOD Total...............................    1,373,061    1,368,300      1,369,773         1,473       -3,288
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The committee recognizes that the delayed passage of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181) had an effect on restoring the military-to-
    civilian positions within the military medical community.
    However, the law prohibits conversions within the military
    medical community, and the committee expects the Department of
    Defense to comply fully with the law in its fiscal year 2010
    budget submission. In order to ensure that the Department meets
    the requirements in fiscal year 2009, the committee increases
    the active duty end strength for the Navy by 1,023 and the Air
    Force by 450. The budget request already provides an increase
    of 7,000 for the Army from which the committee expects the Army
    to restore military medical positions in response to the
    prohibition.

      Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength Minimum
                                     Levels

        This section would establish new minimum active duty end
    strengths for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force as of
    September 30, 2009. The committee recommends 532,400 as the
    minimum active duty end strength for the Army, 326,323 as the
    minimum active duty end strength for the Navy, 194,000 as the
    minimum active duty end strength for the Marine Corps, and
    317,050 as the minimum active duty end strength for the Air
    Force.

                           Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

                Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve

        This section would authorize the following end strengths
    for Selected Reserve personnel, including the end strength for
    reserves on active duty in support of the reserves, as of
    September 30, 2009:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    FY 2008              FY 2009                   Change from
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Service                                                 Committee      FY 2009      FY 2008
                                                   Authorized    Request    Recommendation    Request     Authorized
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Army National Guard.........................      351,300      352,600        352,600             0        1,300
    Army Reserve................................      205,000      205,000        205,000             0            0
    Navy Reserve................................       67,800       66,700         66,700             0       -1,100
    Marine Corps Reserve........................       39,600       39,600         39,600             0            0
    Air National Guard..........................      106,700      106,700        106,700             0            0
    Air Force Reserve...........................       67,500       67,400         67,400             0         -100
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
        DOD Total...............................      837,900      838,000        838,000             0          100
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Coast Guard Reserve.........................       10,000       10,000         10,000             0            0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of
                             the Reserve Components

        This section would authorize the following end strengths
    for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves as of
    September 30, 2009:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    FY 2008              FY 2009                   Change from
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Service                                                 Committee      FY 2009      FY 2008
                                                   Authorized    Request    Recommendation    Request     Authorized
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Army National Guard.........................       29,204       29,950         32,060         2,110        2,856
    Army Reserve................................       15,870       16,170         17,070           900        1,200
    Naval Reserve...............................       11,579       11,099         11,099             0         -480
    Marine Corps Reserve........................        2,261        2,261          2,261             0            0
    Air National Guard..........................       13,936       14,337         14,337             0          401
    Air Force Reserve...........................        2,721        2,733          2,733             0           12
        DOD Total...............................       75,571       76,550         77,200           650          979
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The committee recognizes the increasing requirements on
    Army National Guard and Army Reserve for full-time support
    personnel given the transformation of those components from a
    strategic reserve to an operational reserve. The committee,
    therefore, recommends an increase above the budget request for
    reserves on active duty of 2,110 for the Army National Guard
    and 900 for the Army Reserves to support the reserves.

       Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)

        This section would authorize the following end strengths
    for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30,
    2009:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    FY 2008              FY 2009                   Change from
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Service                                                 Committee      FY 2009      FY 2008
                                                   Authorized    Request    Recommendation    Request     Authorized
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Army National Guard.........................       26,502       27,210         27,210             0          708
    Army Reserve................................        8,249        8,395          8,395             0          146
    Air National Guard..........................       22,553       22,452         22,452             0         -101
    Air Force Reserve...........................        9,909       10,003         10,003             0           94
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
        DOD Total...............................       67,213       68,060         68,060             0          847
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 414--Fiscal Year 2009 Limitation on Number of Non-Dual Status
                                  Technicians

        This section would establish the maximum end strengths for
    the reserve components of the Army and Air Force for non-dual
    status technicians as of September 30, 2009:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    FY 2008              FY 2009                   Change from
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Service                                                 Committee      FY 2009      FY 2008
                                                   Authorized    Request    Recommendation    Request     Authorized
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Army National Guard.........................        1,600        1,600          1,600             0            0
    Army Reserve................................          595          595            595             0            0
    Air National Guard..........................          350          350            350             0            0
    Air Force Reserve...........................           90           90             90             0            0
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
        DOD Total...............................        2,635        2,635          2,635             0            0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 415--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized to be on
                      Active Duty for Operational Support

        This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b)
    of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of reserve
    component personnel who may be on active duty or full-time
    national guard duty during fiscal year 2009 to provide
    operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count
    against the end strengths authorized by sections 401 or 412.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    FY 2008              FY 2009                   Change from
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Service                                                 Committee      FY 2009      FY 2008
                                                   Authorized    Request    Recommendation    Request     Authorized
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Army National Guard.........................       17,000       17,000         17,000             0            0
    Army Reserve................................       13,000       13,000         13,000             0            0
    Naval Reserve...............................        6,200        6,200          6,200             0            0
    Marine Corps Reserve........................        3,000        3,000          3,000             0            0
    Air National Guard..........................       16,000       16,000         16,000             0            0
    Air Force Reserve...........................       14,000       14,000         14,000             0            0
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
        DOD Total...............................       69,200       69,200         69,200             0            0
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Section 416--Additional Waiver Authority of Limitation on Number of
           Reserve Component Members Authorized to be on Active Duty

        This section would amend section 123a of title 10, United
    States Code, to authorize the President to waive the
    limitations on the number of reserve component personnel who
    can be on active duty for operational support under section 115
    of title 10, United States Code. This waiver authority would
    allow a surge of reserve component members to be on active duty
    voluntarily to respond to a major disaster or emergency. A
    Presidential waiver granted under this provision would extend
    until 90 days after such major disaster or emergency is
    determined to be terminated.

                  Subtitle C--Authorizations of Appropriations

                        Section 421--Military Personnel

        This section would authorize $124.7 billion to be
    appropriated for military personnel. This authorization of
    appropriations reflects both reductions and increases to the
    budget request for military personnel that are itemized below:

                       TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                                    OVERVIEW

        The committee continues its ongoing efforts to provide
    greater flexibility to for officer and reserve personnel
    management. The committee supports efforts to establish a
    career intermission pilot program that would allow those who
    are seeking a military career time off from active duty for a
    period of several years in order to pursue other life
    achievements and a return to military service without penalty.
    The committee commends the Army for its support of the Early
    Commissioning Program and is encouraged to learn that the Army
    expects to provide an appropriate level of funding for this
    program in future budget requests to assist in increasing the
    number of junior officers within the Army.
        The committee commends the service military educational
    institutions for incorporating lessons learned from the
    preparation and execution of military strategy in Iraq into
    their curriculum. The committee encourages the services to
    continue their efforts to improve the educational and training
    courses for their students that build up on lessons learned.
        The committee continues efforts to improve the quality of
    life for service members and their families and recognizes the
    personal contributions that those who are serving in uniform
    are making. Just as importantly, the committee acknowledges the
    sacrifices their families are making in support of current
    operations. The committee recommends additional funding to help
    local educational agencies who are providing support to
    military children by including $50.0 million for local
    educational agencies that are heavily impacted by the
    attendance of military dependents and an additional $15.0
    million for local educational agencies that experience
    significant increases or decreases in the average daily
    attendance of military dependent students due to military force
    structure changes.
        Efforts to provide greater support to military spouses and
    dependents continues to be a focus for the committee, which has
    provided education and training opportunities for military
    spouses who are seeking degrees or careers that will be
    portable as they move from duty station to duty station with
    their military member. The committee also remains committed to
    enhancing and improving programs and policies that support
    military families, particularly those of deployed service
    members. The committee notes that there are numerous innovative
    and novel programs that are being developed and proposed by
    organizations that wish to support military families. Programs
    such as Coming Together Around Military Families, Family
    Support Training Programs and Centers for National Guard and
    Reserves, Franklin Covey, Project SOAR, and Project Navigate
    are just a few of such programs that have been brought to the
    committee's attention. The committee believes that there are a
    number of worthwhile family support programs that should be
    considered and recommends an increase of $15.0 million for
    family support programs.
        In addition, the committee commends the Army and the
    Marines Corps for recognizing the importance of family support
    to military readiness. The Army's Family Covenant sends an
    important message to our soldiers and their families, and the
    Marine Corps has also made improvements to their family support
    programs. Both services have recognized that additional full-
    time support personnel are needed to help alleviate the burden
    being placed on families, particularly volunteers who have
    carried a heavy load during these last several years. The
    committee is pleased that the Army and Marine Corps are moving
    forward to address the needs of their families, and urges the
    Secretaries of the Navy and the Air Force to review their
    family support programs, and assess the demand for additional
    full-time personnel to support families and to budget
    accordingly for such additional requirements, if necessary. The
    committee is particularly concerned with the support that is
    being provided to individual augmentees who are deployed in a
    contingency operation and their families within the Navy and
    Air Force and advises that these individuals and their families
    be afforded the support that they need. The committee also
    urges all the services to ensure that similar levels of support
    are being provided to their reserve component members and
    families, as also recommended by the Commission on National
    Guard and Reserves.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

             Advance Deployment Notice to Reserve Component Members

        The committee notes that section 515 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) requires the secretary of a military department to
    provide, as is practicable, notification to reserve component
    members not less than 30 days before being called or ordered to
    active duty for a period of more than 30 days, with a goal of
    90 days. This provision allows the Secretary of Defense to
    waive the notification requirement and requires the Secretary
    to submit to Congress a report detailing the reason for the
    waiver. The committee is concerned that while it has not
    received any waivers from the Secretary, it is unclear whether
    there are established procedures or policies that would provide
    the Secretary the oversight necessary to comply with the
    provision of law.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
    the current procedures and/or policies to ensure that the
    services are complying with the law, and provide the committee
    a summary of the number of reserve component members who have
    been notified of a mobilization since the enactment of Public
    Law 110-181, and of those notified how many had received their
    notification 30, 90, or more than 90 days prior to
    mobilization. The report shall also include the number of
    reservists who were provided less than 30 days notification,
    along with a detailed reason on why the 30 day notification
    requirement could not be met, and whether a waiver was provided
    by the Secretary. The committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense to submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
    the House Committee on Armed Services a report on the results
    of the review by March 31, 2009.

                     Air Force Academy Athletic Association

        The committee sees great promise in the respective
    constructs of the athletic associations of the Naval Academy
    and West Point. To improve the ability of the Air Force Academy
    Athletic Association (AFAAA) to support the Academy's mission
    of building future Air Force leaders of character and to
    provide for the maximum benefit of the Air Force Academy and
    its cadets, the committee believes changes should be made in
    the oversight, management, and fundraising ability of the
    AFAAA. Therefore, the committee directs the Air Force to
    establish the AFAAA as a non-profit entity with all profits and
    proceeds going directly back into the Academy itself. The Air
    Force Academy will implement this directive as expeditiously as
    possible, with the implementation completed within 180 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act. One objective of the
    non-profit entity should be to raise funds through such
    initiatives as admission tickets, concession item and apparel
    sales, licensing trademarks, commercial sponsorships and
    partnerships, radio and television rights revenue, accepting
    gifts and other means appropriate to an intercollegiate sports
    program and use those funds in support of the Academy. If
    additional statutory authority is required to achieve the
    objectives of the AFAAA as a non-profit entity, the Secretary
    of the Air Force should submit those proposals to Congress by
    March 1, 2009. Furthermore, the committee directs that this
    non-profit entity be governed by a board of directors made up
    of at least nine members. The Director of Athletics shall be a
    standing member of the board and serve as chairman. The
    Superintendent will appoint the remaining members of the board,
    which may include a cadet representative and will include at
    least one Air Force Academy alumnus with no current official
    ties to the Academy, after receiving the approval of the
    Secretary of the Air Force for each individual appointment. The
    Secretary of the Air Force will ensure oversight of the
    activities of the Association.

      Competitions to Provide Unofficial Information Services to Service
                                    Members

        The committee has learned that competition between morale,
    welfare, and recreation (MWR) activities and the military
    exchange services to provide unofficial information services
    (such as internet access, internet cafes, recreational gaming,
    cable television, and wireless internet services), has become
    disruptive and counterproductive. The committee needs a better
    understanding of the status of the current situation, the
    circumstances and conditions that led to the current situation,
    and the requirements of regulations and law regarding the
    provision of such services on military installations and to
    military personnel residing off the installation. Therefore,
    the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to prohibit new
    competitions for unofficial information services to be
    undertaken after the date of enactment of this Act until the
    Secretary reviews the applicable regulations and laws,
    clarifies what constitutes unofficial information services, and
    defines the roles and functions of MWR activities and the
    military exchange systems in providing such information
    services. The committee directs the Secretary to report his
    findings, conclusions, and recommendations to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services within 90 days after the date of enactment of this
    Act.

            Financial Counseling for Homeowners in the Armed Forces

        The committee is concerned that the recent nationwide
    mortgage housing crisis may also be affecting the men and women
    of the armed forces. These people and their families purchase
    homes in communities in which they are stationed.
    Unfortunately, unlike many civilian homeowners in the United
    States, military homeowners are frequently forced to move to
    different bases within the United States and even overseas to
    meet the needs of their respective services. In this current
    housing environment, these required permanent changes of
    station can result in military homeowners having to sell their
    homes at a loss. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense
    to develop and implement an information program for members of
    the armed forces, including members of the National Guard and
    reserves, who are returning from deployment or are facing a
    permanent change of station, that would advise members of
    actions that can be taken to protect themselves from the
    financial impacts of owning and maintaining a home. The
    information provided should also include actions that can be
    taken to prevent or forestall mortgage foreclosures,
    information on credit counseling, home mortgage counseling, and
    other information the Secretary considers appropriate.

                     National Longitudinal Survey of Youth

        The committee understands that the Department of Defense
    has funded additional questions within previous versions of the
    National Longitudinal Survey of Youth sponsored by the Bureau
    of Labor Statistics. The committee believes that these surveys
    provide important information to Department of Defense
    recruiting and retention managers and to Congress on attitudes,
    motivations, qualifications, experiences, and income as the
    cohorts move through the stages of life. The committee notes
    that the nation is overdue to initiate a new study because the
    most recent cohort was initiated over 10 years ago in 1997. The
    committee urges the Secretary of Defense to request that a new
    cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth be launched
    by 2010 and that the Secretary promote the initiative by
    committing resources to support aspects of the survey of
    particular interest to the Department.

                 Report on Duty Status of the Reserve Component

        The Commission on National Guard and Reserves issued its
    final report on January 31st of this year. The commission found
    that today's reservists are managed under 29 different and
    distinct statuses that are confusing and frustrating to reserve
    component members and their commanders. The committee has heard
    the challenges reserve members face to meet mission
    requirements when transitioning from one duty status to
    another. Unfortunately, reserve component members and their
    families are often times caught in the middle of transitions in
    which pay and benefits change from one duty status to another.
        The greater utilization of reserve component members to
    meet operational requirements requires simple and
    straightforward management. The commission recommended that the
    29 duty statuses be reduced to 2--title 10 or title 32 status.
    However, reducing the number of duty statuses brings numerous
    challenges that were not specifically addressed by the
    commission. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    undertake a review of all the duty statuses currently being
    used by the services and the Department and to provide a
    strategic plan that would significantly reduce the number of
    duty statuses to allow for a clear, simple structure under
    which reserve members are called to serve. The committee
    directs the Secretary to report the results of the review, and
    a strategic plan, along with any recommendations for
    modification to the current law that may be necessary to reduce
    the duty statuses of reserve component members to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by March 31, 2009.

       Review of Full-Time Manning for the Army National Guard and Army
                                    Reserves

        The committee notes the importance of full-time manning,
    which includes active guard and reserve personnel, as well as
    military technicians, to the training, readiness and
    performance of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve,
    particularly during times of increased operational tempo. Both
    the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve have become
    operational reserves and the requirements for full time manning
    can be expected to increase over present levels. The committee
    does not believe the full-time manning for either the Army
    Guard or the Army Reserve is adequate. Therefore, the committee
    directs the Secretary of the Army to review the projected five-
    year requirements for Army National Guard and Army Reserve
    full-time manning and implement a plan to increase full-time
    manning in both those components to the required levels. The
    Secretary of the Army shall report the results of his review
    and implementation plan to the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by April 1,
    2009.

                  Review of Reserve Officer Joint Requirements

        The committee notes that the budget request included a
    legislative proposal to increase the controlled grade limit for
    lieutenant colonels serving in a full-time support capacity in
    the Marine Corps Reserve. The proposal was included by the
    committee in section 512 of this Act. The documentation
    submitted to support this proposal cited growth in full-time
    lieutenant colonel requirements in a variety of headquarters
    staffs caused by the expansion of reserve component roles to
    encompass missions that traditionally were reserved for the
    active components. The committee is concerned that this
    increase in demand for more senior officers with greater
    experience is a trend that affects all the reserve components
    and that the current authorized levels of senior officer full-
    time support are inadequate to meet operational requirements
    across the reserve forces. The committee is also concerned that
    in the case of the Marine Corps Reserve, there has been a
    deliberate decision to sacrifice critical positions authorized
    for the grade of major in an effort to increase the number of
    lieutenant colonel positions that are considered a higher
    priority. The committee fears that the Marine Corps Reserve may
    have traded one controlled grade problem for another that will
    become apparent when it realizes that there are insufficient
    numbers of majors to support missions.
        Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to study the full-time support controlled grade requirements
    within all the reserve components to determine if the number of
    authorizations is adequate to meet mission requirements in this
    era of increasing activity of our reserve forces. Specifically,
    the committee directs the Secretary to examine the number of
    full-time support authorizations in the grade of major within
    the Marine Corps Reserve to determine if the reduction in
    positions was an appropriate management decision. The Secretary
    shall report his findings and recommendations to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by March 31, 2009.

                    Searchable Military Decorations Database

        The committee notes that there have been a number of
    examples of individuals in recent years who have fraudulently
    claimed to have been awarded the Medal of Honor or other
    decorations of valor. The committee believes that the frequency
    of such incidents could be reduced and the prestige of all
    military valor decorations preserved if the general public was
    afforded access to a searchable database listing those
    individuals who have been awarded decorations for valor.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the
    potential for establishing a searchable database listing
    individuals who have been awarded military medals for valor.
    The Secretary shall consider the cost of the database, the
    administrative challenges in assembling the database, the
    implications for the privacy of the individuals listed in the
    database, and the options for the general public to gain access
    to the database. The Secretary shall also consider the
    feasibility of listing recipients of multiple valor decorations
    in the database, but shall, at a minimum, report his findings
    regarding feasibility of a database that only includes
    recipients of the Medal of Honor. The Secretary shall report
    his findings and recommendations to the Senate Committee on
    Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
    March 31, 2009.

          Strategic Plan to Address Science, Technology, Engineering,
                           Mathematics, and Education

        The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
    lacks a strategic plan to address the growing shortages in
    science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
    professions, both military and civilian, within the services
    and other Departmental agencies. The committee is concerned
    that the nation is facing an increasing shortage of qualified
    STEM professionals, directly impacting our national security.
    The committee further notes that one of the top recommendations
    from the 2007 National Academy of Science report, ``Rising
    Above The Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for
    a Brighter Economic Future,'' is for increasing America's
    talent pool by improving primary and secondary math and science
    education. The committee is aware that the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense and the military services all have
    numerous STEM programs, but is concerned that these programs
    lack the coherent and coordinated approach necessary to address
    STEM issues across the Department of Defense.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
    study on this issue, including an assessment of all the
    programs within the military services, defense agencies, and
    the Office of the Secretary of Defense that encourage, assist,
    and maintain individuals to pursue an interest in STEM. At a
    minimum, the study shall include a description of each program,
    the target students or employee range, the period of the
    program, the amount requested and expended, the numbers of
    individuals impacted, and other appropriate metrics. The study
    should also address how each program adds to the continuum of
    education from kindergarten through high school, as well as
    post-secondary through graduate and post-graduate education.
    The study should include at a minimum review of STARBASE, the
    STEM Learning Modules, eCybermission, as well as efforts within
    Senior Reserve Officer Training (ROTC) programs that provide a
    continuum approach to STEM education. In addition, the study
    shall provide a plan that documents the Department's
    coordinated efforts toward addressing the declining science,
    engineering, and technical workforce. The study shall also
    include recommendations, if any, for the enhancement and
    coordination of STEM programs within the Department. The
    committee directs the Secretary to submit his findings to the
    congressional defense committees by March 31, 2009.

                   Youth Information in Recruiting Databases

        The committee is concerned about the procedures employed by
    the Department in managing databases that include youth
    information. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    verify that well-publicized and efficient procedures are
    available to youth or parents or the guardian of the youth to
    remove information from all Department of Defense recruiting
    databases and to protect youth from unsolicited contact by any
    Department of Defense recruiting agency. In addition, the
    committee directs the Secretary to verify that all information
    maintained on youth in Department of Defense recruiting
    databases are carefully managed to ensure that youth
    information is not released to any agency outside of the
    Department and that it is only used to support recruiting
    programs within the Department. The committee directs the
    Secretary of Defense to submit a report on his findings and
    remedial actions, if any, to the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31,
    2009.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                 Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy Generally

      Section 501--Mandatory Separation Requirements for Regular Warrant
                         Officers for Length of Service

        This section would establish 60 days following completion
    of 30 years of active service as the mandatory retirement date
    for warrant officers in all components, except the Army, which
    would establish the mandatory retirement for warrant officers
    based on 30 years of active service as a warrant officer.

     Section 502--Requirements for Issuance of Posthumous Commissions and
                                    Warrants

        This section would eliminate the requirement for a line of
    duty determination to be conducted before a posthumous
    promotion to a commissioned or warrant grade could be conferred
    and would substitute the requirement for the secretary
    concerned to certify that the service member was qualified for
    appointment to the higher grade.

    Section 503--Extension of Authority to Reduce Minimum Length of Active
            Service Required for Voluntary Retirement as an Officer

        This section would extend the period during which the
    Secretary of Defense may authorize the secretaries of the
    military departments to lower the years of officer service
    required before a member may be retired as an officer from a
    minimum of 10 years to a minimum of 8 years. This section would
    authorize the approval of retirement as an officer with a
    minimum of eight years of service during fiscal year 2014.

       Section 504--Increase in Authorized Number of General Officers on
                        Active Duty in the Marine Corps

        This section would amend sections 525 and 526 of title 10,
    United States Code, to allow an increase of one general officer
    in the rank of Lieutenant General for the Marine Corps

                    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

      Section 511--Extension to All Military Departments of Authority to
        Defer Mandatory Separation of Military Technicians (Dual Status)

        This section would extend to the Secretary of the Air Force
    the same authority previously granted to the Secretary of the
    Army to delay mandatory separation of dual status military
    technicians for years of service or other policy consideration
    until age 60.

    Section 512--Increase in Authorized Strengths for Marine Corps Reserve
     Officers on Active Duty in the Grades of Major and Lieutenant Colonel
                      to Meet Force Structure Requirements

        This section would increase the number of full-time
    lieutenant colonels in the Marine Corps Reserve by seven. This
    section would not increase the overall number of officers in
    controlled grades because the proposal would decrease the
    number of majors to offset the growth in lieutenant colonels.

       Section 513--Clarification of Authority to Consider for a Vacancy
    Promotion National Guard Officers Ordered to Active Duty in Support of
                            a Contingency Operation

        This section would amend section 14317 of title 10, United
    States Code, to authorize national guard officers to be
    considered for promotion when they are ordered to or are
    serving on active duty in support of a contingency operation.
    At present, only Army and Air Force Reserve officers are
    allowed to be considered for vacancy promotions when ordered to
    or are serving on active duty in support of a contingency
    operation. This section would also clarify that national guard
    and reserve officers who are ordered to or who are on active
    duty in support of a contingency operation may be promoted
    against vacancies other than those that exist in the unit with
    which they were ordered to active duty.

     Section 514--Increase in Mandatory Retirement Age for Certain Reserve
                                    Officers

        This section would clarify that reserve officers assigned
    to duties with the Selective Service System, as National Guard
    property and fiscal officers, or with a State headquarters
    staff of the Army National Guard, may be retained in an active
    status until age 62. This section would make the mandatory
    retirement age for these officers consistent with the
    retirement age set for other active duty and reserve officers.

      Section 515--Age Limit for Retention of Certain Reserve Officers on
     Active-Status List as Exception to Removal for Years of Commissioned
                                    Service

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army and
    the Secretary of the Air Force to retain reserve officers in
    the grade of lieutenant general beyond mandatory retirement for
    years of service until the officer becomes 66 years of age.

      Section 516--Authority to Retain Reserve Chaplains and Officers in
                  Medical and Related Specialties until Age 68

        This section would authorize the secretaries of the
    military departments to retain reserve component chaplains and
    officers serving in health profession specialties until age 68.
    The section would also clarify that chaplains and officers
    serving in health profession specialties in the National Guard
    may also be retained until age 68.

     Section 517--Study and Report Regarding Personnel Movements in Marine
                         Corps Individual Ready Reserve

        This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
    conduct a study on how the Marine Corps Reserve moves personnel
    in and out of the Individual Ready Reserve.

             Subtitle C--Joint Qualified Officers and Requirements

     Section 521--Joint Duty Requirements for Promotion to General or Flag
                                    Officer

        This section would amend section 619a of title 10, United
    States Code, to reflect the changes made to section 661 of
    title 10, United States Code, by section 516 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364).

       Section 522--Technical, Conforming, and Clerical Changes to Joint
                             Specialty Terminology

        This section would amend the terminology used in sections
    663, 665, and 667 of title 10, United States Code, to
    correspond with changes made to section 661 of title 10, United
    States Code, in section 516 of the John Warner National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364).
    Specifically, this section would replace references to ``Joint
    Specialty Officer'' with ``Joint Qualified Officer.'' It would
    also modify the reporting requirement in section 667 of title
    10, United States Code, to correspond with changes made in
    section 516 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364).

     Section 523--Promotion Policy Objectives for Joint Qualified Officers

        This section would amend section 662 of title 10, United
    States Code, to comport with the standard in section 619a of
    title 10, United States Code, which goes into effect on October
    1, 2008, so that officers must be a Joint Specialty Officer/
    Joint Qualified Officer to be appointed to the grade of O-7.
    This section also would simplify the promotion objectives as
    applied under the new Joint Qualification System that
    acknowledges all joint experiences no matter where they occur.

                 Section 524--Length of Joint Duty Assignments

        This section would bring guidance regarding joint duty
    assignment lengths and exceptions in line with the Joint
    Qualification System developed by the Department of Defense as
    directed in section 516 of the John Warner National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364).

    Section 525--Designation of General and Flag Officer Positions on Joint
        Staff as Positions to be Held Only by Reserve Component Officers

        This section would amend section 526 of title 10, United
    States Code, to allow the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
    to exempt up to three reserve general and flag officers from
    counting against the general and flag officer limitations.

       Section 526--Treatment of Certain Service as Joint Duty Experience

        This section would require that services of an officer as
    an adjutant general of the National Guard of a state, be
    treated as joint duty or joint duty experience for purposes of
    any provision of law requiring such duty or experience as a
    condition of assignment or promotion. This section would
    require the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to issue a
    report by April 1, 2009, with recommendations to the Chairman
    of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding which duty of officers
    of the National Guard in the Joint Force Headquarters of the
    National Guard of the states should qualify as joint duty or
    joint duty experience. This section would also require that the
    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff submit a report to
    Congress by April 1, 2009, April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2011 on
    information regarding the joint educational courses available
    through the Department.
        This section would require that the Commander of United
    States Northern Command, the Commander of United States Pacific
    Command and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, with the
    approval of the Secretary of Defense, jointly enter into a
    memorandum of understanding describing the operational
    relationships, and roles and responsibilities during domestic
    emergencies.
        This section would also require that the Secretary of
    Defense, in consultation with the Chief of the National Guard
    Bureau, to conduct a review of the role of the Department in
    the defense of the homeland and issue a report of that review
    to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and House Committee
    on Armed Services by April 1, 2009.

                    Subtitle D--General Service Authorities

         Section 531--Increase in Authorized Maximum Reenlistment Term

        This section would increase the authorized maximum
    reenlistment term from six years to eight years.

                 Section 532--Career Intermission Pilot Program

        This section would authorize the secretaries of the
    military departments to conduct a pilot program under which an
    officer or enlisted member may be released from active duty for
    a maximum of three years to encourage retention by allowing
    members to focus on personal and professional goals and
    responsibilities for a temporary period. This section would
    authorize separations to occur during the period from January
    1, 2009, to December 31, 2014, and would allow the total number
    of members selected annually from each armed force to be
    limited to 20 members. Participation in the program would
    require members to enlist in the Ready Reserve and report
    monthly to military authorities during the intermission period,
    and to agree to serve on active duty in a regular or reserve
    component for a period of not less than two months for every
    month of program participation following the member's return to
    active duty. During the intermission period, participating
    members and their dependents would be eligible for the same
    medical and dental care benefits as provided to active duty
    members and their families and would be issued identification
    cards to support access to commissary, exchange, and morale,
    welfare, and recreation facilities.

                       Subtitle E--Education and Training

    Section 541--Repeal of Prohibition on Phased Increase in Midshipmen and
       Cadet Strength Limit at United States Naval Academy and Air Force
                                    Academy

        This section would amend section 6954 of title 10, United
    States Code, and section 9342 of title 10, United States Code,
    to extend the authority of the Secretary of the Navy and the
    Secretary of the Air Force to increase the size of the cadets
    at United States Naval Academy and Air Force Academy by up to
    100 cadets per year to a maximum of 4,400 cadets.

     Section 542--Promotion of Foreign and Cultural Exchange Activities at
                           Military Service Academies

        This section would amend sections 403, 603, and 903 of
    title 10, United States Code, to allow the military service
    academies to support foreign and cultural exchange programs for
    up to two weeks a year to foster the development of foreign
    language skills, cross cultural interactions and understanding,
    and cultural immersion of cadets and midshipmen.

    Section 543--Compensation for Civilian President of Naval Postgraduate
                                     School

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
    compensate the civilian President of the Naval Post Graduate
    School as the Secretary prescribes, but basic pay shall not
    exceed the rate of compensation authorized for Level I of the
    Executive Schedule. This section would also limit the aggregate
    compensation to include bonuses, awards, allowances, or other
    similar compensation to the salary authorized to be paid to the
    Vice President.

     Section 544--Increased Authority to Enroll Defense Industry Employees
                     in Defense Product Development Program

        This section would amend section 7049 of title 10, United
    States Code, to increase from 25 to 125 the number of defense
    industry employees who could receive instruction at the Naval
    Postgraduate School.

       Section 545--Requirement of Completion of Service under Honorable
     Conditions for Purposes of Entitlement to Educational Assistance for
          Reserve Components Members Supporting Contingency Operations

        This section would amend section 16164 of title 10, United
    States Code, to require service members to complete their
    service obligations under honorable conditions in order to
    qualify for the educational benefits under such section.

     Section 546--Consistent Education Loan Repayment Authority for Health
            Professionals in Regular Components and Selected Reserve

        This section would authorize the same maximum limits for
    education loan repayment programs for health professionals in
    the reserve components as the maximum limits authorized for
    similar programs for active duty health professionals.

     Section 547--Increase in Number of Units of Junior Reserve Officers'
                                 Training Corps

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
    consultation with the secretaries of the military departments,
    to develop and implement a plan to establish and support 4,000
    Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps units by fiscal year
    2020. The section would also require the Secretary of Defense
    to submit a report to the congressional defense committees that
    would provide information on how the services will achieve this
    goal, as well as other pertinent information, by March 31,
    2009.

                          Subtitle F--Military Justice

      Section 551--Grade of Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the
                                  Marine Corps

        This section would amend section 5046 of title 10, United
    States Code, to require that the Staff Judge Advocate to the
    Commandant of the Marine Corps serve in the grade of major
    general.

                Section 552--Standing Military Protection Order

        This section would amend chapter 80 of title 10, United
    States Code, to extend a standing military protective order by
    a military commander until the allegation prompting the
    protective order is resolved by investigation, courts martial,
    or other command determined adjudication, or the military
    commander issues a new order.

    Section 553--Mandatory Notification of Issuance of Military Protective
                       Order to Civilian Law Enforcement

        This section would require the commander of a military
    installation to notify appropriate civilian authorities in the
    event a military protective order is issued against a member of
    the armed forces and any individual involved in the order does
    not reside on a military installation.

     Section 554--Implementation of Information Database on Sexual Assault
                         Incidents in the Armed Forces

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    implement a centralized, case-level database for the collection
    and maintenance of all information regarding sexual assault
    involving a member of the armed forces, including information
    about the nature of the assault, the victim, the offender, and
    the outcome of any legal proceedings in connection with the
    assault. Further, the database will be available to personnel
    of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office of the
    Department of Defense to conduct research. The committee notes
    that the department does not currently have sexual assault data
    available in a centralized database, and believes that such a
    capability is needed to properly track and analyze sexual
    assault data. The committee intends for the Department to use
    the database to improve the quality and utility of the analysis
    and recommendations included in the annual reports required by
    law to be submitted to Congress. Upon implementation of the
    database, annual reports shall include, but not be limited to,
    providing a comprehensive assessment of the successes,
    challenges, and lessons learned from the Department's sexual
    assault programs.

            Subtitle G--Decorations, Awards, and Honorary Promotions

                Section 561--Replacement of Military Decorations

        This section would require the secretary concerned to
    replace, on a one-time basis and without charge, a military
    decoration upon the request of the recipient of the military
    decoration or the next of kin of a deceased recipient.

     Section 562--Authorization and Request for Award of Medal of Honor to
         Richard L. Etchberger for Acts of Valor during the Vietnam War

        This section would authorize the President to award the
    Medal of Honor to Richard L. Etchberger, who served in the
    United States Air Force during the Vietnam War. This section
    would also waive the statutory time limitation under section
    8744 of title 10, United States Code.

    Section 563--Advancement of Brigadier General Charles E. Yeager, United
                States Air Force (Retired), on the Retired List

        This section would entitle Brigadier General Yeager to hold
    the rank of Major General on the retired list of the Air Force.
    The entitlement to hold the higher grade would provide no
    additional pay or benefits.

    Section 564--Advancement of Rear Admiral Wayne E. Meyer, United States
                      Navy (Retired), on the Retired List

        This section would authorize and request the President to
    appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, Rear
    Admiral Wayne E. Meyer to the grade of vice admiral on the
    retired list of the Navy. The appointment to hold the higher
    grade would provide no additional pay or benefits.

          Section 565--Award of Vietnam Service Medal to Veterans Who
                   Participated in Mayaguez Rescue Operation

        This section would authorize the secretary of a military
    department to award the Vietnam Service Medal to veterans as a
    substitute for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal that had
    been awarded for participation in the operation to rescue the
    SS Mayaguez during the period May 12 through May 15, 1975.

                             Subtitle H--Impact Aid

      Section 571--Continuation of Authority to Assist Local Educational
      Agencies that Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
                    Department of Defense Civilian Employees

        This section would provide $50.0 million for assistance to
    local educational agencies that have military dependent
    students comprising at least 20 percent of the students in
    average daily attendance during a year. This section would also
    provide $15.0 million for assistance to local educational
    agencies that experience significant increases and decreases in
    the average daily attendance of military dependent students due
    to military force structure changes, relocation of military
    forces from one base to another, and base closures and
    realignments. The committee continues its efforts to ensure
    that local school districts with a significant concentration of
    military students receive the support necessary to provide for
    military families and their dependents.

     Section 572--Calculation of Payments under Department of Education's
                               Impact Aid Program

        This section would amend section 8003 of the Elementary and
    Secondary Education Act of 1985 (20 U.S.C. 7703(c)) to allow
    local educational agencies who are heavily impacted by base
    closures and force structure changes to use the current school
    year student population to obtain impact aid funding, as
    opposed to the previous school year student population.

                         Subtitle I--Military Families

                    Section 581--Presentation of Burial Flag

        This section would amend section 1482 of title 10, United
    States Code, to allow the Department of Defense to provide a
    ceremonial burial flag to a surviving spouse, or remarried
    surviving spouse, if the person authorized to direct the
    disposition of remains is other than a spouse.

     Section 582--Education and Training Opportunities for Military Spouses

        This section would amend section 1784 of title 10, United
    States Code, to allow the Secretary of Defense to establish a
    program to provide tuition assistance and other support to
    eligible military spouses of active duty soldiers, who often do
    not have the opportunities to develop a career as they move
    with their service member spouse from one military base to
    another.

                           Subtitle J--Other Matters

     Section 591--Inclusion of Reserves in Providing Federal Aid for State
       Governments, Enforcing Federal Authority, and Responding to Major
                               Public Emergencies

        This section would modify sections 331, 332, and 333 of
    title 10, United States Code, to clarify Presidential
    authorities with respect to federal response to insurrection,
    domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, to
    include the use of reserve personnel from the Army, Navy, Air
    Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.

         Section 592--Interest Payments on Certain Claims Arising from
                         Correction of Military Records

        This section would require that payments of claims
    resulting from the decision of a board for correction of
    military records to set aside a conviction by court-martial
    include interest calculated from the date of conviction through
    the date on which the payment is made. This section would set
    the rate of interest to be paid as not less than the rate of
    interest paid to service members participating in the
    government savings plan authorized under section 1035 of title
    10, United States Code, on the date the payment of the claim is
    made. This section would further specify that the section would
    be applied to a decision of a board for the correction of
    military records on or after October 1, 2007, to set aside a
    court-martial conviction.

      Section 593--Extension of Limitation on Reductions of Personnel of
       Agencies Responsible for Review and Correction of Military Records

        This section would extend through December 31, 2010, the
    prohibition precluding the secretaries of the military
    departments from reducing the number of military and civilian
    personnel assigned to duty within the board for correction of
    military records until 90 days after the secretary concerned
    submits a report to Congress that describes the proposed
    reduction, provides the rationale for the reduction, and
    specifies the number of personnel that will be assigned to the
    board after the reduction is complete.

    Section 594--Authority to Order Reserve Units to Active Duty to Provide
            Assistance in Response to a Major Disaster or Emergency

        This section would amend existing law to permit the
    President to authorize the Secretary of Defense, and the
    Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard
    when not operating as a service for the Navy, to order any unit
    or member of the Army Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Navy Reserve,
    and the Coast Guard Reserve to active duty for a major disaster
    or emergency, as those terms are defined in section 5122 of
    title 42, United States Code.

          Section 595--Senior Military Leadership Diversity Commission

        This section would establish the Senior Military Leadership
    Diversity Commission, which would review: efforts to develop
    and maintain diverse leadership at all levels of the armed
    forces; the successes and failures of developing and
    maintaining a diverse leadership; the ability of current
    recruitment and retention practices to attract and maintain a
    diverse pool of officers in pre-commissioning program; and
    other factors that address improvements in the diversity of the
    officer corps, particularly at the general and flag officer
    rank. The commission would be required to submit the results of
    their study one year after the commission first meets.

              TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                                    OVERVIEW

        The committee continues to believe that successful
    recruiting and retention in a wartime environment directly
    depends on the close oversight of compensation and benefit
    programs to ensure that they remain robust, flexible, and
    effective. Accordingly, the committee recommends an across-the-
    board pay raise of 3.9 percent, one-half of one percent above
    pay raise levels in the private sector as measured by the
    Employment Cost Index (ECI). This would be the 10th consecutive
    year that the pay raise would exceed the ECI level and would
    result in an average cumulative pay increase of 52 percent over
    the last 10 years.
        The committee also recognizes that some previously adopted
    compensation policies, bonuses, and special pays require
    modification to ensure they remain current and effective. The
    committee recommends a number of such adjustments, including a
    number of refinements to the initiative to reform special and
    incentive pays adopted in the National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
        The committee believes that more needs to be done to
    protect the annuities of surviving military spouses and
    increase compensation and benefits that support members during
    permanent changes of station. For example, the committee would
    include provisions that would authorize the survivors of active
    duty deaths to receive a survivor indemnity allowance, increase
    the allowance for temporary lodging, and increase household
    goods shipment weight allowances for noncommissioned officers.
        The committee remains committed to protecting and enhancing
    military exchange, commissary, and morale, welfare, and
    recreation programs. Accordingly, the committee includes
    provisions that would make military resale stores and morale,
    welfare, and recreation activities more efficient and effective
    programs.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                 Defense Commissary Agency Construction Funding

        Department of Defense policy requires that appropriated
    funding be used to support morale, welfare, and recreation,
    armed services exchange, temporary duty lodging, and other
    nonappropriated fund instrumentality facility construction
    determined to be required as a result of:
              (1) Base Realignment and Closure and global
            repositioning decisions;
              (2) Acts of God, fire, and terrorism; or
              (3) Other relocation or replacement of such
            facilities for the convenience of the government or
            required by international agreements.
    The committee notes that the policy does not include the
    facility requirements of the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA)
    determined as necessary under identical circumstances.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to modify
    the policy regarding the use of appropriated funding to support
    nonappropriated fund instrumentality construction to include
    similar facility construction requirements of DeCA. The
    committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
    confirming that the policy regarding appropriated funding of
    Defense Commissary Agency construction requirements is
    identical to that of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities to
    the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
    on Armed Services by March 31, 2009.

              Disabled Veterans Access to Commissary and Exchanges

        The committee is considering options for increasing the
    opportunity for disabled veterans to shop at commissary and
    exchange stores operated by the Department of Defense. The
    committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the
    propriety of expanding the population eligible to shop at
    commissary and exchange stores from those veterans rated 100
    percent disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs to
    include disabled veterans with disability ratings above 30
    percent. The Secretary shall submit a report on his findings
    and recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
    and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2009.

                          Post-Deployment Leave Policy

        The committee notes that the services have different
    policies regarding the duty status of members during the rest
    and recovery period following lengthy deployments. For example,
    the committee believes it is inequitable that Army members are
    required to use annual leave during block leave periods
    following deployments while Air Force personnel are granted 10
    days of recovery and reconstitution time for which they are not
    required to take annual leave so long as they remain in the
    local area. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    study the service policies regarding post-deployment rest and
    recovery periods and to recommend a policy or legislative
    remedy that ensures service members are treated with fairness
    and equity regarding the use of chargeable leave. The Secretary
    shall report his findings and recommendations to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by March 31, 2009.

                       Telephone Services in Combat Zones

        The committee notes that section 885 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) requires the Secretary of Defense to ensure that contracts
    to provide morale, welfare, and recreation telephone service to
    military personnel serving in combat zones be awarded using
    competitive procedures. The section also requires the Secretary
    to review proposals for new or extended contracts to determine
    if it is in the best interest of the Department of Defense to
    require contract proposals to include options that minimize the
    cost of telephone services to individual users while providing
    those users the flexibility to use phone cards from phone
    service providers other than the entity offering the proposal.
        The committee expresses concern over whether the process
    used to pursue a new or extended contract for such telephone
    services fully complies with the requirements of section 885
    and whether service members are being provided the best
    possible, most cost-efficient telephone services. The committee
    directs the Secretary of Defense to determine if there have
    been any new or extended contracts to provide morale, welfare,
    and recreational telephone services in combat zones since the
    passage of section 885 and, if there has been a new or extended
    contract, to confirm that the Department of Defense has fully
    complied with the requirements of section 885. In addition, the
    committee directs the Secretary to determine the average cost
    of phone calls made by service members and other Department of
    Defense employees in combat zones using contracted telephone
    resources and the average amount of that cost that is returned
    to the contractor as return on investment or profit. The
    Secretary shall report his findings to the Senate Committee on
    Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services within
    30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                         Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

          Section 601--Fiscal Year 2009 Increase in Military Basic Pay

        This section would increase basic pay for members of the
    uniform services by 3.9 percent effective January 1, 2009. This
    raise would continue to fulfill Congress's commitment to keep
    pay raises for the uniformed services ahead of private sector
    pay raises. Accordingly, the gap between pay increases for the
    uniformed services and private sector employees during fiscal
    year 2009 would be reduced from approximately 3.4 percent to
    2.9 percent.

      Section 602--Permanent Prohibition on Charges for Meals Received at
       Military Treatment Facilities by Members Receiving Continuous Care

        This section would permanently prohibit military treatment
    facilities from charging a service member for meals when the
    member is undergoing medical recuperation or therapy or is
    otherwise in the status of continuous care, including
    outpatient care, resulting from injury, illness, or disease
    incurred or aggravated by service in support of Operation Iraqi
    Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom or other combat zone as
    designated by the Secretary of Defense.

        Section 603--Equitable Treatment of Senior Enlisted Members in
                   Computation of Basic Allowance for Housing

        This section would authorize the same housing standard used
    in the calculation of basic allowance for housing for
    noncommissioned officers in the grade of E-8 as the standard
    used to calculate basic allowance for housing for
    noncommissioned officers in the grade of E-9.

     Section 604--Increase in Maximum Authorized Payment or Reimbursement
                     Amount for Temporary Lodging Expenses

        This section would increase the maximum rate that may be
    paid to service members for temporary lodging expenses in
    connection with permanent changes of station from $180 per day
    to $290 per day.

      Section 605--Availability of Portion of a Second Family Separation
                 Allowance for Married Couples with Dependents

        This section would require the secretary concerned to pay
    one member of a married couple, both of whom are members of the
    uniformed services who reside together with dependents, a full
    family separation allowance and the other member one-half of
    such allowance when both members are simultaneously assigned to
    duty under the following conditions:
              (1) Permanent duty stations where dependents are not
            authorized;
              (2) Deployed ships for more than 30 days; or
              (3) Temporary duty away from the member's permanent
            duty station for more than 30 days.

     Section 606--Stabilization of Pay and Allowances for Senior Enlisted
        Members and Warrant Officers Appointed as Officers and Officers
                          Reappointed in a Lower Grade

        This section would authorize a member of the armed forces
    who accepts an appointment or reappointment as an officer
    without a break in service to retain the pay and allowances to
    which the member was entitled in the previous grade if it is
    more than the pay and allowances to which the member is
    entitled in the grade to which he is appointed or reappointed.

    Section 607--Extension of Authority for Income Replacement Payments for
         Reserve Component Members Experiencing Extended and Frequent
                      Mobilization for Active Duty Service

        This section would extend from December 31, 2008, to
    December 31, 2009, the authority for reserve component members
    subjected to extended and frequent mobilization for active duty
    service to be compensated for private sector income denied the
    member as a result of such service.

    Section 608--Guaranteed Pay Increase for Members of the Armed Forces of
       One-Half of One Percentage Point Higher than Employment Cost Index

        This section would mandate that pay raises for members of
    the uniformed services during fiscal years 2010 through 2013
    must be one-half of one percent higher than the raise
    calculated under section 1009 of title 37, United States Code,
    using the level of pay increases in the private sector as
    measured using the Employment Cost Index.

               Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

    Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay Authorities for
                                 Reserve Forces

        This section would extend the authority for the Selected
    Reserve reenlistment bonus, the Selected Reserve affiliation or
    enlistment bonus, 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 until December 31, 2009.

    Section 612--Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay Authorities for
                           Health Care Professionals

        This section would extend the authority for the nurse
    officer candidate accession program, repayment of educational
    loans for certain health professionals who serve in the
    Selected Reserve, the accession bonus for registered nurses,
    the incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists, the special
    pay for Selected Reserve health care professionals in
    critically short wartime specialties, the accession bonus for
    dental officers, the accession bonus for pharmacy officers, the
    accession bonus for medical officers in critically short
    wartime specialties, and the accession bonus for dental
    specialist officers in critically short wartime specialties
    until December 31, 2009.

    Section 613--Extension of Special Pay and Bonus Authorities for Nuclear
                                    Officers

        This section would extend the authority for the special pay
    for nuclear-qualified officers extending a period of active
    service, nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear career
    annual incentive bonus until December 31, 2009.

      Section 614--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment of Other
                       Title 37 Bonuses and Special Pays

        This section would extend the authority for the aviation
    officer retention bonus, assignment incentive pay, the
    reenlistment bonus for active members, the enlistment bonus for
    active members, the accession bonus for new officers in
    critical skills, the incentive bonus for conversion to military
    occupational specialty to ease personnel shortage, the
    accession bonus for officer candidates, and retention bonus for
    members with critical military skills or assigned to high
    priority units until December 31, 2009.

     Section 615--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment of Referral
                                    Bonuses

        This section would extend the authority for the health
    professions referral bonus and the Army referral bonus until
    December 31, 2009.

     Section 616--Increase in Maximum Bonus and Stipend Amounts Authorized
                under Nurse Officer Candidate Accession Program

        This section would increase the bonus that may be paid to
    nurse officer candidates from $10,000 to $20,000 and the
    monthly stipend that may be paid to such candidates from $1,000
    to $1,250. This section would also increase the amount of the
    initial installment payment of the bonus from $5,000 to
    $10,000.

    Section 617--Maximum Length of Nuclear Officer Incentive Pay Agreements
                                  for Service

        This section would authorize nuclear officer incentive pay
    agreements to be of any duration beyond a minimum period of
    three years.

    Section 618--Technical Changes Regarding Consolidation of Special Pay,
         Incentive Pay, and Bonus Authorities of the Uniformed Services

        This section would make technical changes to facilitate the
    utility of provisions included in the initiative to reform
    special and incentive pays adopted in the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).

       Section 619--Use of New Skill Incentive Pay and Proficiency Bonus
      Authorities to Encourage Training in Critical Foreign Languages and
                            Foreign Cultural Studies

        This section would authorize the secretary concerned to pay
    a skill proficiency bonus of up to $12,000 annually to a member
    enrolled in an officer training program who is in training to
    acquire proficiency in a critical foreign language or expertise
    in foreign cultural studies. The section would also authorize
    the Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program through
    December 31, 2013, to pay a skill proficiency bonus to a member
    of a reserve component in an active status while the member
    participates in an education or training program to acquire
    proficiency in a critical foreign language or expertise in
    critical foreign cultural studies.

      Section 620--Temporary Targeted Bonus Authority to Increase Direct
              Accessions of Officers in Certain Health Professions

        This section would designate qualified psychologists,
    registered nurses, and other such mental health practitioners,
    as a secretary of a military department determines to be
    necessary, as critically-short wartime specialties. The
    designation would make such medical practitioners eligible for
    a bonus of up to $100,000 for each 12-month period of obligated
    service that they agree to serve on active duty or in an active
    status in the reserves. The designation would terminate on
    September 30, 2010.

                Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

     Section 631--Increased Weight Allowance for Transportation of Baggage
               and Household Effects for Certain Enlisted Members

        This section would authorize noncommissioned officers in
    the grades of E-5 through E-9 increased weight allowances for
    shipping household goods during permanent changes in station.

        Section 632--Additional Weight Allowance for Transportation of
    Materials Associated with Employment of a Member's Spouse or Community
                    Support Volunteer or Charity Activities

        This section would authorize an additional 200 pounds in
    the weight allowance for shipping household goods during
    permanent changes in station for the purpose of shipping
    materials associated with the employment or community support
    activities of the service member's spouse.

        Section 633--Transportation of Family Pets During Evacuation of
                             Nonessential Personnel

        This section would authorize service members to transport
    two family household pets at government expense when non-
    essential personnel are evacuated from a permanent station
    located in a foreign area.

                 Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits

       Section 641--Equity in Computation of Disability Retired Pay for
                  Reserve Component Members Wounded in Action

        This section would require that the calculation of retired
    pay for reserve component service members who are retired or
    placed on the temporary disability retired list be based on the
    member's total years of service in lieu of active duty years of
    service when the retirement is based on a disability incurred
    under circumstances for which the member was awarded the Purple
    Heart.

    Section 642--Effect of Termination of Subsequent Marriage on Payment of
    Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity to Surviving Spouse or Former Spouse Who
              Previously Transferred Annuity to Dependent Children

        This section would authorize surviving spouses or former
    spouses who previously transferred the Survivor Benefit Plan
    annuity to a child or children to reclaim eligibility for the
    annuity after the termination of a marriage if the child or
    children are no longer eligible for the annuity.

       Section 643--Extension to Survivors of Certain Members Who Die on
        Active Duty of Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance for Persons
         Affected by Required Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity Offset for
                     Dependency and Indemnity Compensation

        This section would amend section 644 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) to authorize the survivors of service members who die
    while serving on active duty to receive a special survivor
    indemnity allowance effective October 1, 2008, as originally
    authorized for other recipients.

     Section 644--Election to Receive Retired Pay for Non-Regular Service
    upon Retirement for Service in an Active Reserve Status Performed after
                  Attaining Eligibility for Regular Retirement

        This section would authorize members of reserve components
    who served in an active reserve status in the Selected Reserve
    for not less than two years after becoming eligible for an
    active duty retirement to elect a non-regular retirement for
    which they are qualified. This section would authorize the
    secretary concerned to reduce the two-year service requirement
    for a member recalled to serve in the position of adjutant
    general or assistant adjutant general within the national guard
    when the member serves at least six months but fails to
    complete the two years of service due to the requirements of
    the law of the state, commonwealth, or territory in which the
    member is serving. This section would further specify that a
    member has attained retirement eligibility after meeting all
    qualifying criteria without regard to whether the person
    actually retired or received retired or retainer pay.

      Section 645--Recomputation of Retired Pay and Adjustment of Retired
         Grade of Reserve Retirees to Reflect Service after Retirement

        This section would authorize the secretary concerned to
    recompute the retired pay and adjust the retired grade of non-
    regular retirees who have been recalled to an active status in
    the Selected Reserve for not less than two years. This section
    would authorize the secretary concerned to reduce the two-year
    service requirement for a member recalled to serve in the
    position of adjutant general or assistant adjutant general
    within the National Guard when the member serves at least six
    months but fails to complete the two years of service due to
    the requirements of the law of the state, commonwealth, or
    territory in which the member is serving.

      Section 646--Correction of Unintended Reduction in Survivor Benefit
         Plan Annuities Due to Phased Elimination of Two-Tier Annuity
                      Computation and Supplemental Annuity

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    determine if the phased elimination of the two-tier annuity
    computation and the related Supplemental Survivor Benefit Plan
    resulted in some Survivor Benefit Plan annuitants receiving a
    smaller annuity than they would have received if the two-tier
    computation system had not been eliminated. This section would
    require the Secretary to restore the annuity to the level that
    would have been paid if the two-tier computation had continued
    to operate if the Secretary identifies annuitants that are
    receiving smaller annuities.

    Section 647--Presumption of Death for Participants in Survivor Benefit
                             Plan in Missing Status

        This section would specify that the secretary of a military
    department may not declare a military retiree who has been
    determined as missing in Iraq or Afghanistan after August 1,
    2007, as presumed dead until the earlier of a period of at
    least seven years has elapsed or the retiree has been confirmed
    dead and a death certificate provided to the next of kin. This
    section would also require monthly retired pay to be resumed
    and any retired pay that may have been due following the
    declaration of the presumption of death to be retroactively
    paid to the family of the missing retiree.

        Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
                            Benefits and Operations

    Section 651--Use of Commissary Stores Surcharges Derived from Temporary
       Commissary Initiatives for Reserve Components and Retired Members

        This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    use surcharge proceeds derived from commissary sales to reserve
    component members, retired members, and other authorized
    commissary patrons utilizing temporary or mobile equipment to
    offset the cost of operations to deliver the goods and services
    using mobile assets.

      Section 652--Requirements for Private Operation of Commissary Store
                                   Functions

        This section would extend a moratorium on studies to
    compare the cost effectiveness of commissary operations
    employing federal civilian employees and such operations
    employing private sector employees from December 31, 2008, to
    December 31, 2013. This section would provide the Defense
    Commissary Agency the opportunity to continue to reengineer
    their workforce to increase effectiveness and efficiency prior
    to competing with private sector entities.

    Section 653--Additional Exception to Limitation on Use of Appropriated
                  Funds for Department of Defense Golf Courses

        This section would authorize the use of appropriated funds
    to purchase and maintain specialized golf carts designed to
    accommodate persons with disabilities and the use of such golf
    carts on military golf courses where they can be operated
    safely.

     Section 654--Enhanced Enforcement of Prohibition on Sale or Rental of
              Sexually Explicit Material on Military Installations

        This section would mandate that the Secretary of Defense
    establish a Resale Activities Review Board to make
    recommendations to the Secretary regarding material that is
    determined to be sexually explicit and therefore barred from
    being sold or rented on property under the jurisdiction of the
    Department of Defense. The board would be comprised of nine
    members of whom six would be appointed by the Secretary of
    Defense to broadly represent the interests of the eligible
    patron population and three would be appointed by the
    secretaries of the military departments. This section would
    require the board membership to be appointed within 120 days of
    the date of enactment of this Act and the board to meet within
    one year of the initial appointment of the board members.

    Section 655--Requirement to Buy Military Decorations, Ribbons, Badges,
       Medals, Insignia, and Other Uniform Accouterments produced in the
                                 United States

        This section would preclude a military exchange store or
    other nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the Department of
    Defense from purchasing for resale any military decorations,
    ribbons, badges, medals, insignia, and other uniform
    accouterments that are not produced in the United States. The
    section would also authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    purchase such uniform accouterments manufactured outside the
    United States when adequate quantity or satisfactory quality
    cannot be procured from U.S. manufacturers or the purchase of
    items produced outside the United States is in the best
    interests of members of the armed forces.

       Section 656--Use of Appropriated Funds to Pay Post Allowances or
          Overseas Cost of Living Allowances to Nonappropriated Fund
                   Instrumentality Employees Serving Overseas

        This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    use appropriated funding to pay post allowances or overseas
    cost-of-living allowances to nonappropriated fund employees
    serving at overseas locations. This section would include such
    allowances due for payment before, on, or after the date of
    enactment of this Act, but such payments would not be
    authorized under this section after December 31, 2011.
        The committee is aware that there has been some confusion
    about the requirement for nonappropriated fund entities to pay
    post allowances at overseas locations when the employee is
    hired locally. The committee is also aware that the Department
    of Defense (DOD) is reconsidering the current policy that
    requires post allowances to be paid to nonapropriated fund
    employees who are locally hired. Given the confusion over the
    specifics of the policy, the committee believes that
    nonappropriated fund entities should be protected from the
    burden of making additional unexpected retroactive and current
    payments until the reassessment of the policy is completed. The
    committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense to
    identify and allocate appropriated funding to pay post
    allowances to nonapropriated fund employees who were locally
    hired at overseas locations and ensure that no nonappropriated
    fund entity incurs additional cost resulting from confusion
    over DOD policy on these matters.

        Section 657--Study Regarding Sale of Alcoholic Wine and Beer in
                Commissary Stores in Addition to Exchange Stores

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    conduct a study evaluating the propriety, patron convenience,
    and financial utility of authorizing alcoholic wine and beer
    for sale in commissary stores and to report his findings and
    recommendations to Congress within 120 days following
    completion of the study. This section would also authorize the
    Secretary to conduct a pilot program involving the sale of
    alcoholic beer and wine over a period of not less than four
    months, but not more than one year as part of the study if such
    a pilot program is determined to be useful.

                           Subtitle F--Other Matters

      Section 661--Bonus to Encourage Army Personnel and Other Persons to
                    Refer Persons for Enlistment in the Army

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    train, directly or through a contractor, members of the general
    public to refer recruit candidates for enlistment. This section
    would also authorize the Secretary greater flexibility on the
    timing of referral bonus payments and the use of a contractor
    to manage the payment of referral bonuses.

        Section 662--Continuation of Entitlement to Bonuses and Similar
     Benefits for Members of the Uniformed Services Who Die, are Separated
               or Retired for Disability, or Meet Other Criteria

        This section would mandate that the estate of a service
    member who dies, other than as a result of the member's
    misconduct, or is retired or separated for disability, will not
    be required to repay any portion of a bonus or similar benefit
    that had been paid to the member. This section would also
    mandate that the full contracted amount of any unpaid bonus or
    similar benefit will be paid within 90 days of death,
    retirement, or separation. This section would also authorize
    the secretary concerned to elect not to recoup bonuses and
    similar benefits. The secretary concerned would also be
    authorized to continue payment of the unpaid portion of such
    bonuses and benefits when the secretary determines that it
    would be contrary to a personnel policy or management
    objective, against equity and good conscience, or contrary to
    the best interests of the United States to deny the unpaid
    amount.

    Section 663--Providing Injured Members of the Armed Forces Information
                              Concerning Benefits

        This section would amend section 1651 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) to add additional requirements to the handbook required by
    that section.

                       TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

                                    OVERVIEW

        The committee remains profoundly concerned about the
    ability of the Defense Health Program to support operational
    requirements, accessibility, and quality of health care
    provided to service members, retirees, and family members.
    After over six years of conflict, the military health system
    appears to be unable to keep up with current demands, as
    evidenced by the continuing shift of care from the direct care
    system to the purchased care system. The committee has learned
    that in the past year, entire clinical Departments and graduate
    medical education programs of military treatment facilities
    have had to close for extended periods due to deploying staff.
    The committee is also concerned with the Department's ability
    to retain the exceptional military health care providers in the
    face of the strains placed upon the system. The committee urges
    the Department to ensure that the Defense Health Program is
    fully funded to meet the demands placed on the system.
        The committee is encouraged that the Department appears to
    have adopted a more responsible method of budgeting for the
    Defense Health Program by significantly reducing the mandated
    efficiencies levied on military treatment facilities. However,
    the committee remains troubled that the Department continues to
    pursue some form of converting military medical and dental
    positions to civilian medical and dental positions despite
    indications that such conversions have had an adverse effect on
    the military health system.
        The committee is disappointed that the Department has been
    slow to develop a thoughtful and comprehensive strategy to
    control the growing cost of health care. This year, the
    Department once again proposed their Sustain the Benefit plan,
    and cut [$1.2 billion] from the budget based on anticipated
    savings from the proposal. The committee rejects the
    philosophical underpinning of Sustain the Benefit that the only
    way to control cost growth is to dramatically raise fees to
    discourage beneficiaries from seeking care or even
    participating in TRICARE. As such, the committee proposes a
    series of demonstration projects for the purpose of
    fundamentally elevating the role of preventive care. The
    committee seeks to enhance the medical readiness of military
    forces and improve the health status of all beneficiaries. This
    may reduce the amount of care required by the beneficiary
    population, which the committee finds preferable to the
    Department's proposal to reduce both the amount of care
    available to the beneficiary population and the size of the
    beneficiary population itself. In addition, given the GAO
    report that found the Department is collecting more revenue in
    premiums than it is paying out in care, the committee believes
    that it is time for the Department to recalculate the TRICARE
    Reserve Select premium.
        The committee remains concerned about the care,
    rehabilitation, and support provided our wounded warriors. The
    committee will continue to provide vigilant oversight as the
    Department implements the requirements of the Wounded Warrior
    Act, contained in title 16 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

            Pain Care Initiative in Military Health Care Facilities

        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
    coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the
    Secretary of Health and Human Services, to develop a plan for a
    pain care initiative in all health care facilities of the
    uniformed services. The plan shall include elements to ensure
    that:
              (1) All active and retired members of the uniformed
            services and their dependents receiving treatment in
            health care facilities of the uniformed services are
            assessed for pain at the time of admission or initial
            treatment, and periodically thereafter, using a
            professionally recognized pain assessment tool or
            process; and
              (2) They receive appropriate pain care consistent
            with recognized means for assessment, diagnosis,
            treatment, and management of acute and chronic pain,
            including, in appropriate cases, access to specialty
            pain management services.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the
    feasibility of including pain care standards into any contract
    entered into by the Department of Defense for the provision of
    health care. These standards shall:
              (1) Be consistent with recognized means for
            assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and management of
            acute and chronic pain;
              (2) Provide medical and other health services through
            physicians and other practitioners appropriately
            credentialed or experienced in pain management;
              (3) Provide for referral of patients with chronic
            pain to specialists, and, in appropriate cases, to a
            comprehensive multidisciplinary pain management
            program;
              (4) Continue treatment for as long as treatment is
            required to maximize the quality of life and functional
            capacity of the patient; and
              (5) Permit physicians and other practitioners
            appropriately credentialed or experienced in pain
            management to make clinical decisions with respect to
            the need for and the extent and duration of pain care
            services.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
    report on the pain care initiative plan within nine months
    after the date of the enactment of this Act to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services.

                       Reserve Component Dental Readiness

        The committee remains concerned about the amount of time,
    effort, and funds that the military departments must expend to
    bring reserve component service members up to the appropriate
    level of dental readiness upon mobilization in order to deploy.
    The committee has become aware that the Army has developed, but
    not yet implemented, a program that would maintain all Army
    soldiers in the Selected Reserve at a deployable level of
    dental readiness independent of alert status and mobilization
    schedule. The committee believes that the Army Selected Reserve
    Dental Readiness System (ASDRS) is a practical approach to
    ensure that the Selected Reserve meets current oral health
    requirements and is ready to deploy in a timely manner.
    Further, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    review ASDRS in the context of all of the reserve components
    and provide recommendations for further action to the
    congressional defense committees within 90 days after the date
    of enactment of this Act.

                     Suicide Prevention in the Armed Forces

        With the continuing high operations tempo and the stresses
    facing service members and their families during deployment and
    at the home station, the committee is aware that the risk of
    suicide among service members is at an all-time high. The
    committee remains steadfast in support of all efforts towards
    suicide prevention within the armed forces and remains
    committed to ensuring that the men and women who serve receive
    the most advanced prevention, identification, and treatment
    programs available. The committee commends the Department and
    the military services for committing resources to institute
    numerous programs to provide suicide prevention support to
    service members and their families, but strongly encourages the
    Department and the military services to put even more focus on
    this critical issue. As such, the committee urges the Secretary
    of Defense to review and evaluate current prevention efforts
    across the armed forces and make necessary changes to increase
    suicide prevention within the Department. The committee also
    directs the Secretary to study the possibility of providing a
    referral for second opinion to potentially suicidal service
    members in a combat theater and to submit a report to the
    congressional defense committees within 180 days after the date
    of enactment of this Act. This shall include consideration of
    the feasibility of a telephonic evaluation of a service member,
    ensuring that they or others are not placed in additional risk
    by transiting to a different geographic location to obtain a
    second opinion.

                      Wounded Warriors as Health Providers

        The committee recognizes the improvements the Department
    has made to the care and management of wounded service members
    over the past year, the progress that still must be made, and
    the continued and growing need for health providers that can
    easily relate to wounded service members. The committee
    believes that many wounded service members who display the
    appropriate aptitude could be retrained by the military to
    become military health professionals. The committee directs the
    Secretary of Defense to study the feasibility of identifying
    and retraining wounded service members as military health
    professionals and submit a report with the findings of the
    study to the congressional defense committees within 180 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                        Subtitle A--Health Care Matters

    Section 701--One-Year Extension of Prohibition on Increases in Certain
            Health Care Costs for Members of the Uniformed Services

        This section would extend the prohibition established by
    the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) on the Department of Defense
    from increasing the premium and copayment for TRICARE Prime,
    the charge for inpatient care for TRICARE Standard, and the
    premium for TRICARE Standard for members of the Selected
    Reserve during the period from October 1, 2008, to September
    30, 2009. The committee shares the Department's concern about
    the rise in the cost of military health care and the potential
    for the escalating cost to have a negative impact on the
    ability of the Department to sustain the benefit over the long-
    term. However, the committee believes that changes to the
    military health care benefit require careful and deliberate
    consideration with a full accounting of the impact. The
    committee makes these recommendations to allow for a period of
    time to shape a more balanced approach to address the cost of
    military health care.

      Section 702--Temporary Prohibition on Increase in Copayments under
              Retail Pharmacy System of Pharmacy Benefits Program

        This section would limit the cost-sharing requirements for
    drugs provided through the TRICARE retail pharmacy program to
    amounts not more than $3 for generic drugs, $9 for formulary
    drugs, and $22 for non-formulary drugs. The cost-sharing
    schedules established by this section would end September 30,
    2009.

     Section 703--Prohibition on Conversion of Military Medical and Dental
               Positions to Civilian Medical and Dental Positions

        This section would indefinitely extend the prohibition on
    conversions of military medical and dental positions to
    civilian medical and dental positions by a secretary of a
    military department by removing the end date of section 721 of
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181).

        Section 704--Chiropractic Health Care for Members on Active Duty

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    provide chiropractic services and benefits as a permanent part
    of the Defense Health Program, including the TRICARE program,
    for all active duty service members.

    Section 705--Requirement to Recalculate TRICARE Reserve Select Premiums
                           Based on Actual Cost Data

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    recalculate the monthly amount of the premium for TRICARE
    Standard coverage. The committee notes the findings of the
    Government Accountability Office report that found the
    Department of Defense was collecting more from beneficiaries
    than it was paying out in health care costs. The committee
    believes that the report's finding suggests that beneficiaries
    may be overpaying for their coverage.

    Section 706--Program for Health Care Delivery at Military Installations
                               Projected to Grow

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    develop a plan to establish a program to build cooperative
    health care arrangements and agreements between military
    installations projected to grow and local and regional non-
    military health care systems. The committee notes the success
    achieved at Fort Drum, New York, of the pilot program
    established by the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375) and
    extended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to test such arrangements and
    agreements. Consequently, the committee believes that the pilot
    program should be institutionalized to encourage similar
    arrangements at installations that are projected to grow due to
    recommendations of the Defense Base Realignment and Closure
    Commission or Grow the Force initiatives but lack the current
    or planned medical treatment capacity to satisfy the proposed
    increase in military personnel at the installation.

        Section 707--Guidelines for Combined Federal Medical Facilities

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the
    Secretary of Veterans Affairs to complete a written agreement
    on patient priority categories, budgeting, staffing,
    construction, and physical plant management before a facility
    could be designated a combined federal medical facility of the
    Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
    The committee notes ongoing efforts at the Captain James A.
    Lovell Federal Health Care Center in North Chicago, Illinois,
    and encourages the Department of Defense and the Department of
    Veterans Affairs to consider similar facilities at other
    geographic locations. Specifically, the committee believes that
    a combined federal medical facility, or at least a shared
    medical building or campus, should be considered on Guam given
    the planned move of forces to that island from Okinawa, Japan.
    The committee also believes there is opportunity for a combined
    federal medical facility or a shared medical building in Corpus
    Christi, Texas.

                          Subtitle B--Preventive Care

     Section 711--Waiver of Copayments for Preventive Services for Certain
                             TRICARE Beneficiaries

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    waive all cost shares for TRICARE beneficiaries who currently
    pay for preventive services, with the exception of Medicare-
    eligible beneficiaries, who would be eligible to receive a
    rebate for all preventive services.

       Section 712--Military Health Risk Management Demonstration Project

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    implement a demonstration project designed to reward healthy
    behaviors on the part of TRICARE Prime enrollees. The
    demonstration project would be carried out over a period of
    three years in at least three geographic areas within the
    United States as determined by the Secretary. Non-Medicare
    eligible retirees and their dependents enrolled in TRICARE
    Prime residing in the demonstration project would be enrolled
    in the demonstration which would consist of a self-reported
    health risk assessment and physiological and biometric
    measures, such as blood pressure, glucose level, lipids and
    nicotine use. Based on the results of the health risk
    assessment and physiological and biometric measures, enrollees
    would be offered programs designed to improve or maintain their
    health status. The Secretary would be authorized, for the
    purpose of this demonstration, to offer monetary and non-
    monetary incentives to enrollees to encourage participation in
    the demonstration. The Secretary would be required to submit an
    annual report on the effectiveness of the demonstration
    program.

              Section 713--Smoking Cessation Program under TRICARE

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish a smoking cessation program to be made available to
    all eligible beneficiaries under the TRICARE program, with the
    exception of Medicare-eligible beneficiaries, who would be
    eligible to receive a rebate for all smoking cessation
    services. The program would include the availability of a
    pharmaceutical used for smoking cessation by prescription at no
    cost, access to a toll-free quit line that is available 24
    hours a day 7 days a week, and access to printed and web-based
    tobacco cessation materials.

     Section 714--Availability of Allowance to Assist Members of the Armed
      Forces and their Dependents Procure Preventive Health Care Services

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    conduct a demonstration project designed to evaluate the
    efficacy of providing a preventive health allowance to improve
    the use of preventive health services by active duty service
    members and their families. The demonstration program would pay
    individual service members (single status) $500 and military
    families (active duty member and dependents) $1000 per year if
    they fulfill all of the preventive health requirements set
    forth by the Secretary. The demonstration project would also
    require active duty service members to meet their service's
    medical and dental readiness requirements to be eligible.

                      Subtitle C--Wounded Warrior Matters

    Section 721--Center of Excellence in Prevention, Diagnosis, Mitigation,
       Treatment, and Rehabilitation of Hearing Loss and Auditory System
                                    Injuries

        This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish a center of excellence in the prevention, diagnosis,
    mitigation, treatment, and rehabilitation of hearing loss and
    auditory system injuries. This provision would ensure
    collaboration to the maximum extent practicable with the
    Department of Veterans Affairs and other appropriate public and
    private entities.
        The committee is concerned that hearing difficulties,
    central auditory disorders, balance problems, and tinnitus are
    occurring at alarming rates in service members from military
    service associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and
    Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). One report of a study of OIF
    and OEF returning veterans who had been exposed to blast shows
    more than 50 percent had significant hearing loss, 49 percent
    reported tinnitus, 32 percent experienced tympanic membrane
    perforation, 26 percent indicated ear pain, and 15 percent
    complained of dizziness. A 2008 analysis of post-deployment
    health assessments reveals that 75 percent of deployed service
    members report exposure to noise. The committee notes the
    mounting evidence that audiologic and otologic disorders are
    often associated with traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic
    stress disorder.
        The committee believes the Department of the Army Hearing
    Program is a step in the right direction to address hearing
    health and soldier readiness. This program supports service
    members through hearing readiness, clinical services,
    operational hearing services (such as in-theater communication,
    protection, and noise control/monitoring systems), and provides
    garrison hearing conservation services. The committee
    encourages the Department of the Army to continue to dedicate
    sufficient resources to support the program.
        Considering the vast operational, health, and quality of
    life issues associated with exposure to high noise levels and
    blasts the committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
    needs to focus and accelerate its efforts to address the
    hearing needs of service members.

    Section 722--Clarification to Center of Excellence Relating to Military
                                  Eye Injuries

        This section would remove the phrase ``in combat'' from
    section 1623(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) to match sections 1621
    and 1623 of the same Act.

              Section 723--National Casualty Care Research Center

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    designate a National Casualty Care Research Center at the Army
    Medical Research and Material Command. The purpose of the
    center would be to establish additional linkages between
    military and civilian casualty research. The center would be
    required to provide public-private partnership for funding
    studies on combat injury, integrate military and civilian
    research to improve care, and ensure that data from both the
    Joint Theater Trauma Registry and National Trauma Bank are used
    to establish research priorities.

     Section 724--Peer-Reviewed Research Program on Extremity War Injuries

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish a competitive, peer-reviewed research program within
    the Defense Health Program for the purpose of saving injured
    extremities, avoiding amputations, and preserving and restoring
    the function of injured extremities.

     Section 725--Review of Policies and Processes Related to the Delivery
                 of Mail to Wounded Members of the Armed Forces

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    review the policies and processes related to the delivery of
    letters, packages, messages, and other communications that are
    intended as measures of support and are addressed generally to
    wounded and injured members of the armed forces in military
    medical treatment facilities and other locations where members
    of the armed forces are treated and rehabilitated.

                           Subtitle D--Other Matters

     Section 731--Report on Stipend for Members of Reserve Components for
                       Health Care for Certain Dependents

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report on the extent to which the Secretary has
    exercised the authority provided in section 704 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181).

       Section 732--Report on Providing the Extended Health Care Option
              Program to Autistic Dependents of Military Retirees

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    prepare a report that contains a plan for including autistic
    dependents of military retirees in the Extended Health Care
    Option program under the TRICARE program.

        Section 733--Sense of Congress Regarding Autism Therapy Services

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    conduct a study on autistic therapy services in the Department
    of Defense to include whether those services would be better
    managed under the TRICARE program.

      TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
                                    MATTERS

                                    OVERVIEW

        The committee remains deeply concerned with the methods
    used by the Department of Defense to determine requirements, to
    allocate resources, and to acquire goods and services to
    produce needed capabilities for the warfighter in ways that are
    timely and affordable. Numerous analyses, including those of
    this committee, have found significant shortcomings in the
    Department's acquisition process. The causes for these
    difficulties are numerous, and many lie outside the scope of
    the acquisition process and outside the purview of acquisition
    officials. There are, however, significant structural problems
    in the acquisition process itself that affect major defense
    acquisition programs and also affect the fast growing area of
    contracting for services. The committee has worked, with
    growing emphasis in recent years, to address these issues,
    including the enactment of the Acquisition Improvement and
    Accountability Act of 2007 as part of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
    The committee continues to consider the weaknesses in the
    acquisition process, including cost increases, schedule delays,
    and breaches of integrity, to be serious impediments to the
    Department's ability to continue to safeguard national
    security.
        The committee notes that at least some of the
    responsibility for failures in the acquisition process may be
    found in a lack of capacity in the acquisition workforce and in
    ambiguous guidelines about the appropriate government role in
    providing oversight to acquisition programs. Increasingly, the
    government has relied upon its prime contractors to provide the
    bulk, if not the entirety, of the systems engineering expertise
    and significant management direction for major programs. It is
    not clear, however, that industry is well suited to undertake
    these functions. The Department's experience with lead system
    integrators provides a strong indication that the shortage of
    such capabilities within the government is at least equaled by
    a similar deficit in industry. The committee believes that the
    government must build management capabilities equal to the
    complexity of modern major defense acquisition programs in
    order to improve performance on these programs.
        The committee has also observed the same management
    difficulty in the area of service contracting, which now
    represents the majority of the Department's acquisition budget.
    While contracting for services enables the Department to reduce
    its workforce or avoid developing an organic workforce for a
    contracted task, it significantly increases the government
    capacity required for contract negotiation, contract
    administration, and contract oversight. There are substantial
    limitations to hiring contractors to manage other contractors,
    since it may be difficult to identify personal conflicts of
    interest and it is inappropriate to allow a contractor to make
    decisions that are inherently governmental in nature. The
    question of what internal capabilities to develop and maintain
    and what capabilities to acquire, is a fundamental matter
    confronted by both governmental and commercial enterprises. In
    all cases, such decisions are critical to the performance of
    the organization's mission. Therefore, this title builds on the
    committee's prior work to develop the military acquisition
    workforce necessary to provide management oversight in the area
    of contingency contracting and to ensure the performance of
    inherently governmental acquisition functions by government
    personnel.
        The committee also remains concerned about the defense
    industrial base and matters of industrial security. The
    committee notes that foreign suppliers continue to take on
    increasingly important roles in major defense acquisition
    programs. The committee remains committed to processes which
    allow for and encourage the participation of foreign suppliers
    on a fair, competitive basis, while continuing to ensure that
    critical capabilities and critical materials are maintained
    within the defense industrial base. The committee received
    compelling testimony about the difficulties the Department has
    experienced in ensuring the protection of classified
    information maintained at the facilities of defense
    contractors. The committee notes that much of the most critical
    information relating to major weapons systems resides in the
    possession of defense contractors, and that protection of this
    information must be one of the Department's highest priorities.
    The Government Accountability Office, however, has identified
    the effective protection of technologies critical to U.S.
    national security interests as a government-wide high risk
    area. The committee has recommended codification of critical
    aspects of the Department's industrial security program in
    title 10, United States Code, as part of this title and has
    authorized additional resources for the program elsewhere in
    this Act.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                             Acquisition Workforce

        The committee has long grappled with the challenges
    inherent in the Department of Defense acquisition system. Most
    of the attention has been focused on attempts to improve the
    acquisition process and structure rather than the acquisition
    workforce. The Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act
    (DAWIA), which was included in the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510),
    was the first major attempt to improve the quality and
    professionalism of the defense acquisition workforce. Since the
    passage of DAWIA, measures have been taken to reduce the size
    of the acquisition workforce in order to reap the benefits of
    improvements in training and efficiency. The Office of
    Personnel Management estimates that the total federal civilian
    workforce declined by 13 percent between 1990 and 2004. At the
    same time, reliance on contractors has increased. The committee
    is aware that the government acquisition workforce may have
    been downsized too much since many of the recent acquisition
    problems can be traced back to poor oversight, poor decision
    making, and poor implementation of acquisition laws and
    regulations. This finding has been highlighted in numerous
    reports by the Government Accountability Office, as well as the
    January 2007, final report of the Acquisition Advisory Panel
    and the October 2007, final report of the Commission on Army
    Acquisition and Program Management in Expeditionary Operations.
        Congress acknowledged the need for enhancements to the
    acquisition workforce with the enactment of section 852 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181), which establishes a designated acquisition fund
    to hire, retain, and train acquisition personnel. The committee
    notes that more attention needs to be paid to the people in the
    acquisition field by providing better training and career
    paths, recognizing them as professionals, and rewarding them
    for the important and critical functions they perform. The
    committee expects that the acquisition fund will enable the
    Department to invest in its workforce, ensuring that the
    Department has the people with the right skills to effectively
    manage and oversee the acquisition of goods and services. The
    taxpayer and the warfighter will benefit greatly from this
    effort.

                          Defense Industrial Security

        The committee notes that the globalization of the defense
    industry and the increase in foreign investment in defense
    firms is creating new challenges for the Department of
    Defense's industrial security program. The committee further
    notes that the bulk of the classified information and
    technology critical to national security is maintained in
    facilities operated by the Department's contractors. The
    committee believes that additional authority is required, and
    has included provisions in this title adding a new subchapter
    to title 10, United States Code, to provide statutory authority
    for industrial security regulations which currently derive
    their authority from an executive order. Further, this
    subchapter would extend certain best practices relating to
    security to all defense contractors working on classified
    contracts and increase congressional oversight of these issues.
    To assist the Department in implanting this statutory
    framework, the committee has recommended authorization of an
    additional $20.0 million for the Defense Security Services'
    industrial security program in title III of this Act.

         Implementation of Changes to Protections for Specialty Metals

        The committee notes that sections 804 and 884 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181), made significant changes to the requirements of
    section 2533b, title 10, United States Code, to procure
    strategic materials critical to national security from domestic
    sources. As a result, on January 29, 2008, the Department of
    Defense issued a memorandum entitled, ``Class Deviation--
    Implementation of New Specialty Metals Restrictions''
    (henceforth referred to as ``class deviation'') to implement
    these statutory changes. While the class deviation was
    generally consistent with congressional intent, the committee
    expects the Director, Defense Procurement, Acquisition Policy,
    and Strategic Sourcing to thoroughly review the following
    issues and make necessary changes prior to finalizing the
    Department's policy and regulations in this area.
        The committee is concerned about the way that the class
    deviation defines commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) subassemblies
    and components. The definition in the class deviation states,
    ``A COTS item is considered to be `offered without
    modification' if it is not modified prior to contractual
    acceptance by the next higher tier in the supply chain.'' The
    committee believes this definition could be misinterpreted
    without further clarification by the Department. First, the
    committee believes that the class deviation should clearly
    state that the exception for COTS items and components
    generally applies to items incorporated in non-commercial end
    items. Second, the committee supports the interpretation in the
    class deviation that, ``If two or more COTS items are combined
    in such a way that the resultant item is not a COTS item, only
    the specialty metals involved in joining the COTS items
    together are subject to the restrictions,'' only if the changes
    made to the COTS item are incidental to installation, joining,
    or incorporation into the non-commercial end item. The
    committee believes that if a contractor is using COTS items
    with more substantial modifications, it must do so either using
    the new de minimis exception or the streamlined compliance for
    commercial derivative military articles.
        Additionally, the committee believes the definition of the
    term ``produced'' in the class deviation requires
    clarification. The committee's intent in adding the term
    ``produced'' was to allow for manufacturing processes other
    than the traditional melting process, and it is intended to
    refer to melting or a process that is the equivalent of
    melting. The committee recommends that the Department strike
    the definition of the term ``produced'' or, at a minimum,
    clarify that it does not refer to secondary finishing processes
    such as quenching or tempering.
        Further, while the committee agrees that the certifications
    required by the contractor to receive relief under the de
    minimis and commercial derivative military article exceptions
    should be made in ``good faith'' as described in the class
    deviation, the committee also urges the Department to make
    clear that compliance remains subject to all relevant
    contractual requirements, including potential audit. The
    committee further recommends that the class deviation be
    revised to state that the ``de minimis exception does not apply
    to high performance magnets containing specialty metal,''
    placing the focus on the melted magnet, rather than the
    individual elements combined to produce the magnet.
        Moreover, the class deviation lists a number of exceptions
    to the requirements of section 2533b, title 10, United States
    Code, including ``(a)(2) Acquisitions outside the United States
    in support of combat operations,'' and ``(a)(3) Acquisitions in
    support of contingency operations.'' The committee notes that
    it would be inconsistent with existing statute to imply that
    acquisitions in support of contingency operations are exempt,
    whether or not those acquisitions take place outside the United
    States. Therefore, the committee recommends that the Director
    revise these exceptions to state, ``Acquisitions outside the
    United States in support of combat operations or in support of
    contingency operations,'' consistent with subsection (c)(1) of
    the statute.
        Finally, the committee notes that the national security
    waiver provided in subsection (k) of section 2533b of title 10,
    United States Code, was designed for use when items of critical
    importance to national security are found to contain non-
    compliant specialty metals. The committee intends that the
    authority be used as a last resort and only in the most
    compelling cases. Use of the authority also obligates the
    Department to identify and correct the cause of the non-
    compliance, including potential sanctions against a contractor
    who knowingly supplies non-compliant materials. The committee
    expects that the Department will exercise this national
    security waiver authority on an infrequent, case-by-case basis.

              Implementation of Gansler Commission Recommendations

        The committee notes that the report of the Commission on
    Army Acquisition and Program Management in Expeditionary
    Operations, commonly known as the Gansler Commission, called
    for urgent reform in the Army's approach to contracting,
    especially contingency contracting, and recommended a
    significant cultural shift in how the Army views acquisition.
    The committee believes that following through on this
    recommendation will require strong commitment from the
    leadership of the Department of the Army and the Department of
    Defense. The commission's report placed significant emphasis on
    restoring positions for general officers in the acquisition
    corps and reestablishing the balance between military and
    civilian contracting personnel. The committee strongly endorses
    the majority of the recommendations of the Gansler Commission
    and has addressed the requirement for an attractive military
    career path for the acquisition corps, which includes the rank
    of general officer in section 813 of this Act. The committee
    has also addressed other Gansler Commission recommendations by
    providing expedited hiring authority to the Department of
    Defense in section 811, and authority to lift the cap on
    premium pay for federal employees in section 1101 of this Act.
    In addition the committee urges the Department to reexamine the
    establishment of a contingency contracting corps as part of its
    joint policy on contingency contracting.

                 Implementation of Revolving Door Requirements

        The committee notes that section 847 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) added new requirements for senior Department of Defense
    officials seeking employment with defense contractors. The
    section requires such officials to obtain a written opinion
    from the appropriate government ethics officer on post-
    employment restrictions that may apply to the official's
    employment. The section requires defense contractors hiring
    former Department of Defense officials to confirm that the
    written ethics opinion has been obtained and requires the
    Department of Defense to retain these written ethics opinions
    for not less than five years.
        The committee notes that section 847 deals with post-
    employment restrictions previously imposed by law and applies
    to senior Department of Defense officials previously covered by
    these restrictions. The committee believes that section 847
    will ensure that the benefits of the written ethics opinion
    clarifying post-employment restrictions are shared by both
    former defense officials and defense contractors. The committee
    expects the Department of Defense, in implementing this
    section, to minimize the administrative burden of this
    requirement while facilitating the ability of senior defense
    officials to quickly obtain written ethics opinions.

                            Increase in Bid Protests

        The committee is concerned that the submission of a bid
    protest is becoming pro forma in the event that a prospective
    contractor is rejected from the competitive range or the award
    of a contract is made to another vendor, and that the number of
    frivolous bid protests submitted to the Government
    Accountability Office may be increasing. While the committee
    remains committed to the right of prospective contractors to
    have an independent forum to adjudicate legitimate concerns
    about improprieties and errors during the bid and proposal
    evaluation process, the committee discourages the use of bid
    protests as a stalling or punitive tactic.
        The committee directs the Comptroller General to conduct a
    review of bid protests filed with the Government Accountability
    Office during the last five years, which were associated with
    awards made by the Department of Defense. The review shall
    assess the extent to which bid protests may be increasing, the
    extent to which frivolous and improper protests are increasing,
    and the causes of any increase identified. Further, the
    committee directs the Comptroller General to provide
    recommendations regarding actions that could be taken by
    Congress or by the executive branch to disincentivize any
    frivolous or improper bid protests on the part of industry.
    Such recommendations shall discuss the consequences of
    authorizing the Government Accountability Office to dismiss
    protests for a wider range of causes, the imposition of fines
    or other sanctions for the submission of frivolous protests, or
    the inclusion of a vendor's protest track record in all past
    performance evaluations conducted in competitive source
    selections. Finally, the committee directs the Comptroller
    General to submit a report on his review, including his
    recommendations, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
    the House Committee on Armed Services within 180 days after the
    date of enactment of this Act.

                  Iraqi Recipients of Special Immigrant Visas

        In section 1059 of the National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), Congress gave the
    President the ability to grant a limited number of special
    immigrant visas to Iraqis who worked for U.S. forces in the
    Republic of Iraq as translators and who might face death if
    they remained in Iraq. This authority was subsequently expanded
    and broadened in section 1244 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181),
    allowing for the issuance of special immigrant visas to more
    Iraqis who worked for coalition forces in Iraq in a variety of
    roles.
        The committee believes that the Iraqi recipients of the
    special immigrant visas possess skills, particularly fluency in
    Arabic and knowledge of the people and culture of Iraq, which
    could be useful while the United States is involved in Iraq.
    Further, the committee notes that many of the recipients of the
    special immigrant visas worked on behalf of the mission of the
    coalition forces for years and often at great risk to
    themselves or their families, and that many Iraqi citizens who
    worked for or with the coalition forces have been threatened or
    killed in Iraq. The committee therefore urges the Secretary of
    Defense to find ways of accessing these recipients of special
    immigrant visas, including utilizing such authorities he may
    have to hire them directly where appropriate and creating
    incentives for private sector contractors to hire them for
    contracts related to Operation Iraqi Freedom when those
    contracts require knowledge of Arabic and Iraq. The committee
    directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report within 90
    days after the date of enactment of this Act to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services on the status of efforts to hire Iraqi recipients of
    special immigrant visas and the status of efforts to encourage
    contractors to hire Iraqi recipients of special immigrant
    visas, and any changes in law that the Secretary considers
    necessary to improve efforts to access the skills of these
    persons.

       Memorandum of Understanding on Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan

        The committee notes that section 861 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181), requires the Department of Defense, the Department of
    State, and the United States Agency for International
    Development to enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU),
    by July 1, 2008, on contracting in the Republic of Iraq and the
    Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The committee is aware that
    there are currently four separate control centers in Iraq with
    responsibility for tracking and coordinating contractor
    movements, one operated by the Department of State and three
    operated by the Department of Defense. These overlapping
    contractor movement control centers illustrate the challenge of
    dealing with more than 150,000 contractor personnel working for
    multiple organizations across three agencies. The committee
    expects the MOU to address significant concerns about a lack of
    coordination in contracting, and a corresponding lack of
    accountability, by ensuring that each agency is able to clearly
    identify its roles and responsibilities in the contracting
    process. The committee also expects that the MOU will establish
    mechanisms for agencies to share information and coordinate
    shared contracting responsibilities.
        The committee notes that the MOU signed between the
    Department of Defense and the Department of State on private
    security contractors in December 2007, represents a step
    forward in coordination between the two departments. However,
    the MOU required by section 861 will cover significantly more
    contracts and far more contractor personnel than the MOU
    currently in place. Most critically, the new MOU applies to all
    contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan, not just those involving
    private security contractors. The committee expects that the
    new MOU will be significantly more comprehensive as a result.
        The committee commends the Department of Defense for the
    memorandum issued by the Secretary of Defense on March 10,
    2008, providing guidance on the application of the Uniform Code
    of Military Justice to contractor personnel. The memorandum
    effectively implements section 552 of the John Warner National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
    364). The committee notes that the new MOU is required to
    address the responsibility of each signatory agency in ensuring
    that U.S. laws are enforced for contractor personnel during
    overseas operations.

                   Preservation of the Tool and Die Industry

        The committee believes that a robust tool and die industry
    is a fundamental building block for manufacturing that requires
    tools to make parts, measure them, and assemble them into
    finished products. The committee further notes that the tool
    and die industry makes products that range in complexity.
    Without tooling, the foundation of manufacturing disappears and
    the United States' ability to develop new products and build
    them becomes severely compromised. Foreign competition and the
    resulting contraction in the U.S. tooling industry has
    displaced high-skilled workers and forced the closure of nearly
    half of the domestic tool shops. The committee is concerned
    that the ability to develop new defense products and
    manufacture them in the near future may be limited by the
    capacity of the domestic tool and die industry.
        Consequently, the committee encourages the Secretary of
    Defense to develop a roadmap to preserve critical capabilities
    within the tool and die industry necessary for the manufacture
    of defense components. The Secretary should consider the
    following elements for such a roadmap: identifying and
    assisting domestic companies that produce dies and molds;
    incentivizing companies to utilize domestic engineering,
    machining and manufacturing resources for producing Department
    of Defense components and parts; working with automotive tool
    shops through collaboration with other elements of the defense
    supply chain, such as technology fairs or demonstrations; and
    investing in additional research and development for critical
    defense technologies, such as the techniques for forming and
    welding advanced light-weight materials.

                          Service Contractor Inventory

        Section 807 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), requires an annual
    inventory of activities performed pursuant to contracts for
    services for, or on behalf of, the Department of Defense (DOD).
    The committee understands that the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics has been tasked with
    the responsibility for developing this service contracting
    inventory and intends to undertake a pilot survey with
    professional services contracts. The committee notes that two
    similar reporting requirements were included in previous
    legislation, including section 343 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), and
    section 345 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107). The committee notes,
    however, that the inventory mandated by section 807 is intended
    to be of much broader scope than those that were previously
    performed, should cover all service contracts, and should not
    be limited to simply capturing data from the Federal
    Procurement Data System.
        The committee notes that the Department of the Army has
    undertaken an extensive manpower and costing inventory of all
    Army service contractors. In September 2002, the Army's
    inventory was designated as the DOD pilot to test manpower and
    cost reporting by the Business Initiatives Council (BIC). The
    BIC expected the Army's pilot to provide much better visibility
    to the government on the contractor work force. The Army
    inventory captures data not only on contracting organizations,
    but the components administering the contract as well as the
    funding source for the contract and the number of full time
    contractor equivalent employees. The committee recommends that
    the Army inventory be used as a model for implementation of
    section 807.
        The service contracting inventory also is intended to be
    used as a tool to allow commanders to consider in-sourcing
    contracts, particularly of functions that are inherently
    governmental or are considered to be closely associated with
    inherently governmental functions. The in-sourcing of contracts
    was authorized under section 324 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
    The committee, however, encourages commanders to undertake in-
    sourcing activities whenever appropriate and not rely solely
    upon the service contractor inventory to determine which
    functions may be in-sourced.

                            Small Business Programs

        The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
    has experienced a decline in performance in fulfilling small
    business contracting goals. Data for fiscal year 2006 indicates
    that the Department saw a decline in total awards of prime
    contracts to small business as well as a decline in the
    percentage of awards made to small businesses. In fiscal year
    2006, the Department also fell short of its goal for woman-
    owned small businesses, historically underutilized business
    zone small businesses, and for service disabled veteran owned
    small businesses (SDVOSB). The committee strongly supports the
    Department's goal of awarding three percent of total funds to
    SDVOSBs. However, the most recent data indicates that the
    Department awarded less than one percent of total funds to
    SDVOSBs. While the committee notes that awards in 2006 were
    substantially higher than awards to SDVOSBs in 2005, the
    committee continues to urge the Department to exercise all
    reasonable and appropriate options to increase awards to
    SDVOSBs in the current fiscal year and into the future. The
    committee also urges the Department to ensure the accuracy of
    the information used to compile statistics on awards made to
    small business.

             Utilization of Local Businesses for Contracts on Guam

        The committee is aware that local businesses on Guam have
    the potential to make substantial contributions to a wide range
    of contracts required to build, operate, and maintain the
    numerous Department of Defense facilities currently existing on
    Guam and those currently in planning or under construction. The
    committee is also aware that the island of Guam in its entirety
    qualifies as a historically underutilized business zone
    (HUBZone). Businesses on Guam qualify to participate in the
    HUBZone program if they are small businesses, owned and
    controlled by U.S. citizens, with a principal office on Guam,
    and with 35 percent of their employees living in a HUBZone. The
    committee urges the Guam Joint Program Office (JPO) to work
    with the Department of Defense's Office of Small Business
    Programs to ensure that businesses on Guam are fully aware of
    the HUBZone program and the process for qualifying to
    participate in the program. The committee further urges the
    Guam JPO to utilize appropriate HUBZone goals as part of
    detailed small business subcontracting plans for eligible
    contracts on Guam. The committee notes that qualified HUBZone
    businesses qualify for special consideration as prime
    contractors and urges the Guam JPO to utilize HUBZone
    preferences, including HUBZone set-asides, for prime contracts
    where appropriate. The committee also notes that the
    Procurement Technical Assistance Program (PTAP) could provide
    valuable assistance to businesses on Guam and urges the Guam
    JPO to explore ways for providing access to PTAP to businesses
    on Guam. The committee expects that the Guam JPO will keep the
    committee informed on progress made in utilizing the HUBZone
    and PTAP programs on Guam.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                 Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

     Section 801--Review of Impact of Illegal Subsidies on Acquisition of
                                 KC-45 Aircraft

        This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force,
    within 10 days after a ruling by the World Trade Organization
    that the United States, the European Union, or both have
    provided an illegal subsidy to a manufacturer of large
    commercial aircraft, to begin a review on the impact of the
    illegal subsidy on the source selection for the KC-45 aerial
    refueling aircraft program. This section would require that the
    review include an opportunity for public comment on the effect
    of illegal subsidies on the program, consultation with experts
    within the federal government on the effect of illegal
    subsidies, and consultation with each of the offerors in the
    source selection process. This section would require that the
    review be completed within 90 days of a final ruling by the
    World Trade Organization on all illegal subsidy cases involving
    large commercial aircraft that are pending as of the date of
    enactment of this Act. This section would further require the
    Secretary of the Air Force to determine whether the illegal
    subsidy had a material impact on the source selection process
    sufficient to bring its fairness into question, and upon making
    such a determination, to take such measures as are necessary
    and appropriate to ensure that the effect of the illegal
    subsidy is removed and the source selection process is fair to
    all offerors. This section would define an illegal subsidy as a
    violation of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
    Measures of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on
    Tariffs and Trade and would include subsidies provided by any
    political subdivision of the United States or any member
    government, subcentral government, or combination of member
    governments of the European Union.

        Section 802--Assessment of Urgent Operational Needs Fulfillment

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    commission a study by a federally funded research and
    development center to assess the effectiveness of the urgent
    operational need requirements generation processes of the
    Department of Defense and the acquisition processes used to
    fulfill such requirements. Within 180 days after the date of
    enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to
    the congressional defense committees the written report
    documenting the key findings and recommendations of the study.

      Section 803--Preservation of Tooling for Major Defense Acquisition
                                    Programs

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    issue guidance requiring that unique tooling associated with
    the production of hardware for a major defense acquisition
    program be preserved and stored through the end of the service
    life of the related weapons system. This section would allow
    the Secretary to waive this requirement in the interest of
    national security and with notice to the congressional defense
    committees.

     Section 804--Prohibition on Procurement from Beneficiaries of Foreign
                                   Subsidies

        This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
    entering into a contract with a foreign person, including a
    joint venture, cooperative organization, partnership, or
    contracting team, who has received a subsidy from the
    government of a foreign country that is a member of the World
    Trade Organization (WTO), if the United States has requested a
    consultation with that foreign country on the basis that the
    subsidy is prohibited under the Agreement on Subsidies and
    Countervailing Measures. This restriction would not apply to
    any major defense acquisition program that has already received
    milestone B approval. This section would also specify that the
    prohibition on procurement would be lifted after the requested
    consultation is resolved. This section would further allow the
    President to waive the requirement on the basis that doing so
    is necessary to address a significant and imminent threat to
    national security.

      Section 805--Domestic Industrial Base Considerations during Source
                                   Selection

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    issue regulations, within 120 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act, to allow a source selection authority to consider
    impacts on the domestic industrial base during source selection
    for a major defense acquisition program. This section would
    authorize defense acquisition officials to impose penalties on
    a contractor who misleads the government regarding potential
    domestic industrial base impacts. This section would require
    the Secretary to report to the congressional defense committees
    if a domestic industrial base evaluation factor is not utilized
    in a competition for a major defense acquisition program.

               Section 806--Commercial Software Reuse Preference

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    ensure contracting officials identify and evaluate, at all
    stages of the acquisition process, opportunities for the use of
    commercial computer software and, if practicable, use such
    software instead of developing new software. This section would
    also require the Secretary to review and revise defense
    regulations to clarify that the existing preference for
    commercial items in the acquisition process includes a
    preference for commercial computer software.

      Section 807--Comprehensive Proposal Analysis Required During Source
                                   Selection

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within
    120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to issue
    regulations regarding the evaluation of a proposal for a major
    defense acquisition program for which a significant proportion
    of the activities will be performed outside the United States.
    Such regulations would require the potential contractor, or
    subcontractor, to identify costs not borne by the contractor as
    a result of the activities performed outside the United States,
    such as foreign government-borne health care and workers
    compensation. This section would further require a Department
    of Defense contracting officer to consider such costs in
    evaluating any contractor proposal for a cost-based contract,
    and to certify that there are no reasonable grounds to believe
    that the final assessed price excludes any cost that other
    potential contractors could not also elect to exclude.

    Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
                                and Limitations

         Section 811--Acquisition Workforce Expedited Hiring Authority

        This section would amend section 1705 of title 10, United
    States Code, to provide the Secretary of Defense with temporary
    expedited hiring authorities for acquisition positions. The
    section would allow the Secretary, in conformance with sections
    3304, 5333, and 5753 of title 5, United States Code, to
    designate acquisition positions as shortage category positions
    and to recruit, appoint, and establish special pay criteria for
    qualified individuals in such positions. The authority would
    expire on September 30, 2012.

      Section 812--Definition of System for Defense Acquisition Challenge
                                    Program

        This section would amend section 2539b of title 10, United
    States Code, to define the term `system' to clarify that the
    term includes both functional systems, such as an avionics or
    fuel system, and also a major system as defined in section 2302
    of title 10, United States Code.

    Section 813--Career Path and Other Requirements for Military Personnel
                            in the Acquisition Field

        This section would add a new section 1722a to title 10,
    United States Code. This section would require the secretaries
    of the military departments, with respect to the military
    departments, and the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, with respect to the
    Office of the Secretary of Defense, the unified combatant
    commands, the defense agencies, and the defense field
    activities to establish policies and issue guidance to ensure
    the proper development, assignment, and employment of military
    personnel in the acquisition field. This section would require
    the policies established and the guidance issued to ensure a
    career path in the acquisition field that attracts the highest
    quality officers and enlisted personnel, a number of command
    positions and senior non-commissioned officer positions
    sufficient to ensure that military personnel have opportunities
    for promotion and advancement in the acquisition field, and a
    number of qualified, trained military personnel in the
    acquisition field sufficient to support requirements for
    military personnel in contingency contracting.
        This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish a minimum number of general officer billets reserved
    for acquisition in each of the military departments and within
    the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the unified combatant
    commands, the defense agencies, and the defense field
    activities, including billets reserved for command of
    contracting organizations. This section would require each
    secretary of a military department to submit an annual report
    to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
    and Logistics on the implementation of this section. This
    section would also require that consideration of general and
    flag officer billets for acquisition be included in the
    strategic plan relating to general and flag officers required
    by section 543 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).

           Section 814--Technical Data Rights for Non-FAR Agreements

        This section would add a new section 2320a to title 10,
    United States Code. This section would require the Secretary of
    Defense to issue policy guidance regarding the negotiation and
    acquisition of technical data rights for agreements that are
    not subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR),
    including other transaction authority agreements authorized by
    section 2371 of title 10, United States Code, and cooperative
    research and development agreements. This section would require
    that program managers for major weapons systems developed under
    such agreements assess long-term technical data requirements in
    accordance with subsection (e) of section 2320, United States
    Code. This section would also require the Secretary to submit a
    report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
    Committee on Armed Services within 120 days after the date of
    enactment of this Act regarding the implementation of the
    requirements of subsection (e) of section 2320(e) of title 10,
    United States Code.
        The committee notes that the Department has utilized
    agreements that are not subject to the FAR for the initial
    development and prototyping of certain major weapon systems
    such as the design of naval surface combatants. This section
    would ensure appropriate guidance is in place to assist defense
    acquisition officials during the negotiation of such agreements
    in protecting the rights of the federal government to technical
    data.

      Section 815--Clarification that Cost Accounting Standards Apply to
             Federal Contracts Performed Outside the United States

        This section would amend section 26 of the Office of
    Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 422) to clarify that
    the cost accounting standards established pursuant to that act
    apply regardless of whether a contract is entered into or
    performed overseas. This section would also require that the
    Cost Accounting Standards Board revise the cost accounting
    standards, within 180 days of the date of enactment of this
    Act, to reflect the application of those standards to overseas
    contracts.

       Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Inherently Governmental Matters

     Section 821--Policy on Personal Conflicts of Interest by Employees of
                       Department of Defense Contractors

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    develop a policy to prevent personal conflicts of interest in
    defense contracts. This section also would require a standard
    contract clause for inclusion in all solicitations and
    contracts to implement such policy. The committee is concerned
    that contractor employees who work side-by-side with government
    employees are not subject to the same conflict of interest
    provisions as government employees. In the current environment
    of increased reliance on contractors to meet mission
    requirements for the Department of Defense, the committee finds
    this situation problematic. Both the Acquisition Advisory
    Panel, established under section 1423 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136),
    and the Government Accountability Office recommended the
    development of policies to address personal conflicts of
    interest. Furthermore, this section would require the
    Department's Panel on Contracting Integrity, established by the
    section 813 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), to consider and
    make recommendations on the feasibility of applying federal
    procurement integrity regulations to contractor personnel.

      Section 822--Development of Guidance on Personal Services Contracts

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    develop guidance that provides a clear definition of personal
    services contracts and guidance on the use of such contracts.
    The committee is concerned about the apparent growth in the use
    of personal services contracts by the Department of Defense.
    These are contracts characterized by an employer-employee
    relationship between the government and contractor personnel.
    Normally, the Department and all federal agencies are required
    to hire employees in accordance with civil service laws, and
    Part 37.104 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)
    prohibits the award of personal services contracts unless
    specifically authorized by statute. Despite this prohibition,
    however, the Acquisition Advisory Panel, established under
    section 1423 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), noted that many, if not
    all, agencies have contractors performing activities that are
    considered to be personal services. For example, the Government
    Accountability Office recently observed that the working
    environment for contractors at the Army's Contracting Center of
    Excellence reflected aspects of all six of the FAR criteria for
    assessing the existence of a personal services contract
    (Defense Contracting: Army Case Study Delineates Concerns with
    Use of Contractors as Contract Specialists, GAO-08-360, March
    2008). The Government Accountability Office further noted that
    the distinction between personal and non-personal services
    contracts is murky. The Government Accountability Office also
    observed that the Department of Defense lacks guidance on
    mitigating the risk of a contract becoming one for personal
    services. This section would implement the Government
    Accountability Office findings.

     Section 823--Limitation on Performance of Product Support Integrator
                                   Functions

        This section would require that whenever the Department of
    Defense enters into a performance-based logistics (PBL)
    contract for the purchase of logistics support of a weapon
    system or major end item, the product support integration
    function shall be performed by an employee of the Department
    beginning in fiscal year 2011. The product support integrator
    (PSI) is identified in the PBL Program Manager's Product
    Support Guide as ``an entity performing as a formally bound
    agent . . . charged with integrating all sources of support,
    public and private, defined within the scope of the PBL
    agreements to achieve the documented outcomes.'' The PSI is
    ``the single point of accountability for integrating all
    sources of support necessary to meet the agreed to support/
    performance metrics'' of the PBL contract. The committee
    believes this is an inherently governmental function.

                    Subtitle D--Defense Industrial Security

           Section 831--Requirements Relating to Facility Clearances

        This section would add a new section 438, relating to
    requirements for facility clearances, to a new subchapter on
    defense industrial security in title 10, United States Code.
    This section would provide statutory authority for existing
    industrial security regulations by requiring a contractor of
    the Department of Defense to obtain a facility clearance in
    order to be granted custody of classified information, and
    would enhance some contractor security practices and Department
    authorities, including granting the Secretary of Defense
    authority to revoke or suspend a facility clearance by the
    Department at any time. Additionally, this section would
    condition an entity's facility clearance upon the entity's
    compliance with the following requirements: safeguarding of
    classified information; safeguarding covered controlled
    unclassified information; adherence to Department security
    agreements, contract provisions regarding security, and
    relevant Department industrial security regulations; and
    employing business and management practices that do not result
    in the compromise of classified information or adversely affect
    the performance of classified contracts.
        The committee notes that some entities presently holding
    facility clearances already carry out these responsibilities.
    The committee believes that this is a best practice that should
    apply to all entities holding facility clearances. The
    committee encourages the Department to generate and share best
    practices with all entities holding facility clearances to
    enhance compliance with these requirements. This section would
    also require an entity granted a facility clearance to provide
    a certification of security responsibility to the Secretary of
    Defense affirming the entity's responsibility to adopt policies
    and practices necessary to safeguard classified information and
    the performance of classified contracts. This certification
    would include a requirement to appropriately manage the
    entity's subcontractors and suppliers performing work on
    classified contracts.
        This section would further require that the members of a
    covered entity's board of directors ensure, in their capacity
    as fiduciaries, that the covered entity comply with the
    requirements in this section. The Secretary of Defense may
    waive this requirement for reasons of national security. The
    committee notes that the National Industrial Security Program
    Operating Manual (NISPOM) makes a similar requirement for some
    entities holding a facility clearance, and that these entities
    have a strong record of compliance with the Department's
    industrial security regulations. This section would also
    require the Secretary of Defense to require that an entity,
    subject to the approval of its board of directors, designate an
    employee who would be responsible for the covered entity's
    compliance with this section. The committee notes that this
    section is similar to the responsibilities assigned to the
    Facility Security Officer and the Technology Control Officer
    outlined in sections 1-201 and 2-306 in the NISPOM.
        This section would further require entities with facility
    clearances to notify the Secretary of Defense of events which
    would affect the clearance or compromise classified
    information.

              Section 832--Foreign Ownership Control or Influence

        This section would add a new section 439 to title 10,
    United States Code, relating to foreign ownership, control, and
    influence (FOCI) of entities with facility clearances. This
    section would define FOCI consistent with current regulations
    as a foreign interest with the power, direct or indirect,
    whether or not exercised, and whether or not exercisable
    through the ownership of the entity's securities, by
    contractual arrangements or other means, to direct or decide
    matters affecting the management or operations of that entity
    in a manner that may result in compromise of classified
    information or the performance of a classified contract. This
    section would require the Secretary of Defense to consider
    several factors to determine whether and how to mitigate the
    FOCI of the entity. These FOCI factors are similar to current
    regulations; however, they also require consideration of the
    role of hedge funds, joint ventures, and positions on an
    entity's board of directors when determining whether an entity
    is under FOCI.
        This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    impose any security method, safeguard, or restriction the
    Secretary believes necessary to ensure that the entity complies
    with the general requirements for facility clearances. This
    section would also require an entity under FOCI to establish a
    government security committee on the entity's board of
    directors to oversee compliance with industrial security
    regulations and to oversee the entity's security manager. The
    committee believes the Department's current framework for
    establishing government security committees is very effective
    and represents an organizational structure that ensures
    compliance with Department industrial security regulations.
    This section would allow an entity under FOCI to maintain a
    facility clearance for up to nine months as long as such entity
    is negotiating mitigation measures with the Secretary and there
    is no indication that classified information is at risk of
    compromise. This section would also require an entity to notify
    the Secretary of any material change to information submitted
    by the entity relating to FOCI. The committee notes that this
    notification would apply to changes in the information
    currently provided in the certificate pertaining to foreign
    interests filed by the entity. This section would further
    require an entity to notify the Secretary of any proposed
    merger, acquisition, or takeover by a foreign person.

     Section 833--Congressional Oversight Relating to Facility Clearances
            and Foreign Ownership Control or Influence; Definitions

        This section would add new sections 440 and 440a to title
    10, United States Code, to ensure congressional oversight and
    define terms relating to facility clearances. This section
    would require the Secretary of Defense to notify the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services when a facility clearance is suspended or revoked and
    when an entity with a facility clearance has entered into
    negotiations for a proposed merger, acquisition, or takeover by
    a foreign person. This section would also require the Secretary
    to submit a biannual report on specific, cumulative, and trend
    information on entities holding facility clearances including
    information on foreign ownership, control, and influence of
    such entities, problems with compliance, and information on
    measures taken by the Defense Security Service to address any
    compliance problems. The report would be required to be
    submitted in an unclassified form, with a classified annex if
    necessary. This section would require the Secretary of Defense
    to prescribe regulations to implement the sections in this
    subtitle relating to defense industrial security by September
    1, 2009. This section would also require the Secretary of
    Defense to conduct a study on investments in the defense
    industrial base by foreign governments, entities controlled by
    foreign governments, persons of foreign countries, and hedge
    funds.

                           Subtitle E--Other Matters

       Section 841--Clarification of Status of Government Rights in the
    Designs of Department of Defense Vessels, Boats, Craft, and Components
                                    Thereof

        This section would add a new section, section 7317, to
    title 10, United States Code, to provide that the sole legal
    authority determining government rights in the designs of
    vessels, boats, craft, and components thereof, including hulls,
    decks, and superstructures is either section 2320 of title 10,
    United States Code, or the contract, grant, or cooperative
    agreement under which the item was developed. This section
    would prohibit any claims of exclusive private ownership of
    such designs under the Vessel Hull Design Protection Act
    (chapter 13 of title 17, United States Code).

     Section 842--Expansion of Authority to Retain Fees from Licensing of
                             Intellectual Property

        This section would amend section 2260 of title 10, United
    States Code, to clarify the authority of the Secretary of
    Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security to register and
    license trademarks that are owned and controlled by the
    government. This section would clarify that the Secretary of
    Defense could use the authority provided in section 2260 to
    register and license trademarks belonging to defense agencies
    and defense field activities. This section would also clarify
    that the Secretary of Homeland Security can issue regulations
    governing the registration and licensing of trademarks owned
    and controlled by the United States Coast Guard.

     Section 843--Transfer of Sections of Title 10 Relating to Milestone A
                          and Milestone B for Clarity

        This section would rearrange sections 2366a and 2366b of
    title 10, United States Code, relating to certifications of
    milestone decisions for major defense acquisition programs so
    that the section requiring certification of a Milestone A
    decision precedes the section requiring certification of a
    Milestone B decision.

             Section 844--Earned Value Management Study and Report

        This section would require that the Secretary of Defense
    conduct a study on the implementation of earned value
    management, the accuracy of earned value data provided by
    suppliers, and ways to measure the success of utilizing earned
    value management to achieve program objectives. This section
    would require the Secretary of Defense to report the results of
    the study to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services within 180 days after the
    date of enactment of this Act.

                     Section 845--Report on Market Research

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
    the House Committee on Armed Services by October 1, 2009, on
    the market research conducted by the Secretary in implementing
    section 2377 of title 10, United States Code. This section
    would require that the report identify the total number of
    contracts sampled, representative outcomes of market research,
    training tools developed to assist with market research,
    additional planned actions, and other matters.

       Section 846--System Development and Demonstration Benchmark Report

        This section would require the secretary of a military
    department to submit a system development and demonstration
    benchmark report for each of the following programs: Broad Area
    Maritime Surveillance, Combat Search and Rescue Helicopter,
    Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, Aerial Refueling Tanker (KC-45A),
    Presidential Helicopter (VH-71 Increment II), and the unmanned
    aerial vehicle, Warrior--Alpha. The benchmark report would
    include a description of the requirements, estimated
    development cost, program schedule, and other program matters.
    This section would also require semi-annual contract
    performance reports until a full rate production decision is
    made for each program. This section would further require that
    the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
    Logistics (USD(AT&L)) establish a Configuration Steering Board
    for each of these programs and to notify the congressional
    defense committees of major cost increases and significant
    schedule delays. Finally, this section would prohibit the
    milestone decision authority from granting approval to proceed
    to low-rate initial production if the system development and
    demonstration costs for such a program grow by more than 25
    percent, or if the program schedule slips by more than 15
    percent. This restriction could be waived if the USD(AT&L)
    certifies to the congressional defense committees that
    proceeding to low rate initial production is in the best
    interest of the Department.

    Section 847--Additional Matters Required to be Reported by Contractors
          Performing Security Functions in Areas of Combat Operations

        This section would amend section 862 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181), to include additional requirements for which contractors
    performing security duties are required to file incident
    reports.

                   Section 848--Report Relating to Munitions

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
    March 1, 2009 detailing how certain munitions used by the armed
    forces are procured including any procurement from non-domestic
    sources. This section would require the report to include a
    plan to procure these munitions from domestic sources by 2012.

          TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                         Cyber Command Responsibilities

        The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
    submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the
    roles and responsibilities of the Air Force Cyber Command
    within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act. This
    report shall include, but is not limited to:
              (1) The current state of activities at Cyber Command,
            including staffing levels, mission essential tasks,
            lines of responsibility within the Air Force, as well
            as in U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) chain of
            command;
              (2) A description and expected timeline of the
            initial operating capability for Cyber Command;
              (3) A description and expected timeline of the
            planned state for Cyber Command when it reaches full
            operating capability; and
              (4) A description of the chief technology officer
            position including roles and responsibilities for the
            Cyber Command, and how he or she would interact with or
            support the larger STRATCOM mission and Department of
            Defense Chief Information Officer.

               Director of Operational Energy Plans and Programs

        The committee supports the Department of Defense's efforts
    to monitor and reduce energy consumption by installations and
    fleet vehicles since the passage of the National Energy
    Conservation Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-619). The Department's
    adoption of installation energy metrics, innovative funding
    mechanisms, and a governing structure has resulted in the
    achievement of a 30 percent reduction in the energy intensity
    of non-industrial facilities compared with a 1985 baseline.
    While the committee is encouraged by the Department's progress
    managing energy on installations, the committee is concerned
    about the difficulties the Department faces in managing energy
    needed for military operations. The operational use of energy
    imposes significant logistical burdens and operational
    vulnerabilities, increases force protection requirements, and
    amounts to three-quarters of the Department's annual demand.
        According to a study commissioned by the Office of Force
    Transformation and Resources, the energy required for military
    operations has been increasing over time. For example, energy
    demand for the Department's military operations in the Republic
    of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan grew from 9 to
    16 gallons per soldier per day from 2005 to 2007. This same
    study cautioned that the heavy logistical burden imposed by
    fuel will, if unchanged, also impede realization of the more-
    distributed ``new global posture'' called for in the 2005
    National Defense Strategy and 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review.
    The committee is also aware that a February 2008 Defense
    Science Board Task Force report concluded that the Department
    has failed to establish and meet operational energy goals, and
    that lack of leadership is a root cause. Similarly, the U.S.
    Comptroller General issued a March 2008 report recommending
    that the Department establish an overarching organizational
    framework to guide and oversee mobility energy initiatives. The
    committee weighed the recommendations of these studies at a
    hearing on March 13, 2008.
        While the committee commends the Deputy Secretary of
    Defense's identification of energy as one of the Department's
    top 25 transformational priorities, the committee also
    recognizes the challenges in achieving this transformational
    vision. Therefore, the committee includes a provision in
    section 904 of this title that would establish a Director for
    Operational Energy Plans and Programs within the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense and senior operational energy officials
    within each of the military services. The committee also
    includes a provision in section 331 of this Act that would
    require an annual report on operational energy use and
    initiatives to be submitted by the Secretary of Defense acting
    through the Director for Operational Energy Plans and Programs.
    Lastly, the committee believes it would be incumbent upon the
    Director to oversee implementation of the requirements of
    section 332 of this Act that would require consideration of
    fuel logistics support requirements in the planning, capability
    requirements, and acquisition processes.

       Inter-agency transformation of the United States Southern Command

        The United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), with the
    approval of the Secretary of Defense, has moved quickly to
    transform itself into a joint, inter-agency, regional security
    command over the last year. It plans to complete the
    transformation by October 1, 2008. As part of this process,
    SOUTHCOM envisions altering its mission statement and its
    organizational structure and functioning. The combatant command
    (COCOM) plans to alter its current mission of ``conduct[ing]
    military operations and promoting security cooperation to
    achieve U.S. strategic objectives'' to a mission of
    ``support[ing] security, stability, and prosperity in the
    Americas.'' Thus, it would elevate stability operations and
    prosperity-generating activities to the same level as the
    security activities for the COCOM mission.
        With regard to the organization itself, SOUTHCOM
    established a director of inter-agency partnering (J9) along-
    side SOUTHCOM's eight other joint directorates. The J9 acts as
    the inter-agency ``portal'' for the command, identifying and
    coordinating inter-agency opportunities, and as the facilitator
    of the transformation. Ultimately, SOUTHCOM envisions shifting
    to ``mission-centric'' directorates as African Command is
    implementing, from having Directorates which are based upon
    traditional Joint Staffing. According to SOUTHCOM and with the
    guidance of Joint Forces Command, four new directorates are
    planned: a directorate for strategy and policy; a directorate
    for security and intelligence; a directorate for stability; and
    a directorate for inter-agency partners. These four directors
    would be supported by two offices, one for resources and
    management, and one for enterprise support. In addition, the
    command wishes to expand its efforts in public-private
    cooperation and international partnerships to the extent
    legally permissible. Eventually, SOUTHCOM would like to become
    ``the regional focus point for policy implementation'' for
    inter-agency efforts in their geographic area of
    responsibility.
        Although the committee generally supports the efforts of
    SOUTHCOM to transform itself to meet the twenty-first-century
    challenges in the Western Hemisphere more effectively, the
    committee does have a series of concerns about the implications
    of these changes. Chief among these concerns are:
              (1) The concept for how the four new, mission-centric
            directorates that are planned for SOUTHCOM will
            interface laterally with other COCOMs that maintain
            traditional joint directorate structures and vertically
            with the Joint Staff at the Pentagon;
              (2) The duties and responsibilities of the two
            proposed deputy commanders for SOUTHCOM;
              (3) A description of the warfighting chain of
            command, as required under title 10, United States
            Code, from the commander of SOUTHCOM down to the
            proposed joint operations center of the security and
            intelligence directorate, as well as the coordination
            of this center with the proposed stability directorate
            and the inter-agency partnering directorate;
              (4) SOUTHCOM's plan to manage and evaluate its
            internal transformation, including measures of
            progress;
              (5) The role of the Department of State, the United
            States Agency for International Development, the
            Millennium Challenge Corporation, and other foreign
            assistance agencies in the delivery of assistance by
            SOUTHCOM and other COCOMs;
              (6) The appropriateness of including the economic
            welfare of a region, in this case Central and South
            America and the Caribbean, within the core of the
            COCOM's mission;
              (7) The role the Department of Defense generally, and
            the COCOMs more particularly, should have in
            establishing foreign assistance policy as part of the
            foreign assistance process at the Department of State
            or as part of the inter-agency process led by the
            National Security Council; and
              (8) The Department's plan to incorporate lessons
            learned from SOUTHCOM's inter-agency transformation
            into other COCOMs aside from United States African
            Command.
        In light of these concerns, the committee directs the
    Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
    State, to submit a written response to the committee's concerns
    by July 31, 2008. The response shall be submitted to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and House Committee on Armed
    Services.

            Long-Term Nature of Business Transformation Agency Work

        The Business Transformation Agency was established to
    continuously guide the Department's efforts at business
    improvement. The committee is aware that there are elements
    within the Department that may view the Business Transformation
    Agency as a transient organization and are making resource and
    staff allocations based on that view. The committee is
    concerned that decisions have not been made to size
    appropriately the senior workforce, first and foremost by
    making permanent many of the senior executive service billets.
    The committee believes that such a decision should be made
    before the change of administration to ensure that the Business
    Transformation Agency is able to attract and retain the right
    quality of personnel and to position the agency for success in
    the future.

             Planning Assumptions on the Level of Contract Support

        The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
    begun reviewing the contractor support in operations and
    contingency plans, including the requirements for contractor
    services as well as the standards for supporting contractor
    personnel in forward areas. The committee further notes that
    according to guidance published by the Chairman, Joint Chiefs
    of Staff (CJCSM 3122.03c), operational plans are to include
    information on contracted services needed to support the plan.
    The plans are to include a list of the contracts likely to be
    used in theater and the capabilities they bring. The committee
    notes that it would be useful for the guidance to also include
    information on how award of contracts and management of
    contractors in deployed locations will be conducted.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a
    status report on implementation of the guidance to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by December 1, 2008.
        Furthermore, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense
    to include in the next Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), as
    required by the National Defense Authorization Act for 1996
    (Public Law 104-106), an assessment of the number and types of
    services logistics support contractors necessary to assist with
    implementation of the defense strategy. A detailed analysis on
    the approach used to determine the level of contractor support
    should be included as an appendix to the QDR.

                           Quadrennial Defense Review

        The committee expects that the next report of the
    Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), as required by section 118 of
    title 10, United States Code, will be delivered to Congress in
    2010. The committee encourages Department of Defense (DOD)
    officials to take the opportunity provided by the requirement
    of the review to carefully adhere to the requirements described
    in that section. In recent years, the committee has noted that
    the QDR process has become more constrained by assumptions
    regarding resources and budgets than the statute requires.
    Furthermore, the committee believes that the QDR reports have
    not clearly articulated the substantive national security
    assumptions required in the statute or the rationales
    underlying those assumptions. As a result, those reports have
    been of limited usefulness to the committee as it conducts its
    oversight role relating to overarching DOD strategy and force
    transformation.

                          United States Africa Command

        The committee has watched with great interest the
    establishment and development of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).
    The committee notes that while there is no statutory
    requirement for the Department of Defense to consult with
    Congress before making such a substantial change to the Unified
    Command Plan, Congress is nevertheless responsible for
    providing AFRICOM with the resources it requires for success.
    Congress, as a co-equal branch of government, also has its own
    perspective on what is in the national interests of the United
    States. Therefore, the committee believes that an opportunity
    to provide input to the Department of Defense during the
    conception and early phases of development of the command would
    have been beneficial to all.
        The committee understands that AFRICOM currently defines
    its mission as better enabling ``the Department of Defense and
    other elements of the U.S. Government to work in concert and
    with partners to achieve a more stable environment in which
    political and economic growth can take place . . . [and will
    help] coordinate U.S. Government contributions on the
    continent.'' The committee further understands that a stable
    Africa is in the national interests of the United States.
    Nevertheless, the committee finds that within the command's
    mission statement, it has listed a variety of tasks that appear
    to depart from traditional Department of Defense (DOD)
    missions, including medical HIV/AIDS assistance, humanitarian
    assistance, and disaster relief. The diplomatic and cultural
    environment on the continent of Africa is extremely varied and
    complex. While the Department of Defense has always played a
    role in those sorts of tasks, the committee is concerned that
    AFRICOM might become the primary agent of U.S. efforts in those
    areas when they might be better served by other agencies or
    departments taking the lead.
        Given these concerns, the committee directs the Secretary
    of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the
    heads of any other federal agencies or departments the
    Secretary of Defense determines appropriate, to submit, not
    later than one week prior to AFRICOM assuming full operational
    capability, a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services,
    the House Committee on Armed Services, the Senate Committee on
    Foreign Relations, and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
    on the final determination of the full set of roles and
    missions of AFRICOM. The report shall also include a
    description of:
              (1) How United States strategic interests have
            influenced the size and scope of the U.S. military
            footprint on the continent and the effect the creation
            of AFRICOM will have on future U.S. military operations
            in Africa;
              (2) How various African communities, regional
            organizations like the African Union, major non-
            governmental organizations that operate in Africa, and
            other foreign countries, including the People's
            Republic of China and the European nations, which have
            played roles on that continent, view the establishment,
            roles, and missions of AFRICOM;
              (3) AFRICOM's anticipated involvement in
            stabilization and reconstruction activities in Africa,
            and the cost-sharing agreements, if any, with the
            Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International
            Development, and other agencies, relating to those
            activities;
              (4) The anticipated total cost of establishing this
            command, including facilities and infrastructure
            improvements, personnel, equipment, force protection,
            permanent change of station and other related costs,
            any cooperative or cost-sharing agreements with other
            Defense Department entities like United States European
            Command, and any cost-sharing arrangement with other
            non-DOD departments and agencies; and
              (5) Any challenges that AFRICOM may have in filling
            the inter-agency positions in the command.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                  Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management

         Section 901--Revisions in Functions and Activities of Special
                               Operations Command

        This section would revise the statute governing special
    operations activities to accurately reflect current mission
    requirements of Special Operations Command. This section would
    urge greater emphasis on unconventional and irregular warfare,
    as well as counterterrorism and counterinsurgency missions.

     Section 902--Requirement to Designate Officials for Irregular Warfare

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    designate a single Executive Agent within the Department for
    the development and execution of irregular warfare activities.
    This section would also require the Secretary to designate an
    Assistant Secretary of Defense to exercise responsibility for
    overall management and coordination of these activities.

        Section 903--Plan Required for Personnel Management of Special
                               Operations Forces

        This section would require the Commander, Special
    Operations Command, to develop and provide to congressional
    defense committees a plan to ensure proper personnel management
    of special operations forces. This section would require
    submission of the plan within 30 days after the date of
    enactment of this Act.

         Section 904--Director of Operational Energy Plans and Programs

        This section would establish a Director of Operational
    Energy Plans and Programs within the Department of Defense to
    develop and oversee implementation of a strategy for managing
    the energy required for moving and sustaining military forces
    and weapons platforms for military operations. In addition,
    this section would require the secretaries of the Army, Navy,
    and Air Force to designate a senior official accountable for
    their service's operational energy programs.

       Section 905--Corrosion Control and Prevention Executives for the
                              Military Departments

        This section would require the Assistant Secretary of each
    military department with responsibility for acquisition,
    technology, and logistics to designate an employee of the
    military department to act as the senior official to coordinate
    department-level Corrosion Prevention and Control Program
    activities. The service corrosion executive would coordinate
    Corrosion Prevention and Control (CPC) within the military
    department and with the Office of the Secretary of Defense,
    military service program executive offices, materiel commands,
    and major service commands. This section would provide the
    corrosion executive with the CPC coordination authority
    necessary to assure the sustained performance, readiness,
    economical operation, and service life of military systems and
    equipment, including participation in materiel development,
    acquisition, fielding, operation, and storage processes. The
    service corrosion executive would be the military department's
    CPC principal point of contact to the Department of Defense
    corrosion executive designated in section 2228 of title 10,
    United States Code.

           Section 906--Alignment of Deputy Chief Management Officer
                                Responsibilities

        This section would rectify a conflict in the chain of
    command of the Business Transformation Agency by requiring that
    Director of the Business Transformation Agency report only to
    the Deputy Chief Management Officer. This section would amend
    section 192 of title 10, United States Code, which designates
    joint responsibility for supervising the Business
    Transformation Agency to the Vice Chair of the Defense Business
    Systems Management Committee (DBSMC) and the Deputy Chief
    Management Officer to eliminate the requirement that the
    Business Transformation Agency be supervised by the Vice Chair
    of the DBSMC.

      Section 907--Requirement for the Secretary of Defense to Prepare a
     Strategic Plan to Enhance the Role of the National Guard and Reserves

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    develop a plan for enhancing the National Guard and reserves,
    and submit a report on that plan to the Senate Committee on
    Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
    April 1, 2009. This section would require that the plan assess
    the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Report of
    the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves of January
    31, 2008, and the provisions of the National Guard Empowerment
    Act, and State-National Defense Integration Act of 2008 (HR
    5603) as introduced in the House of Representatives in the
    110th Congress. This section would further require that the
    plan include any changes to current Department of Defense
    organization, structure, command relationships, budget
    authority, procurement authority, compensation and benefits,
    and any other recommendations for legislation that the
    Secretary of Defense considers necessary.

        Section 908--Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as the
                    Department of the Navy and Marine Corps

        This section would designate the Department of the Navy as
    the Department of the Navy and the Marine Corps and change the
    title of its Secretary to the Secretary of the Navy and Marine
    Corps. This section would formally recognize the responsibility
    of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy over both the Navy
    and Marine Corps and the Marine Corps' status as an equal
    partner with the Navy.

                    Section 909--Support to Committee Review

        This section makes a number of findings concerning the
    Quadrennial Defense Review and the need for the House Committee
    on Armed Services to review in a bipartisan, thorough manner,
    the military capabilities needed to address challenges to the
    United States. The section further requires the Secretary of
    Defense to provide the House Committee on Armed Services
    information to assist the committee as it reviews U.S. defense
    strategy and other plans within 15 days of the receipt of a
    request for such information.

                          Subtitle B--Space Activities

    Section 911--Extension of Authority for Pilot Program for Provision of
      Space Surveillance Network Services to Non-United States Government
                                    Entities

        This section would extend the expiring authority of the
    Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program that would
    allow non-U.S. Government entities to purchase space
    surveillance network services from assets owned or controlled
    by the Department of Defense through September 30, 2010. The
    current authority would expire on September 30, 2009.

        Section 912--Investment and Acquisition Strategy for Commercial
                             Satellite Capabilities

        This section would require the Department of Defense to
    conduct an assessment to determine a recommended investment and
    acquisition strategy for commercial satellite capabilities.
    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to report
    the results of this assessment by February 1, 2009.

                 Subtitle C--Chemical Demilitarization Program

    Section 921--Chemical Demilitarization Citizens Advisory Commissions in
                             Colorado and Kentucky

        This section would authorize the Program Manager for the
    Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program to manage and
    fund the Colorado and Kentucky Chemical Demilitarization
    Citizens' Advisory Commissions.

        Section 922--Prohibition on Transport of Hydrolystate at Pueblo
                            Chemical Depot, Colorado

        This section would prohibit the transportation of
    hydrolysate byproduct from the chemical demilitarization (Chem-
    Demil) facility at Pueblo, Colorado, at any time during fiscal
    year 2009. This section would also require the Secretary of
    Defense to provide a comprehensive comparative cost-benefit
    analysis with regard to on-site and off-site treatment
    methodologies. This section would require this information to
    be provided to the congressional defense committees by February
    15, 2009.
        The committee notes that a delay in program execution has
    extended the Chem-Demil effort beyond the original target
    completion date of April 29, 2007. The committee also notes
    that the budget request for fiscal year 2009 assumes a program
    completion date in year 2023. The committee recognizes the
    additional delay as resulting in part from programmatic
    uncertainty and management irregularities, legal challenges,
    and insufficient resources. The committee believes inadequate
    programmatic consistency, discipline, and rigor has also
    contributed to the current state of affairs.
        The committee understands the Department has initiated a
    comparative cost analysis with regard to on-site and off-site
    disposal methodologies in the Assembled Chemical Weapons
    Alternatives program, an independent component of the overall
    Chem-Demil effort. The committee expects this cost assessment
    to be completed in an expeditious manner and address, among
    other things, transportation requirements, potential
    litigation, and possible clean-up recovery needs in times of
    spills or other accidents.
        The committee urges the Department to provide such
    information to the committee as soon as possible and requires
    its delivery by February 15, 2009.

                    Subtitle D--Intelligence-Related Matters

    Section 931--Technical Changes Following the Redesignation of National
     Imagery and Mapping Agency as National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

        This section would make technical changes to bring the
    United States Code and other laws into conformity with the
    agency name change from National Imagery and Mapping Agency to
    the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, as provided for in
    section 921(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136).

      Section 932--Technical Amendments to Title 10, United States Code,
        Arising from Enactment of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
                             Prevention Act of 2004

        This section would make technical changes to reflect in
    various sections of title 10, United States Code, the change
    from ``Director of Central Intelligence'' to ``Director of
    National Intelligence'' and from ``Director of Central
    Intelligence'' to ``Director of the Central Intelligence
    Agency.''

    Section 933--Technical Amendments Relating to the Associate Director of
                          the CIA for Military Affairs

        This section would amend section 528(c) of title 10, United
    States Code, to change the term ``Military Support'' to
    ``Military Affairs.''

                           Subtitle E--Other Matters

     Section 941--Establishment of Department of Defense School of Nursing

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    establish a Department of Defense School of Nursing authorized
    by section 955 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). The committee is aware
    of the growing shortage of military medical personnel and
    believes that Department of Defense schools to produce military
    health professionals, such as the recently established Army
    School of Social Work, will have a significant positive impact
    on the shortage. This section would also authorize the
    Secretary to conduct a demonstration project to encourage
    retired military nurses to serve as faculty at civilian nursing
    schools.

    Section 942--Amendments of Authority for Regional Centers for Security
                                    Studies

        This section would amend section 184 of title 10, United
    States Code, to make funds authorized under that section in any
    fiscal year available for programs that begin in that fiscal
    year, but end in the following fiscal year, beginning with
    fiscal year 2009. This section would also create a pilot in
    which the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the
    Secretary of State, may waive reimbursement of the costs of
    activities at the Regional Centers up to $1.0 million for
    fiscal year 2009 and 2010 for non-governmental and
    international organization personnel. This section would also
    require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report describing
    the extent of nongovernmental and international organization
    participation in the programs of each regional center,
    including the costs incurred by the United States for the
    participation of each organization. The committee notes that
    ``international organization personnel'' in this section is
    intended to refer to personnel from non-profit or not-for-
    profit entities such as the United Nations, the African Union
    or the European Union, and not international corporations or
    businesses.

       Section 943--Findings and Sense of Congress Regarding the Western
                 Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation

        This section would express the sense of congress that the
    Western Hemispheric Institute for Security Cooperation
    (WHINSEC) is 1) one of the most effective mechanisms that the
    United States has to build relationships with future leaders
    throughout the Western Hemisphere, influence the human rights
    records and democracy trajectory of countries in the Western
    Hemisphere, and mitigate the growing influence of non-
    hemispheric powers; 2) succeeding in meeting its stated mission
    while fostering mutual knowledge, transparency, confidence, and
    cooperation among the participating nations; and 3) is an
    invaluable education and training facility which the Department
    of Defense should continue to utilize in order to help foster a
    spirit of partnership that will ensure security and enhance
    stability and interoperability among the United States military
    and the militaries of participating nations.

       Section 944--Restriction on Obligation of Funds for United States
               Southern Command Development Assistance Activities

        This section would require that the Secretary of Defense,
    within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to
    submit to the congressional defense committees a report
    describing the development assistance activities carried out by
    the United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) and containing: a
    certification that such activities will not negatively impact
    the readiness of SOUTHCOM; do not divert resources from funded
    or unfunded requirements of SOUTHCOM; are not already, or will
    not be, undertaken by other federal departments or agencies;
    and are designed, planned, and conducted as derivative
    activities of SOUTHCOM's warfighting responsibilities under
    title 10 of the United States Code.
        This section would also restrict the obligation or
    expenditure of 10 percent of SOUTHCOM's operation and
    maintenance funds until 30 days after the certification
    required by this section is received by the congressional
    defense committees.

       Section 945--Authorization of Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery
                                  Capabilities

        This section would codify authority for Joint Forces
    Command to act as the Executive Agent for the Non-conventional
    Assisted Recovery Capabilities and authorize the Department to
    develop a personnel recovery program for isolated personnel
    representing all parts of the U.S. Government.

     Section 946--Report on United States Northern Command Development of
            Interagency Plans and Command and Control Relationships

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
    consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
    heads of other appropriate federal agencies, to submit a report
    to Congress within 90 days of the date of enactment of this Act
    describing progress made in addressing the recommendations of
    the Government Accountability Office regarding the organization
    of the United States Northern Command. This section would also
    require the commander of Northern Command to coordinate with
    other federal agencies to ascertain requirements for plans,
    training, equipment, and resources in support of homeland
    defense; domestic emergency response; and military support to
    civil authorities.

                          TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                            Counter-Drug Activities

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $1.1 billion for drug
    interdiction and counter-drug activities, in addition to $189.9
    million, for operational tempo, which is contained within the
    operating budgets of the military services. The budget is
    organized in fiscal year 2009 to address four broad national
    priorities: (1) international support; (2) domestic support;
    (3) intelligence and technology; and (4) demand reduction.
        The committee recommends an authorization for fiscal year
    2009 Department of Defense counter-drug activities as follows
    (in millions of U.S. dollars):

    FY09 Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Request...............  $1,060.5
    International Support.........................................     541.3
    Domestic Support..............................................     207.6
    Intelligence Technology and Other Demand Reduction............     173.6
    Demand Reduction..............................................     138.0
    Recommended Decrease..........................................
    International Support.........................................       5.0
    Recommended Increase..........................................
    Southwestern Border Fence.....................................       5.0
    Recommendation................................................   1,060.5

                           Items of Special Interest

    Budget requests

        The budget request contained $1.1 billion for drug
    interdiction and counter-drug activities, including all
    counter-narcotics resources in the Department of Defense with
    the exception of those resources in the operating budget for
    the military services and those resources which are
    appropriated or requested in emergency budgets. The committee
    notes that the fiscal year 2009 budget request represents the
    sixth year that the Administration has funded the overwhelming
    majority of counter-narcotics activities in the Islamic
    Republic of Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia through
    the use of emergency budget requests, instead of including
    these amounts in the regular budget request.

    International support

        The budget request contained $541.3 million for
    international support. The committee recommends $536.3 million,
    a decrease of $5.0 million, for international support. The
    committee notes that this small decrease will not result in
    diminished activities as the international support program
    continues to receive funding from emergency budget requests.

    Self-propelled semi-submersible vessels and low profile vessels without
            nationality

        The committee recognizes that one of the emerging and most
    significant threats in the forty-two million square mile
    transit zone that includes the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of
    Mexico, and the eastern Pacific Ocean is the use of manned and
    unmanned self-propelled semi-submersible (SPSS) vessels and Low
    Profile Vessels (LPVs) to transport illicit narcotics into the
    United States. Narcotics traffickers in the region have
    increasingly turned to this method of transportation to
    circumvent the effective counter-drug efforts of the United
    States and partner nations have. The committee has significant
    concerns that these vessels represent a potential platform for
    other dangerous cargos and for human trafficking.

    Southwest border fence

        The southwest border continues to be a major human and drug
    smuggling corridor into the United States. Since 1990, the
    Department of Defense has been involved in addressing the
    heavily used smuggling corridor in San Diego, California, by
    building physical barriers throughout the region. As a result,
    the number of drug ``drive-throughs'' and the number of
    apprehensions of illegal crossers has greatly diminished. The
    Southwest Border Fence has served as an invaluable counter-
    narcotics resource and supports the President's border security
    initiative and makes for more efficient and effective use of
    the national guardsmen deployed in support of Operation Jump
    Start.
        However, the border fence construction project is still
    under construction, and the area remains one of the nation's
    most heavily utilized drug smuggling corridors. Additional
    funds are required to continue work on the fourteen-mile Border
    Infrastructure System near San Diego, California.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
    million for this purpose.

    Temporary expansion of the Joint Inter-Agency Task Force-South

        The United States African Command (AFRICOM) is scheduled to
    establish a counter narco-terrorism (CNT) office by October 1,
    2008. This office will assume responsibility for existing
    programs of the United States European Command (EUCOM) CNT
    office. Given Joint Inter-Agency Task Force-South's (JIATF-S)
    existing capabilities that it has developed over nearly two
    decades, EUCOM-CNT is relying on JIATF-S to provide information
    regarding trans-Atlantic drug events as well as helping to
    establish intelligence analyst support in various U.S.
    embassies in Africa. In addition, it will take a collective
    effort with Western European countries that have years of
    experience in the region, other U.S. Government agencies, non-
    governmental organizations, and the United Nations Office on
    Drugs and Crime.
        JIATF-S's primary mission is to detect, monitor, and
    support interdiction of the south-to-north flow of illicit
    drugs and other narco-terrorist threats to the security of the
    United States within the prescribed Joint Operating Area (JOA).
    It also serves as a center for detection and monitoring, as
    well as counter-drug support to U.S. country teams in Latin
    America and the Caribbean. JIATF-S's JOA responsibilities
    currently extend from up to 100 nautical miles from the
    Continental United States (CONUS) for air targets, to the CONUS
    territorial seas for maritime targets, to the U.S. territorial
    seas of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands for both air
    and maritime targets and also includes the territory of the
    Bahamas.
        The committee recognizes the efforts of AFRICOM to
    establish an effective counter-narcotics program within the
    command and appreciates AFRICOM's limited resources to do so.
    As an interim measure, the committee recommends that the JOA of
    JIATF-S be expanded to include Africa. The committee recommends
    only a temporary expansion; as opposed to longer term
    expansion, because much of JIATF-S's success is attributable to
    its relatively small area of responsibility. The committee does
    not want to jeopardize ongoing and future operations of the
    task force. Additionally, the committee recommends an increase
    in the number of Tactical Analysis Teams with oversight and
    management by J2. Authorization of funding for this temporary
    expansion would be provided by section 1033 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
    85), as amended by section 1021 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136),
    section 1022 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), section 1022 of
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 109-181), and section 1024 of this Act. The
    committee directs the Commander of AFRICOM to report to the
    Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
    Armed Services by March 1, 2009 on: the combatant command's
    overall counter-narcotics strategy; the identification of
    priorities for counter-narcotic efforts in AFRICOM's area of
    responsibility, particularly in West Africa; the role that
    JIATF-S will temporarily play in meeting these objectives; and
    the role of international and regional partnerships in
    executing the same.

                                Other Activities

                                 Civil Affairs

        The committee recognizes the growing need within the
    Department of Defense (DOD) for civil affairs skills and
    capabilities across the full spectrum of operations. Current
    operations around the world highlight the continued high demand
    for civil affairs skills and capabilities, placing great strain
    on the availability of personnel who have those skills.
    Therefore, the committee continues to support the plan of U.S.
    Special Operations Command to increase the total civil affairs
    force by three battalions by March 2009.
        Still, the committee notes current departmental policy, as
    stated in DOD Directive 3000.05, that stability operations are
    a core military mission and should be conducted throughout the
    full spectrum of operations. The committee believes this policy
    may lead to even greater demand for civil affairs specialists.
    The committee also understands that the Department has
    reorganized U.S. Army civil affairs units, dividing them
    between the active and reserve components and between special
    and general purpose forces. The committee believes the ultimate
    effects of these steps remains unclear.
        The committee believes that the Department should pay close
    attention to how the roles and requirements for civil affairs
    personnel, skills, and capabilities evolve as the Department
    identifies future stability operations requirements and then
    incorporates stability operations capabilities in the planning
    and execution of full spectrum operations. Therefore, the
    committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the civil
    affairs requirement and role throughout the spectrum of
    operations. The study, at a minimum, should include:
              (1) An analysis of the overall anticipated civil
            affairs requirement, with a description of how that
            requirement was determined;
              (2) An analysis of whether the programmed force
            structure will meet the anticipated requirement;
              (3) An analysis of whether stability operations
            competencies are being adequately developed in the
            civil affairs force and whether non-civil affairs
            general purpose forces are being trained in skills
            traditionally resident in civil affairs forces in order
            to carry out stability operations;
              (4) Identification of current proponency for civil
            affairs and an analysis of whether it is properly
            placed;
              (5) An analysis of whether the current and planned
            force mix between the active and reserve components is
            appropriate given the continued demands for civil
            affairs units; and
              (6) An analysis of what innovative tools or personnel
            management policies may be needed to assist in bringing
            needed civil affairs competencies and experience into
            the force on a temporary basis.
        The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report of
    findings and recommendations by April 1, 2009, to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services.

                Humanitarian Assistance Requirements of the Navy

        The committee notes the many humanitarian assistance and
    disaster response missions undertaken by the Department of
    Defense each year. The committee is also aware of the central
    role placed on humanitarian assistance and disaster response in
    the new maritime strategy jointly authored by the Navy, Marine
    Corps, and Coast Guard entitled ``A Cooperative Strategy for
    21st Century Seapower.'' The new strategy declares that
    preventing wars is as important as winning wars, and that
    executing the strategy will require globally distributed,
    mission-tailored maritime force packages. The committee
    therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to undertake a
    comprehensive review of current and projected personnel and
    equipment requirements to meet the humanitarian assistance and
    disaster response missions described in the new maritime
    strategy. The committee further directs the Secretary to review
    current naval vessels that perform this mission, assess their
    current and future viability, and prepare an analysis on the
    potential benefit of building new humanitarian assistance
    platforms based on existing vessels including, but not limited
    to, the T-AKE and LPD-17 hull forms. The committee directs the
    Secretary, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint
    Chiefs of Staff, to prepare and submit a report on these
    reviews, including any comments the Secretary considers
    necessary regarding the consistency of this maritime strategy
    with the national military strategy and the report of the
    Quadrennial Defense Review, among other related strategy
    documents, to the congressional defense committees by April 1,
    2009.

          Inclusion of Non-Lethal Capability in Defense Civil Support
                               Requirements Plan

        In connection with the Department's mission for defense
    support to civil authorities, the committee notes that section
    1815 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2008 (Public Law 110-181) requires the Secretary of Defense to
    identify the military-unique capabilities required by the
    military services, including the reserve component, the joint
    commands, and defense agencies, to support civil authorities in
    an incident of national significance or catastrophic event. The
    committee urges the Department to comply with section 1815 and
    encourages the Department to determine whether there are non-
    lethal capability requirements for domestic homeland defense
    and defense support to civil authorities' missions.

       Long-Term Plans for Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance

        Section 923 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) requires the
    Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (USD/I) to provide a
    ``Defense Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR)
    Integration Roadmap'' to guide the development and integration
    of Department of Defense (DOD) ISR capabilities from 2004
    through 2018. The USD/I, in his 2005 and 2007 Roadmap updates,
    has yet to provide all of the elements required by section 923.
    Specifically, the ISR Roadmap has not addressed: how DOD
    intelligence information could enhance the Department's role in
    homeland security; how counter-intelligence activities of the
    armed forces and DOD intelligence agencies could be better
    integrated; and how funding authorizations and appropriations
    could be optimally structured to best support development of a
    fully integrated ISR architecture. Moreover, the Roadmap does
    not provide a sufficient level of detail to enable ISR decision
    makers to prioritize different needs and assess progress in
    achieving strategic goals. The lack of a long-term, 10-15 year,
    vision of what ISR capabilities are required to achieve
    strategic goals also makes it difficult for the Department to
    assess investment options to achieve the most efficient and
    effective use of ISR capabilities and make informed decisions
    on an appropriate mix of national overhead systems, such as
    satellites and manned and unmanned platforms. As a result, the
    Department is making considerable investments in unmanned
    aircraft systems without the benefit of a longer-term vision.
    Furthermore, the Department has not yet addressed all of the
    management aspects required to be addressed by section 923 in
    its Roadmap.
        The committee continues to be concerned that joint
    requirements be integrated to provide required capabilities to
    warfighters as efficiently and effectively as possible. The
    committee is aware of the Department's effort to develop a
    vision of a future ISR architecture that is based on an
    independent analysis of expected future requirements and
    strategic goals and that looks at future requirements for a
    time period beyond the Future Years Defense Program. As it
    develops this future ISR architecture, the committee directs
    the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense
    committees, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and
    the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, by March
    15, 2009, on its determination of: (1) the appropriate mix of
    national overhead systems and manned and unmanned airborne
    platforms to achieve strategic goals that is based on an
    analysis of future ISR demand; and (2) a comprehensive set of
    metrics to assess ISR effectiveness in meeting the Department's
    strategic goals. Further, the report shall include sufficiently
    detailed information on the Department's vision of a future ISR
    architecture to enable Congress to understand the bases for the
    Department's assessment of and prioritization of capability
    gaps and overlaps, enable decision makers to address tradeoffs
    between competing needs, and assess progress in achieving ISR
    strategic goals. The report shall also be consistent with and
    reflect the Secretary's efforts to comply with section 942 of
    the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181). Finally, the report shall include
    detailed recommendations on how funding authorizations and
    appropriations can be structured to support a fully integrated
    ISR architecture.
        In addition, the committee directs the Secretary to include
    information in all future funding requests that explains how
    each request fits into the Department's ISR architecture
    without unnecessary duplication or overlapping with existing
    systems or capabilities.

                        National Language Service Corps

        The committee remains committed to expanding the Department
    of Defense foreign language and cultural awareness
    capabilities. The committee supports the launch of the National
    Language Service Corps pilot program as part of the broader
    Department of Defense commitment to the President's National
    Security Language Initiative. This effort will identify
    Americans with skills in critical languages and develop the
    capacity to mobilize them during times of national need or
    emergency. The National Language Service Corps represents the
    first organized national attempt to capitalize on our rich
    diversity in language and culture. This pilot organization
    began recruiting in January 2008 and has a goal of creating a
    cadre of 1,000 highly proficient people, in 10 languages by
    2010. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide
    a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services by February 15, 2009, on the
    status of the implementation of the program and future plans to
    institutionalize and make any recommendations regarding the
    possible expansion of the program beyond the pilot phase.

                       Nuclear Weapons Inventory Control

        The committee views the inadvertent transfer of weapons
    from Minot Air Force Base (AFB) to Barksdale AFB in August
    2007, and the discovery in March 2008, that nose cones for
    Minuteman III missiles were mistakenly shipped to the Republic
    of China on Taiwan in 2006 as grave errors. These incidents
    raise significant concerns about the inventory control
    exercised over the nation's nuclear weapons and weapons
    components.
        The Minot AFB-Barksdale AFB transfer prompted the Secretary
    of Defense to charge the Defense Science Board (DSB) Permanent
    Task Force on Nuclear Weapons Surety to review the Department's
    weapons inventory control processes and procedures. In its
    February 2008 report, ``Unauthorized Movement of Nuclear
    Weapons,'' the DSB Task Force noted the incident ``dramatized
    the need for uncompromising processes and procedures, clear
    focus on the unique demands of the enterprise at multiple
    levels of the national security structure, and an environment
    that attracts, nurtures and guides the right numbers of the
    best and brightest as stewards of this uniquely powerful
    national security force.'' The task force concluded, ``There
    are currently significant deficiencies in meeting each of those
    needs.''
        While the investigation of the nose cone shipments is
    ongoing, the committee notes that an inter-agency review is
    warranted of the inventory controls protecting the nation's
    nuclear weapons and weapons components. Therefore, the
    committee directs the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
    Energy to jointly prepare a report on the steps the Department
    of Defense and the Department of Energy plan to take to address
    the deficiencies and recommendations included in the February
    2008, DSB report, and any that result from the ongoing
    investigation of the nose cone shipment to Taiwan. The report
    shall also include an assessment of new technologies that might
    be deployed to augment existing inventory control processes and
    strengthen human controls. The report shall be transmitted to
    the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
    on Armed Services within 180 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act.

     Oversight of Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Proposals
                              for New Capabilities

        The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in its
    March 2008 report, ``Intelligence, Surveillance, and
    Reconnaissance'' (ISR) that the Department can better assess
    and integrate ISR capabilities and oversee development of
    future ISR requirements. Specifically, it noted that the Joint
    Capabilities Integration and Development System's Functional
    Capabilities Board charged with oversight of new ISR
    requirements has not worked proactively with sponsors of new
    capability proposals or ensured that the sponsors completed
    capabilities-based assessments that thoroughly assess
    alternatives to new materiel solutions to ISR needs as called
    for in joint guidance. The Government Accountability Office
    found in a review of 19 new ISR capabilities proposed by
    service and agency sponsors, that 12 sponsors did not complete
    assessments, and the completeness of the remaining sponsors'
    assessments varied.
        In its response to the GAO report, the Department agreed
    with the Government Accountability Office's recommendations to
    improve the availability of information on current capabilities
    and those in development to assist sponsors and reviewers in
    determining capabilities already developed or proposed and the
    implementation of oversight activities by the Joint Staff's
    Battlespace Awareness Functional Capabilities Board. However,
    the Department disagreed with the Government Accountability
    Office's recommendation to review staffing and expertise levels
    of the Board and to take steps to address capability
    shortfalls, if any, because a recent review had found no
    shortfalls, even though lack of adequate numbers of qualified
    staff was cited by some defense officials as a reason that
    oversight activities were not implemented as called for in
    Joint Staff guidance. The committee agrees with Government
    Accountability Office that the Department should reexamine its
    process and staffing needs as a part of improving oversight
    activities.
        The committee directs the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
    of Staff to report to the congressional defense committees, the
    Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House
    Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by March 1, 2009, on
    the steps taken to assist military service and agency sponsors
    in developing proposals for new ISR capabilities that are
    informed by current information on all ISR capabilities that
    may be available and to ensure that the Functional Capabilities
    Board receives complete assessments to support the Joint
    Requirements Oversight Council's investment decisions. In
    addition, in light of the improved oversight practices the
    Department plans to implement, the committee directs that the
    report reassess the number of personnel and skills required to
    perform thorough reviews of ISR capability proposals and report
    to Congress the methodology and results of the assessment.

    Strengthening Inter-Agency Stabilization and Reconstruction Contingency
                                    Planning

        The committee is concerned with the lack of progress in the
    implementation of the inter-agency planning framework called
    for in National Presidential Security Directive--44. The
    committee encourages the Secretary of Defense, in coordination
    with the Secretary of State, to accelerate efforts to develop a
    framework for integrating inter-agency stabilization and
    reconstruction contingency planning with military operational
    and contingency planning. The committee further encourages the
    Secretary of Defense to promulgate a concept of operations for
    improving the integration of the inter-agency into this
    stabilization and reconstruction contingency planning in every
    phase at the combatant command, joint task force, and major
    subordinate command levels.

                      Unmanned Aircraft Systems Task Force

        In the committee report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
    committee directed the Secretary of Defense to review and
    determine whether the designation of one military department as
    executive agent for unmanned aerial systems (UAS) would serve
    as the best means for eliminating duplication of effort and
    enhancing interoperability. In lieu of establishing an
    executive agent for UAS, in October 2007, the Department
    created a UAS Task Force to coordinate critical UAS issues and
    to develop a way ahead to enhance operations, enable inter-
    dependencies, and streamline acquisition. The Task Force has
    established focused teams and assigned lead organizations to
    address several UAS acquisition and management issues that
    include interoperability, airspace, frequency and spectrum
    utilization, and payload and sensor management. A senior
    steering group has also been established to periodically assess
    progress on the goals established for the Task Force and to
    address unresolved issues. Notwithstanding these efforts, the
    Department continues to face challenges in the management and
    operational use of UASs. These challenges included the lack of
    an oversight framework and strategic plan to guide development
    and investment decisions in UASs and coordinate those efforts
    with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
    related manned and unmanned capabilities like Constant Hawk,
    Angel Fire, and unmanned airship systems that have been fielded
    to meet current exigencies.
        To ensure that the Department makes progress in overcoming
    UAS acquisition and management challenges, the committee
    directs the Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional
    defense committees, the Senate Select Committee on
    Intelligence, and House Permanent Select Committee on
    Intelligence with an annual report on the Department's progress
    in addressing UAS challenges. The report shall include, at a
    minimum, information on the issues being addressed by the Task
    Force, progress made in coordinating UAS issues within UAS
    programs, between UAS and ISR-related manned and unmanned
    capabilities, and its recommendations to address existing
    issues. In addition, the report shall describe the actions that
    the Department has taken to implement the Task Force's
    recommendations and milestones for completing any unresolved
    recommendations.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                         Subtitle A--Financial Matters

                    Section 1001--General Transfer Authority

        This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to make
    transfers between any amounts of authorizations for fiscal year
    2009 in division A of this Act. This section would limit the
    total amount of transferred under this authority to $4.0
    billion. This section would also require prompt notification to
    Congress of each transfer made.

    Section 1002--Requirement of Separate Display of Budget for Afghanistan

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, for
    any annual or supplemental budget request of the Department of
    Defense, to clearly and separately set forth any funding
    requested for any U.S. operations or other activities
    concerning the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan at the
    appropriation account level, and at the program, project, or
    activity level. This section would further require the budget
    submission to include a separate detailed description of the
    assumptions underlying the funding request. Such assumptions
    should include, to the extent possible: anticipated troop
    levels; operating tempo; and reset requirements.
        The committee believes that budget request submissions by
    the Department of Defense for Afghanistan have lacked
    transparency, in part, given the Department's combined
    submissions for the Republic of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other
    countries in the war on terrorism without separate dedicated
    line items for Afghanistan. This section will enable the
    committee to provide the level of oversight on funding for
    Afghanistan that is necessary.

       Section 1003--Requirement for Separate Display of Budget for Iraq

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, for
    any annual or supplemental budget request of the Department of
    Defense, to clearly and separately set forth any funding
    requested for the Republic of Iraq at the appropriation account
    level, and at the program, project, or activity level. This
    section would further require the budget submission to include
    a separate detailed description of the assumptions underlying
    the funding request. Such assumptions should include, to the
    extent possible: anticipated troop levels; operating tempo; and
    reset requirements.

          Section 1004--One Time Shift of Military Retirement Payments

        This section would delay in the year 2013, one percent of
    the cost-of-living adjustment for military retirees provided by
    section 1461 of title 10, United States Code. The delay in
    payment would occur in September 2013 and would be restored in
    a one-time lump sum in October 2013. It would also transfer
    $40.0 million from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction
    Fund to the Miscellaneous Receipts Fund of the United States
    Treasury.

              Subtitle B--Policy Relating to Vessels and Shipyards

          Section 1011--Conveyance, Navy Drydock, Aransas Pass, Texas

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
    sell the yard floating drydock AFDL-23 to Gulf Copper Ship
    Repair, the current lessee of the drydock. This vessel would be
    sold at fair market value and take into account the amounts
    paid by, or due and owing from, the lessee. The Secretary of
    the Navy would be authorized to set additional terms and
    conditions on the transfer as the Secretary considers
    appropriate to protect the interests of the United States.

      Section 1012--Report on Repair of Naval Vessels in Foreign Shipyards

        This section would amend section 7310 of title 10, United
    States Code, to require the Secretary of the Navy to notify the
    appropriate congressional defense committees when repairs of
    U.S. Navy vessels, including those operated by Military Sealift
    Command and the U.S. Maritime Administration, are to occur at a
    foreign repair facility. The notification would include: a
    legal justification for the scheduled repair in a foreign
    shipyard; the vessel to be repaired; the shipyard contracted or
    designated for the repair; the cost of the repair; the schedule
    for repair; and the homeport or location of the vessel prior to
    its voyage for repair. This section would require the
    notification to be made at least 30 days prior to repairs
    beginning.

    Section 1013--Policy Relating to Major Combatant Vessels of the Strike
                        Forces of the United States Navy

        This section would amend section 1012 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) by requiring that in addition to future ship classes of
    aircraft carriers, major surface combatants, and submarines,
    that assault echelon amphibious ships also must be constructed
    with integrated nuclear power systems if the ship's light
    weight displacement is greater than 15 thousand tons.
        The committee believes the future naval force should not be
    reliant on the availability of fossil fuel for fleet
    operations. Removing the need for access to fossil fuel sources
    significantly multiplies the effectiveness of the entire battle
    force and eliminates the dependence on foreign nation support
    of deployed naval forces.

             Section 1014--National Defense Sealift Fund Amendments

        This section would amend section 2218 of title 10, United
    States Code, removing the authority of the Secretary of Defense
    from obligating or expending funds in the National Defense
    Sealift Fund for any other purpose in the National Defense
    Sealift fund that was not authorized by law. In addition this
    section would amend the definition of Department of Defense
    Sealift Vessels to only those vessels specifically authorized
    by Congress to be procured or chartered using funds from the
    National Defense Sealift Fund.

     Section 1015--Report on Contributions to the Domestic Supply of Steel
               and Other Metals from Scrapping of Certain Vessels

        This section would require that the Secretary of the Navy
    submit a report to the congressional defense committees
    containing the estimated contribution to the domestic market
    for steel and other metals from the scrapping of certain
    vessels not yet disposed of by the Navy, and a plan for the
    sale and disposal of such vessels.

                      Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities

         Section 1021--Continuation of Reporting Requirement Regarding
      Department of Defense Expenditures to Support Foreign Counter-drug
                                   Activities

        This section would extend, by one year, the requirement for
    the Secretary of Defense to submit a report detailing the
    expenditure of funds by the Secretary during fiscal year 2008
    in direct and indirect support of the counter-drug activities
    of foreign governments. This requirement expired in fiscal year
    2008. The committee notes that the Department of Defense
    continues to increase its level of counter-narcotics assistance
    to foreign law enforcement agencies and militaries in recent
    years. The committee believes that it should provide closer
    oversight of such expenditures.

     Section 1022--Extension of Authority for Joint Task Forces to Provide
       Support to Law Enforcement Agencies Conducting Counter-terrorism
                                   Activities

        This section would extend the authority provided in section
    1022b of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2004 (Public Law 108-136), which expires at the end of fiscal
    year 2008, through fiscal year 2009. The current authority
    provides that a joint task force of the Department of Defense,
    which is providing support to law enforcement agencies
    conducting counter-drug activities, may also provide, subject
    to all applicable laws and regulations, these law enforcement
    agencies with support for their counter-terrorism activities.

     Section 1023--Extension of Authority to Support Unified Counter-drug
        and Counter-terrorism Campaign in Colombia and Continuation of
         Numerical Limitation on Assignment of United States Personnel

        This section would extend the continuation of authorities
    provided in section 1021 of the Ronald W. Reagan National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-
    375), which allows the Department of Defense to support a
    unified campaign against narcotics trafficking and activities
    by organizations designated as terrorist organizations for
    fiscal year 2009. This section would also extend the limitation
    on the number of U.S. military and federally funded civilian
    contractor personnel in the Republic of Colombia through fiscal
    year 2009. Section 1021 limits the number of military personnel
    in Colombia to 800 people and the number of federally funded
    civilian contractors to 600 people. This section would extend
    the authorities for an additional year to provide support to
    Colombian efforts against the three designated, Colombian-based
    Foreign Terrorist Organizations: the Revolutionary Armed Forces
    of Colombia; the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia; and
    the National Liberation Army.

         Section 1024--Expansion and Extension of Authority to Provide
       Additional Support for Counter-drug Activities of Certain Foreign
                                  Governments

        This section would extend by one fiscal year the duration
    of authority for assistance under section 1033 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
    85), as amended by section 1021 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136),
    section 1022 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), and section 1022
    of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181). The current authority, which would expire
    at the end of fiscal year 2008, enables the Department of
    Defense to provide counter-drug equipment to nations of the
    Western Hemisphere, Central Asia, and the Caucasus.
        This section would expand the list of countries that could
    qualify for assistance under section 1033 to include three West
    African countries which have been recognized by the U.S.
    Government as major transit countries, countries of concern, or
    countries from which significant counter-narcotic activities
    for sub-regions can be conducted. These countries are: the
    Republic of Ghana; the Republic of Guinea-Bissau; and the
    Republic of Senegal. According to the 2008 International
    Narcotics Control Strategy Report of the Department of State,
    Ghana has become a ``significant transshipment point for
    illegal drugs, particularly cocaine from South America, as well
    as heroin from Southeast and Southwest Asia. Europe is the
    major destination, but drugs also flow to South Africa and to
    North America.'' For fiscal year 2008, the President determined
    that Guinea-Bissau, while not a major drug transit or major
    illicit drug producing country, is ``becoming a warehouse
    refuge and transit hub for cocaine traffickers from Latin
    America transporting cocaine to Western Europe.'' The
    Department of Defense has identified Ghana as an ``anchor
    country'' for its emerging counter-narcotic efforts through the
    African Command on the continent.
        This section would increase the funding limitation under
    section 1033 from $60.0 million to $65.0 million for fiscal
    year 2009.
        This section would make a technical correction to section
    1033 to reflect the respective name today of the Committee on
    Foreign Affairs.
        The committee notes that the Department has not fully
    utilized the existing section 1033 authority with regard to all
    of the eligible countries and will again evaluate its use over
    fiscal year 2009.
        The committee also notes that although the Republic of
    Ecuador is currently eligible to receive support under section
    1033, it will consider that country's cooperation with the
    United States on counter-narcotic activities through the
    remainder of fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 2009 to determine
    whether it should remain eligible.

    Section 1025--Comprehensive Department of Defense Strategy for Counter-
               narcotics Efforts for West Africa and the Maghreb

        This section would require that the Secretary of Defense,
    in consultation with the Secretary of State, prepare a counter-
    drug plan for all eligible governments under section 1033 for
    fiscal year 2009 and updates thereafter, as well as a region-
    wide, counter-drug plan for Africa, with a special emphasis on
    West Africa and the Maghreb.

    Section 1026--Comprehensive Department of Defense Strategy for Counter-
              narcotics Efforts in South and Central Asian Regions

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report to the congressional defense committees by
    March 1, 2009, that outlines the Department's role, missions,
    objectives, and budget in support of the overall U.S.
    Government counter-narcotics strategy and activities in the
    South and Central Asian regions and other geographically
    proximate countries. The report would also describe measures
    that will be utilized to evaluate the success of these elements
    toward reducing the production and trafficking of illicit
    narcotics in these regions and countries.
        The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense submitted
    a report to the congressional defense committees on September
    24, 2007, updating the inter-agency counter-narcotics plan for
    the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the South and Central
    Asian regions as directed by the committee in section 1025 of
    the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364). However, with regard to South
    and Central Asian regions, the committee is concerned that the
    Department has not clearly articulated its role, missions,
    objectives and associated measures of progress for its efforts
    that support the broader U.S. counter-narcotics strategy within
    the South and Central Asian regions. Furthermore, the committee
    notes that the Department has not adequately identified how its
    counter-narcotics efforts in South and Central Asia complement
    the overall U.S. Government counter-narcotics strategy for
    Afghanistan.
        The committee supports the efforts of the Department to use
    counter-narcotics resources to support the U.S. counter-
    narcotics strategy in South and Central Asia. However, the
    committee continues to believe that the Department must only
    fund and manage activities within its core mission and must not
    take on leading roles in missions for which with other U.S.
    Government agencies have core responsibilities.

                       Subtitle D--Boards and Commissions

             Section 1031--Strategic Communication Management Board

        This section would require the Department to create a
    Strategic Communication Management Board (SCMB) consisting of
    representation from the services, Joint Staff, combatant
    commands, and from divisions within the Office of the Secretary
    of Defense responsible for strategic communication and public
    diplomacy. Members of the Board will also include interagency
    partners as advisory members. The SCMB's purpose is to
    establish guidance to the Department related to strategic
    communication and military support to public diplomacy and will
    include a charter to assist with the establishment of
    priorities and improving intra- and inter-departmental
    coordination.
        The committee is concerned about the state of strategic
    communication and public diplomacy (SC/PD) efforts within the
    Department of Defense. The committee believes that the
    dissolution of the strategic communication integration group
    (SCIG) was a major setback to the coordination of SC/PD
    efforts. While the SCIG resources and authority may not have
    been adequate to completely manage the Department's SC/PD
    effort, the Board remained a focal point within the Department
    and positively contributed to the effort to mitigate conflict
    and confusion.
        The committee believes that the SCMB's near-term priority
    should be the development of a comprehensive Department-wide
    strategy that can be used to effectively inform and guide the
    disparate and vast community involved in strategic
    communication activities. Such a product should simultaneously
    serve as a Department perspective for informing a more
    comprehensive government-wide strategic communication strategy.

     Section 1032--Extension of Certain Dates for Congressional Commission
                 on the Strategic Posture of the United States

        This section would amend section 1062 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181) to modify the deadline by which the Congressional
    Commission on U.S. Strategic Posture must report its analysis
    and recommendations. The Commission's final report to Congress
    would be required by March 1, 2009, and an interim report would
    be due by December 1, 2008.

       Section 1033--Extension of Commission to Assess the Threat to the
             United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack

        This section would extend the operation of the Commission
    to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic
    Pulse (EMP) Attack until March 31, 2012, and require the
    Commission to provide an annual report beginning on March 1,
    2010: (1) assessing the changes to the vulnerability of U.S.
    military systems and critical civilian infrastructures
    resulting from the EMP threat and changes in the threat; (2) on
    the progress, or lack of progress, protecting U.S. military
    systems and critical civilian infrastructures from EMP attack;
    and (3) including Commission recommendations to address the
    threat and protect U.S. military and civilian systems from
    attack.
        This section would authorize up to $3.0 million for the
    Commission's activities in a given year. This section would
    also add two members to the Commission: one appointed by the
    Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, and one
    appointed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
        The committee notes that it expects the Commission to
    provide the report focused on the original requirements
    established in the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398) to
    the committee by the November 30, 2008 deadline.

                        Subtitle E--Studies and Reports

            Section 1041--Report on Corrosion Control and Prevention

        This section would require the Department of Defense,
    through the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight, to
    provide a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
    the House Committee on Armed Services by February 1, 2009,
    regarding the potential for improvements in corrosion control
    and prevention in weapons systems by planning for corrosion
    control and prevention earlier in the system requirements and
    acquisition processes. Specifically, the Department would be
    required to examine corrosion control and prevention as a Key
    Performance Parameter, as part of the Joint Capabilities
    Integration and Development System, or for incorporation into
    acquisition strategies. It also would require review of the
    report by the Comptroller General within 60 days of the
    submission of the report.

      Section 1042--Study on Using Department of Defense Modular Airborne
            Fire Fighting Systems in a Federal Response to Wildfires

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    complete a study on how to utilize, in a cost-effective manner,
    the Department's Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System (MAFFS)
    assets at the initial stages of wildfire-related contingencies
    involving federal response capabilities. This section would
    require the Secretary to report the results of this study to
    the congressional defense committees within six months of the
    date of enactment of this Act.
        The committee commends the Department's MAFFS units, which
    were critical in saving lives and reducing damage during the
    federal response to the Southern California wildfires in
    October and November 2007. The committee notes, however, that
    the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), at times, does not
    use the Department's MAFFS assets when responding to wildfires
    on the basis that using the Department's MAFFS assets is cost
    prohibitive. The committee believes that the current NIFC
    resource allocation system may result in inefficient employment
    distribution and lead to unnecessary risk to life and loss of
    property.
        With regards to future employment of MAFFS assets, the
    committee believes that the maximum federal response should be
    immediately utilized whenever necessary and appropriate. The
    committee further believes the MAFFS capability is an important
    resource and should be available during the early phases of all
    contingencies.

                Section 1043--Study on Rotorcraft Survivability

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense and
    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to conduct a study on
    Department of Defense rotorcraft survivability, and provide a
    report on the study to the congressional defense committees by
    August 1, 2009.

    Section 1044--Studies to Analyze Alternative Models for Acquisition and
                 Funding of Inter-connected Cyberspace Systems

        This section would require concurrent studies by an
    independent federally funded research and development center
    and the Joint Staff to analyze alternative models and recommend
    changes to the present service-based approach for acquisition
    and funding of interconnected systems for network centric
    operations.

             Section 1045--Report on Non-strategic Nuclear Weapons

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in
    consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
    Energy, and the Director of National Intelligence, to conduct a
    review of nonstrategic nuclear weapons world-wide, and submit a
    report to Congress, within 180 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act on the findings and recommendations of the review.
        The report should include: an inventory of nonstrategic
    nuclear weapons and an assessment of the methods currently used
    to identify, track and monitor these weapons; an evaluation of
    these weapons as deterrents; an assessment of risks associated
    with these weapons; and recommendations for improving the
    security and consolidating, dismantling, and disposing of these
    weapons. The report should be submitted in unclassified form
    but may include a classified annex.

      Section 1046--Study on National Defense Implications of Section 1083

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    study the national defense implications of section 1083 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181).

       Section 1047--Report on Methods Department of Defense Utilizes to
               Ensure Compliance with Guam Tax and Licensing Laws

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report to the congressional defense committees within
    180 days after the date of enactment of this Act on the steps
    that the Department is taking to ensure that all contractors of
    the Department performing work on Guam comply with local tax
    and licensing requirements.

                     Subtitle F--Congressional Recognitions

      Section 1051--Sense of Congress Honoring the Honorable Duncan Hunter

        This section would enumerate the accomplishments of
    Representative Duncan Hunter during his career and express the
    sincere gratitude of Congress and the nation.

    Section 1052--Sense of Congress in Honor of the Honorable Jim Saxton, a
                     Member of the House of Representatives

        This section would enumerate the accomplishments and honor
    the service of Representative Jim Saxton during his 24-year
    career on the House Committee on Armed Services and in the
    House of Representatives, and would express the sincere
    gratitude of Congress and the nation.

      Section 1053--Sense of Congress honoring the Honorable Terry Everett

        This section would honor the leadership and character
    demonstrated by Representative Terry Everett during his 16-year
    career on the House Committee on Armed Services and in the
    House of Representatives, and would express the sincere
    gratitude of Congress and the nation.

      Section 1054--Sense of Congress Honoring the Honorable Jo Ann Davis

        This section would express the sense of Congress that the
    Honorable Jo Ann Davis, a late Representative from Virginia,
    performed her duties with integrity and distinction, served the
    House of Representatives and the American people selflessly,
    and deserves the sincere and humble gratitude of Congress and
    the nation.

                           Subtitle G--Other Matters

     Section 1061--Amendment to Annual Submission of Information Regarding
                     Information Technology Capital Assets

        This section would change the requirement to report on
    programs based on life cycle cost, which is difficult to
    estimate for information technology systems, and substitute
    with a requirement based on the need to submit a Capital Asset
    Plan in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget
    Circular A-11, Section 300. This section would synchronize the
    information the Department provides both Congress and the
    Office of Management and Budget for reporting on major
    Department of Defense information technology investments.

       Section 1062--Restriction on Department of Defense Relocation of
         Missions or Functions from Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station

        This section would prevent the future movement of any
    missions or functions related to Cheyenne Mountain Air Force
    Station until the Secretary of Defense has submitted a report
    and certified to Congress on the costs and benefits of any
    move. The report and certification shall include: a cost
    estimate; independent vulnerability and risk assessment; and
    the Secretary's implementation plan to address the
    vulnerabilities and risks identified in the assessment. The
    report and certification shall be submitted to the
    congressional defense committees 30 days prior to any movement
    of missions or functions.

                Section 1063--Technical and Clerical Amendments

        This section would make a number of technical and clerical
    amendments of a non-substantive nature to existing law.

    Section 1064--Submission to Congress of Revision to Regulation on Enemy
      Prisoners of War, Retained Personnel, Civilian Internees, and Other
                                   Detainees

        This section would require that the Secretary of Defense
    submit to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
    Committee on Armed Services the updated, successor regulation
    to Army Regulation 190-8, Enemy Prisoners of War, Retained
    Personnel, Civilian Internees and Other Detainees (dated
    October 1, 1997) before the Department would be permitted to
    conduct activities pursuant to it.
        This section also clarifies that the existing Army
    Regulation 190-9 would not be impaired in any way by the
    notification procedure of this section.

         Section 1065--Authorization of Appropriations for Payments to
           Portuguese Nationals Employed by the Department of Defense

        This section would authorize payments for salary increases
    based on wage survey data for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. Such
    Portuguese nationals employed by the Department of Defense for
    payments may only be paid if: (1) the wage survey methodology
    described in the United States--Portugal Agreement on
    Cooperation and Defense, signed at Lisbon on June 1, 1995, is
    eliminated; and (2) that agreement and any implementing
    regulations be revised to explicitly state that future
    increases in the pay of Portuguese nationals employed by the
    Department of Defense in Portuguese Republic are in compliance
    with United States law and regulations prescribed by the
    Secretary of Defense.

                 Section 1066--State Defense Force Improvement

        The section would amend section 109 of title 32, United
    States Code, to recognize state defense forces as an integral
    military component of the United States, and would authorize
    the Secretary of Defense to coordinate, assist, train, and
    transfer excess equipment to a state defense force provided the
    Secretary determines certain conditions are met. This section
    would also provide that funds available to the Department may
    not be made available to a state defense force.

          Section 1067--Barnegat Inlet to Little Egg Inlet, New Jersey

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    undertake, at federal expense, appropriate measures as the
    Secretary determines to be necessary and in the public interest
    to address munitions placed on the beach during the
    construction of the Barnegat Inlet to Little Egg Inlet
    Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction project.

    Section 1068--Sense of Congress Regarding the Roles and Mission of the
         Department of Defense and Other National Security Institutions

        This section would express the sense of Congress that to
    ensure the future security of the United States, all of the
    national security organizations of the federal government must
    work together more effectively and that institutionalizing
    effective coordination within and among those organizations may
    require fundamental reform.

         Section 1069--Sense of Congress Relating to 2008 Supplemental
                                 Appropriations

        This section would express the sense of Congress that
    readiness shortfalls exist within the armed forces of the
    United States and that Congress has provided, and will continue
    to provide, funds to address such shortfalls.

     Section 1070--Sense of Congress Regarding Defense Requirements of the
                                 United States

        This section would express the sense of Congress that the
    defense requirements of the United States should be based on a
    comprehensive national security strategy and fully funded to
    counter present and emerging threats.

                      TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

    Implementation of Existing Policies for Medical Care for Department of
     Defense and Non-Department of Defense Civilians Injured or Wounded in
                       Support of Contingency Operations

        The committee is concerned that Department of Defense (DOD)
    civilians who are injured or wounded while serving in support
    of a contingency operation may not be receiving adequate
    medical treatment or administrative support for such injuries.
    The committee is aware that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    issued a memorandum, ``Policy Guidance for Provision of Medical
    Care to Department of Defense Civilian Employees Injured or
    Wounded While Forward Deployed in Support of Hostilities,'' on
    September 24, 2007. However, the committee is concerned that
    this policy may not be sufficient to address the full scope of
    medical care and treatment that may be required, and may not be
    communicated to such eligible employees and providers.
        In addition, the committee is concerned that non-DOD
    federal civilian personnel who become ill, injured, or wounded
    while serving in a combat zone in support of United States
    armed forces may be eligible for care with military medical
    facilities in theatre, but the conditions for such medical care
    eligibility are not well-defined, nor well-communicated to non-
    DOD federal agencies and their employees.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to:
              (1) Review and establish a process to provide
            oversight of the implementation of all existing
            policies, directives, and instructions to ensure
            comprehensive coverage to meet the medical requirements
            of injured or wounded DOD federal civilians;
              (2) Establish a toll-free number to provide injured
            and wounded DOD federal civilian personnel a one-stop
            opportunity to obtain information and assistance; and
              (3) Define for non-DOD federal civilian personnel the
            process and conditions for approving medical care for
            non-DOD federal civilian personnel at military medical
            facilities in theatre, and to distribute such
            information to appropriate individuals within other
            federal agencies for dissemination to their employees.
        The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report on the status of these actions to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services by March 31, 2009.

                   Information Technology Workforce Analysis

        The committee is concerned about the government's ability
    to compete with industrial and academic sectors to attract and
    retain the high-quality information technology workforce needed
    to support future networked military forces. In order to
    collect substantial data and develop a quantifiable analysis on
    this concern, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report to the congressional defense committees within
    120 days after the date of enactment of this Act. This report
    shall include an analysis of the sufficiency of the Department
    of Defense (DOD) workforce. The analysis shall address the
    number of billets in the Department, available and filled, and
    an analysis of the knowledge, skills, and attributes required
    for these billets. The report shall also address the adequacy
    of the workforce supply pipeline, and include an examination of
    educational curricula and expected future needs for DOD
    software engineering programs at the university and post-
    graduate level.

      Review of Medical Care for Federal Civilian Employees Serving in a
                             Contingency Operation

        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to establish
    a working group within the Department of Defense to examine the
    medical care for civilian employees serving in a contingency
    operation.
        The working group should be comprised at least of the
    following members:
              (1) A member from one of the services' medical
            departments;
              (2) A member from the Office of the Under Secretary
            of Defense for Personnel and Readiness;
              (3) A member from the Office of Personnel Management;
              (4) A member from the Office of Management and
            Budget;
              (5) A member from the Department of State;
              (6) A member from the Defense Business Board;
              (7) A member from one of the federal employee
            organizations;
              (8) A member from the Department of Labor;
              (9) A member from the Department of Justice;
              (10) A member from the United States Agency for
            International Development; and
              (11) A member from the Department of Veterans
            Affairs.
        The working group should be tasked with reviewing access to
    medical care for federal civilian employees serving in a
    contingency operation. The review should include consideration
    of whether federal civilian employees who are injured or
    wounded in a contingency operation are adequately supported and
    compensated by the Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA)
    in chapter 81, title 5, United States Code; whether existing
    policies, directives, and instructions on medical coverage for
    injured or wounded civilians are adequate and fully
    communicated to employees and their supervisors; the
    development of a training regime to ensure awareness of agency
    policies and FECA procedures and requirements for employees and
    their supervisors; the need to provide mental health support to
    federal civilian employees in theatre and upon their return;
    whether recovery care coordinators should be established for
    injured or wounded federal civilians; and whether such
    individuals should have access to specialized treatments that
    are occurring within the military medical community. These
    reviews should include a recommendation on who is responsible
    for such care and treatment, and if the Department is
    determined to be able to provide the best course of action,
    then how the Department will be reimbursed for such services.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit
    the results of the working group's assessment to the
    congressional defense committees by March 31, 2009.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

     Section 1101--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on Premium Pay
                             for Federal Employees

        This section would extend, for one additional year, the
    authority of the head of a federal agency to waive the
    limitations on the amount of premium pay that may be paid to a
    civilian employee who performs certain work in an overseas
    location that falls under the responsibility of the U.S.
    Central Command, or in support of a military operation or
    responding to an emergency declared by the President. The total
    compensation would be limited to $212,100 per calendar year.

        Section 1102--Extension of Authority to Make Lump-Sum Severance
                                    Payments

        This section would extend, from 2010 to 2014, existing
    authorities under section 5595 of title 5, United States Code,
    to allow the Department of Defense to pay, upon request,
    severance pay in one lump sum in lieu of bi-weekly payments to
    eligible employees being involuntarily separated. If an
    employee receiving a lump sum payment is reemployed by the
    federal government or the District of Columbia during the
    severance pay time period, the employee must pay back the
    portion of the payment that would not have been received under
    the bi-weekly option.

     Section 1103--Extension of Voluntary Reduction-in-Force Authority of
                             Department of Defense

        This section would extend, from 2010 to 2014, existing
    authorities under section 3502 of title 5, United States Code,
    to allow an employee who is not affected by a reduction in
    force (RIF) to volunteer to be separated to protect another
    employee from being involuntarily separated by RIF procedures.
    The intent of this authority is to minimize the negative impact
    of downsizing within the Department of Defense.

        Section 1104--Technical Amendment to Definition of Professional
                              Accounting Position

        This section would update the current statutory definition
    of professional accounting positions in section 1599d of title
    10, United States Code, to recognize the establishment of the
    National Security Personnel System, which does not utilize the
    General Schedule in defining positions.

     Section 1105--Expedited Hiring Authority for Health Care Professionals

        This section would amend section 1599c of title 10, United
    States Code, to provide the Secretary of Defense with temporary
    expedited hiring authority for health care professionals. For
    purposes of sections 3304, 5333, and 5753 of title 5, United
    States Code, the Secretary would be allowed to designate health
    care positions as shortage category positions, and to recruit,
    appoint, and establish special pay criteria for qualified
    individuals in such positions. This section also would require
    the Department of Defense to utilize preferences for hiring
    veterans and other statutory categories of personnel. The
    committee recognizes the Department's immediate need for health
    care professionals to meet the medical needs of our military
    men and women. This section would expire in 2012.

    Section 1106--Authority to Adjust Certain Limitations on Personnel and
                          Reports on Such Adjustments

        This section would permit the Department of Defense and the
    military services to exceed the limitation on personnel by no
    more than five percent each year above the baseline, if it is
    determined to be necessary to eliminate a contract being
    performed for an inherently governmental function, or a
    contract that is being performed that is closely associated
    with an inherently governmental function, such as a lead
    systems integrator function which was prohibited in the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181). The baseline personnel limitation for fiscal year
    2009 is the current statutory limitation. This section would
    authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish a new baseline
    each year based on the lesser of the previous year's five
    percent increase, or the actual personnel increase. This
    section also would require the Secretary of Defense to submit
    an annual report accompanying the budget request documenting
    the use of this authority. Finally, this section would require
    the Comptroller General to conduct an evaluation of the
    Department's use of this authority and report to the
    congressional defense committees on the Comptroller's findings
    by April 15, 2009.

     Section 1107--Temporary Discretionary Authority to Grant Allowances,
    Benefits, and Gratuities to Personnel on Official Duty in a Combat Zone

        This section would provide temporary discretionary
    authority to federal agencies to grant allowances, benefits,
    and gratuities--comparable to those provided to members of the
    foreign service--to an agency's civilian employees on official
    duty in a combat zone. This authority would expire in 2011.

     Section 1108--Requirement Relating to Furloughs During the Time of a
                             Contingency Operation

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense, before
    issuing any furlough notices to civilian employees of the
    Department of Defense on the basis of a lack of funds during
    contingency operations, to certify to the congressional defense
    committees that he has no other legal measures to avoid such
    furloughs. The committee believes the certification should
    include a description of the measures the Secretary of Defense
    has taken to avoid such furloughs, as well as measures taken to
    obtain the required funding.

    Section 1109--Direct Hire Authority for Certain Positions at Personnel
                           Demonstration Laboratories

        This section would provide the Secretary of Defense with
    temporary direct hire authority for scientific and engineering
    positions within certain defense laboratories. For purposes of
    sections 3304, 5333, and 5753 of title 5, United States Code,
    the Secretary would be allowed to designate scientific and
    engineering positions as shortage category positions, and to
    recruit, appoint, and establish special pay criteria for
    qualified individuals in such positions. This section also
    would limit the authority, in any calendar year, to no more
    than two percent of the total number of positions within the
    laboratory. This section would expire in 2013.

                 TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                     Combatant Commanders' Initiative Fund

        The committee welcomes the Department of Defense's added
    emphasis on using the Combatant Commanders' Initiative Fund
    (CCIF), as established in section 166a of title 10, United
    States Code, and modified by the John Warner National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), as
    a valuable tool for combatant commanders to tailor programs and
    initiatives for their respective areas of responsibility. The
    committee also notes the Department's plans to increase the use
    of this authority, as amended, so that combatant commanders can
    better provide urgent and unanticipated humanitarian relief and
    reconstruction assistance to countries, particularly where U.S.
    armed forces are engaged in contingency operations.
        Because the use of this modified authority is a relatively
    recent development, the committee expects that the Department
    will update its guidelines for use of the CCIF, especially as
    it relates to humanitarian relief and reconstruction
    activities, to ensure that the authority can be used quickly
    and without bureaucratic delay in urgent situations. As noted
    in the conference report accompanying the John Warner National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
    364), the committee underscores that CCIF authority,
    particularly as it relates to humanitarian relief and
    reconstruction activities, is not intended for use in the
    Islamic Republic of Afghanistan or the Republic of Iraq so long
    as the Commanders' Emergency Response Program or other similar
    authority is available for use in those countries.
        Finally, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    submit an annual report on the exercise of CCIF authority for
    fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011. Each report shall be due to
    the congressional defense committees within 90 days after the
    end of the respective fiscal year and shall, at a minimum,
    identify each foreign nation that received assistance under
    CCIF authority for that fiscal year, the amount of that
    assistance, and the national security rationale for providing
    that assistance.

                 Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Iraq

        The committee notes with significant concern the increasing
    requests for funding for the Commanders' Emergency Response
    Program (CERP) in the Republic of Iraq at a time when the
    Government of Iraq is experiencing unanticipated increases in
    national revenue, has a growing institutional capability to
    undertake its own humanitarian and reconstruction projects, and
    has itself contributed its own national funds to projects
    administered under CERP authority. Moreover, the committee
    notes that the increasing requests do not reflect comparable
    growth of CERP projects to address similar needs in the Islamic
    Republic of Afghanistan theater of operations. Accordingly, the
    committee recommends a provision elsewhere in this title to
    limit the expenditure of U.S. CERP funds in fiscal year 2009 to
    no more than twice the amount obligated by the Government of
    Iraq for its CERP account in calendar year 2008.
        The committee also directs the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report to the congressional defense committees within
    90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, detailing: how
    the Department of Defense formulated base budget and
    supplemental budget requests for the CERP program to date and
    how the Department takes into account the increasing receipts
    of the Government of Iraq; the increasing capability of the
    Government of Iraq in undertaking humanitarian and
    reconstruction projects to benefit the Iraqi people;
    contributions from the Government of Iraq; and the needs in the
    Islamic Republic of Afghanistan when formulating CERP requests.

                               Foreign Disclosure

        The committee notes that the protection of classified
    information is one of the paramount responsibilities of the
    Department of Defense. Military officers, civilians employed by
    the Department of Defense, and in some cases contractor
    personnel, interact with foreign personnel of allied militaries
    and coalition partners in environments where the protection of
    classified information is challenging, and where the proper
    sharing of information is essential to the mission. The
    committee encourages the Department to provide training to all
    such personnel on the rules regarding foreign disclosure of
    sensitive information. Such training is especially important
    for members of the reserve component called to duty in
    positions requiring the handling of sensitive information and
    foreign disclosure.

                             Foreign Military Sales

        The committee notes that the training and equipping of
    foreign security forces is an increasingly important element of
    U.S. national security policy and is an area with growing
    involvement by the Department of Defense. Foreign military
    sales (FMS) can be a highly beneficial and effective part of
    this effort. For example, in recent years, the Government of
    Iraq has increasingly utilized the FMS process to acquire and
    sustain U.S.-origin military equipment because the FMS process
    provides high-quality equipment while minimizing concerns about
    procurement integrity that otherwise have inhibited the
    Republic of Iraq's efforts to make major investments in
    equipment. As the United States focuses increasingly on
    building partnership capacity around the world, it is often
    doing so with countries that are not traditional FMS customers.
    These countries have underdeveloped institutional capacities,
    particularly in matters of budgeting and acquisition, which
    present challenges for an FMS sales system that has
    traditionally focused on sales to longer-term, more developed
    allies.
        These trends have correctly led to a reexamination of the
    policies and processes associated with FMS, including the
    appointment of a dedicated FMS task force by the Deputy
    Secretary of Defense. The committee is pleased to note that the
    efforts of this task force led to a significant reduction in
    the time needed to process high-priority FMS requests. The
    committee expects that the Department will continue to examine
    the policies and processes associated with FMS to ensure that
    they are appropriately tailored to the changing environment for
    this program.
        At the same time, the committee notes that processes other
    than FMS that have been and are still being used to equip
    foreign security forces, particularly the special funds for
    Iraqi and Afghan security forces, have proven extremely
    vulnerable to materiel diversion, corruption, and
    accountability failures. These failures can not only limit the
    effectiveness of U.S. assistance, in extreme cases, they can
    and have led to outcomes that work at cross purposes to U.S.
    policy and the military mission. The FMS program is a better
    long-term alternative to these more ad hoc programs, which have
    limited institutional support and under-developed
    accountability processes.
        The FMS program suffers from its own accountability issues
    as highlighted in reports issued by the Government
    Accountability Office and by the recent discovery of the
    accidental delivery of classified parts to the Republic of
    China on Taiwan. The Government Accountability Office
    identified numerous cases of shipments leaving U.S. ports in
    which the defense articles were not authorized by the FMS
    agreement, the FMS agreement was closed, or the value of the
    articles exceeded the amount authorized. The Government
    Accountability Office also found that there is no effective
    system for tracking shipments after they have left a U.S. port,
    which increases opportunities for diversion, improper delivery,
    or theft. The committee expects the Department to work and
    share information with other federal agencies to correct
    problems with tracking FMS shipments at U.S. ports and during
    transport to the country of destination.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, working in
    coordination with the Secretary of State, to submit a report,
    by September 1, 2008, to the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services, the House Committee on Armed Services, the Senate
    Committee on Foreign Relations, and the House Committee on
    Foreign Affairs containing an analysis of the implications of
    the Department's efforts to build partner capacity around the
    globe for the FMS program, measures needed to address problems
    with the tracking of FMS shipments, and efforts within the
    Department to update its policies and processes for handling
    FMS.

        Graduates of the Jordanian International Police Training Center

        The committee has previously noted its concern about the
    ability to track the status of those Iraqi Police Forces who
    have been trained and equipped by coalition forces. In
    particular, the committee is concerned about the status of past
    graduates of the Jordanian International Police Training Center
    (JIPTC). The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    submit a report within 180 days after the date of enactment of
    this Act to the congressional defense committees on the current
    status of all Iraqi graduates of the JIPTC, including the
    number who are still part of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF),
    the number who are no longer part of the ISF, and the number,
    if any, who have been detained by coalition or Iraqi
    authorities.

     Honoring and Acknowledging Service Members Redeploying from Operation
                  Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom

        The committee believes that the service, contributions and
    sacrifices made by the men and women of the armed forces in
    support of their missions in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)
    and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) have resulted in many
    significant accomplishments that will provide lasting benefits,
    and that their accomplishments should be honored not only by
    the people of Iraq and Afghanistan but by all Americans. The
    committee believes that the service, sacrifice, and
    accomplishments of these service members should be honored and
    acknowledged by their leaders prior to their redeploying from
    OIF and OEF. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary
    of Defense to transmit guidance throughout the Department, in a
    manner and form the Secretary deems appropriate, to implement
    the issuance of statements to service members honoring and
    acknowledging their service prior to their redeployment from
    theater.

       Integrating Inter-agency Capabilities into Department of Defense
                       Planning for Stability Operations

        The committee commends the ``Report to Congress on the
    Implementation of DOD Directive 3000.05 Military Support for
    Stability, Security, Transition and Reconstruction (SSTR)
    Operations'' required by section 1035 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364). The report served as a useful, informative guide
    to the evolution of SSTR-related policies at the Department of
    Defense (DOD). The report recognizes the essential contribution
    that civilian agencies must make to successful stability
    operations. The committee also commends the military services'
    ongoing efforts in this area, particularly Army Field Manual 3-
    0, which acknowledges and incorporates the role of civilian
    expertise. The committee shares the Department's view that this
    is an area that deserves substantial attention and one where
    policies will continue to evolve.
        Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to provide to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
    House Committee on Armed Services within 90 days after the date
    of enactment of this Act a report containing an update on the
    further implementation of DOD Directive 3000.05, including:
              (1) Efforts to identify and prioritize needed SSTR
            capabilities, both military and civilian, during every
            phase of an operation;
              (2) The development of measures of effectiveness to
            evaluate progress in achieving these capabilities;
              (3) Steps taken to integrate civilian personnel and
            capabilities more fully into military planning and
            scenario development;
              (4) Efforts to update DOD planning guidance to
            require that the SSTR planning review process includes
            validation that lessons learned, especially lessons
            learned from the establishment and operation of
            Provincial Reconstruction Teams in the Republic of Iraq
            and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, have been
            considered and adopted as appropriate; and
              (5) Continuing challenges or obstacles to integrated
            inter-agency support for SSTR operations, and potential
            solutions for mitigating them, including methods for
            achieving greater inter-agency participation in the
            development of military plans.

              Oversight of Department of Defense Policies on Iran

        The committee remains seriously concerned about certain
    activities undertaken by the government of the Islamic Republic
    of Iran and believes that many of Iran's policies and actions
    threaten the internal security of its neighbors and the
    collective stability of the Middle East region. The committee
    notes that it has held briefings and hearings throughout the
    last year on a range of security issues involving Iran,
    including:
              (1) Coalition measures to stop Iranian support for
            insurgents and militias in the Republic of Iraq;
              (2) Efforts under the Gulf Security Dialogue to help
            build stability and security in the Middle East region;
              (3) The activities of Iranian Navy's patrol craft in
            close proximity to U.S. military ships in the Strait of
            Hormuz;
              (4) Iranian conventional military capabilities: and
              (5) Iranian nuclear intentions and capabilities as
            assessed in the November 2007 National Intelligence
            Estimate.
        The committee appreciates the information that has been
    provided by the Department of Defense, the Department of State,
    and other federal agencies on Iran. The committee encourages
    the Department of Defense and other agencies to remain actively
    engaged with the committee on security matters involving Iran,
    and to keep the committee fully informed on these matters.

             Reconstruction, Security, and Stabilization Assistance

        The committee believes that the authority provided in
    section 1207 of the National Defense Authorization Action for
    Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163), provides the Department
    of State with critical resources to engage in reconstruction,
    security, or stabilization activities. The committee reaffirms
    that the resources provided under this authority are intended
    to meet immediate, short-term needs. They are not intended for
    long-term development programs, even when other funding
    authorities that currently exist are not sufficient or
    appropriate. Nor is this authority intended to be used for
    broader security assistance initiatives that would be better
    suited for traditional foreign military financing authorities;
    as stated in the conference report accompanying Public Law 109-
    163, Congress does not believe it is appropriate to provide
    long-term funding from the Department of Defense to the
    Department of State so that the Department of State can fulfill
    its statutory requirements. Finally, this authority should not
    be used for broader security assistance programs undertaken
    under the type of authority provided under section 1206 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public
    Law 109-163), as amended by section 1206 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364).

     Report on Command and Control Structure for Military Forces Operating
                            in the Republic of Korea

        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, by December
    1, 2008, to submit to the congressional defense committees a
    report on the command and control structure for military forces
    operating in the Republic of Korea (ROK), which include ROK,
    U.S., and other international forces, following the U.S.
    transfer of wartime operational control of ROK forces to the
    ROK by 2012. The report shall address the command and control
    structure for such forces in both peacetime and wartime and
    include a detailed explanation of how such command and control
    structure achieves unity of command and U.S. security
    objectives on the Korean peninsula.

       Report on Efforts to Train and Equip the Afghan National Security
                                     Forces

        The committee notes that in recent committee hearings and
    briefings, senior Department of Defense officials have
    emphasized that training and equipping the Afghan National Army
    and Afghan National Police of the Afghan National Security
    Forces (ANSF) is a cornerstone of the U.S. strategy in the
    Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and a key to success there. The
    committee is seriously concerned that efforts to train and
    equip the ANSF continue to be hampered by a chronic shortage of
    qualified trainers and mentors for the ANSF, and that the ANSF
    continues to be plagued by corruption, absenteeism, and other
    problems. The committee urges the Department of Defense to
    strengthen its efforts to address these problems, and to build
    and sustain a strong and fully capable ANSF that will be able
    to independently and effectively conduct operations and
    maintain long-term security and stability in Afghanistan.
        The committee notes that it receives a monthly report from
    the U.S. Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan
    (CSTCA-A) on the ANSF, which includes the shortfall of U.S.
    trainers and mentors for the ANSF. However, the committee notes
    that the report does not include the shortfall of all personnel
    required to train, mentor and support the ANSF, which has been
    the subject of public statements and testimony before the
    committee by the Secretary of Defense. The committee therefore
    directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the monthly
    report, beginning on the first month following the date of the
    enactment of this Act, contains the shortfall of all personnel
    required to train, mentor, and support the ANSF. The report
    shall clearly set forth the shortfall of all U.S. personnel,
    including U.S. personnel that are part of North Atlantic Treaty
    Organization (NATO) Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams
    (OMLTs) for the Afghan National Army. The report shall also
    describe the mechanism employed to identify U.S. requirements
    for ANSF trainers and mentors, and include any commitments from
    NATO countries for OMLTs. The report shall be submitted in
    unclassified form but may include a classified annex if
    necessary.
        The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense, by
    December 1, 2008, to submit to the congressional defense
    committees a report on any ongoing and planned actions of the
    Department of Defense to: address the shortfall of U.S.
    trainers and mentors for the ANSF; encourage NATO countries to
    fulfill the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force
    (ISAF) Combined Joint Statement of Requirements (CJSOR)
    shortfalls for OMLTs; and increase contributions from NATO
    countries and other international partners for building and
    sustaining the ANSF.

     Review of Provincial Reconstruction Team Personnel and Training, and
    Department of Defense Measures to Support the Development of a Corps of
         Civilian and Military Personnel for Future Stabilization and
                           Reconstruction Operations

        The committee notes that military and civilian personnel
    have performed admirably in filling positions on Provincial
    Reconstruction Teams (PRT) in the Islamic Republic of
    Afghanistan and the Republic of Iraq. However, the committee is
    concerned that current civilian and military personnel systems
    may not be adequate to identify and select personnel to serve
    on PRTs, recognize and reward the service of those who have
    volunteered for PRT assignments, or attract qualified personnel
    with the skills and experience needed to perform successfully
    on PRTs in the future. Further, the committee notes that the
    pre-deployment training for military and civilian personnel
    serving in PRTs in Afghanistan and Iraq has developed in an ad
    hoc manner and varies greatly depending on the theater in which
    the personnel will serve. For example, it appears certain PRT
    personnel had no pre-deployment PRT mission-specific training
    requirement.
        The committee believes that the United States likely will
    be called upon again to provide the sustained effort necessary
    to stabilize and rebuild a nation and that such effort is
    likely to require a corps of military and civilian personnel
    with unique skills and expertise. The committee believes that
    this likelihood mandates that the Department of Defense
    carefully review the selection, training, and performance of
    PRT personnel, and begin to consider how to establish and
    maintain a corps of future commanders, leaders, and other
    personnel for organizations designed to perform stability and
    reconstruction missions.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to undertake such a review and submit a report to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services within six months after the date of enactment of this
    Act. At a minimum, the report shall include the following:
              (1) In the case of military officers and enlisted
            personnel who served on a PRT, a listing of the types
            of personnel selected for service as part of a PRT,
            including information regarding skill sets and
            experience levels compared to the skill sets and
            experience levels required by the PRTs; whether the
            military or civilian skills of reserve component
            members on PRTs were used to meet PRT requirements and
            how civilian skills of reservists' were assessed in the
            selection process; the number and type of decorations
            and awards received by PRT personnel relative to their
            peers; promotion, command, or leadership selection for
            military personnel who served on a PRT relative to
            their peers; and if credit for serving in a joint or
            inter-agency billet was provided to personnel who
            served as part of a PRT.
              (2) In the case of Department of Defense civilian
            personnel who served on a PRT, a listing of the types
            of personnel selected including information regarding
            skill and experience levels compared to the skill sets
            and experience levels required by the PRTs; the number
            and type of awards received by personnel who served on
            a PRT relative to their peers; and advanced training,
            education, and promotion opportunities that were
            provided following assignment to PRTs, relative to
            their peers.
              (3) A description of Department of Defense plans to
            work with the Department of State and other federal
            departments and agencies, as appropriate, to integrate
            and standardize training for personnel assigned to PRTs
            in the future, including measures to ensure that both
            Department of Defense and non-Department of Defense PRT
            personnel can train together as early in the pre-
            deployment schedule as possible; measures to ensure
            that all PRT personnel receive pre-deployment PRT
            mission-specific training, as appropriate; measures to
            ensure that in the future PRT personnel would be able
            to train with the maneuver units with which they would
            work, where such is appropriate and practicable;
            measures to standardize training on force protection
            and combat life saving skills; measures to ensure the
            cross-utilization of training facilities for all
            personnel, including courses offered by the Foreign
            Service Institute, if appropriate; and measures to
            ensure that the cost of training personnel and
            providing personnel to conduct training are shared with
            other agencies, as required.
              (4) A discussion of the Department of Defense
            consideration of measures to develop a corps of
            civilian and military personnel for stabilization and
            reconstruction operations in the future, including
            potential requirements to develop specific security,
            stability, transition, and reconstruction (SSTR)
            operations career tracks for officers, enlisted
            personnel, and civilian personnel, as well as special
            skills identifiers or experience identifiers for these
            assignments; coordination with the Secretary of State
            to augment exchange programs between the Department of
            State, the United States Agency for International
            Development, and the Department of Defense,
            particularly the unified combatant commands; and
            requirements to provide for the professional education
            and training of military and civilian personnel and to
            coordinate the development of inter-agency stability
            and reconstruction curriculum for use in programs at
            appropriate educational institutions of the Department
            of Defense and other agencies.

       Security Developments in Pakistan and Implications for Afghanistan

        The committee is seriously concerned about instability in
    Pakistan, which has steeply increased since mid-2007, and the
    implications for U.S. national security and security in the
    Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the region. The committee
    notes that it has held hearings and briefings throughout the
    last year on a range of security issues involving Pakistan,
    including:
              (1) The security and stability situation in
            Pakistan's border areas, and any implications for
            Afghanistan;
              (2) The security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons,
            including the command and control structure;
              (3) U.S. strategy and policy involving Pakistan, in
            light of Pakistan's recent presidential and
            parliamentary elections;
              (4) Information regarding reported U.S. military
            involvement in Pakistan, including the status of any
            conversations with the Pakistani Government, and any
            Department of Defense plans;
              (5) The U.S. Security Development Plan in Pakistan,
            including efforts to train and equip the Pakistani
            Frontier Corp and establish Border Coordination
            Centers; and
              (6) Department of Defense Coalition Support Fund
            reimbursements to Pakistan and the status of efforts
            relating to section 1232 of the National Defense
            Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
            181), which includes a requirement for itemized
            descriptions of such reimbursements to Pakistan.
        The committee appreciates the information that has been
    provided by the Department of Defense and the interagency on
    Pakistan. The committee encourages the Department of Defense
    and the interagency to remain actively engaged on security
    matters involving Pakistan, and to keep the committee fully
    informed of any significant developments.

              Security for Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Iraq

        The committee is concerned about Department of Defense
    plans to provide security for Provincial Reconstruction Teams
    (PRTs) and Provincial Support Teams (PSTs) in certain provinces
    of the Republic of Iraq after the primary responsibility for
    security in those provinces is transferred to the Iraqi
    Government through the Provincial Iraqi Control (PIC) process.
    The committee also notes that such planning may be further
    complicated by the expiration of United Nations Security
    Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1790. Because PRTs and PSTs provide
    key services, support, and mentoring to the communities in
    which they operate, their continued presence is integral to the
    U.S. strategy to improve the delivery of services and the
    capacity of the Government of Iraq. Therefore, the committee
    directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
    Secretary of State, to submit a report to the Senate Committee
    on Armed Services, the House Committee on Armed Services, the
    Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and the House Committee
    on Foreign Affairs within 90 days after the date of enactment
    of this Act on how security will be provided for PRTs and PSTs
    as provinces transition under the PIC process and under any
    legal structure that replaces or supersedes UNSCR 1790.

                   Special Inspector General for Afghanistan

        The committee is seriously concerned that the President has
    not yet appointed a Special Inspector General for Afghanistan
    Reconstruction (SIGAR), pursuant to section 1229 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181), which required such appointment within 30 days
    after the date of enactment of Public Law 110-181. The
    committee emphasizes that appointment of the SIGAR is critical,
    given the need for independent and objective audits of U.S.
    Government programs and operations for Afghanistan
    reconstruction. The committee expects the President to appoint
    the SIGAR at the earliest possible time.

              Unity of Command in Provincial Reconstruction Teams

        The committee notes that Provincial Reconstruction Teams
    (PRTs) operate under complicated, and at times, unclear chains
    of command and receive direction from multiple sources. The
    lack of ``unity of command'' at every level (tactical,
    operational, and strategic) has at times resulted in
    uncoordinated, and perhaps even counterproductive, outcomes.
        The committee further notes that ``unity of command'' is a
    time-tested principle of military leadership and management
    that marries accountability with responsibility and provides
    personnel in the field a clear source of guidance and
    direction. This principle has corollaries in other activities,
    both in government and in industry, such as the principle of
    ``line management'' which denotes clear lines of authority and
    direction. The committee strongly recommends that the
    Department of Defense and the Department of State seek to unify
    leadership and command within the PRT effort to clarify
    accountability and authority in the field and that the
    President consider whether there is adequate guidance in terms
    of roles, missions, and leadership responsibilities for United
    States Government personnel in other zones of conflict.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                      Subtitle A--Assistance and Training

       Section 1201--Extension of Authority to Build the Capacity of the
                            Pakistan Frontier Corps

        This section would amend section 1206 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181), by extending the authority through fiscal year 2010.

     Section 1202--Military-to-Military Contacts and Comparable Activities

        This section would amend section 168(e) of title 10, United
    States Code, so that funds provided under that section in any
    fiscal year may be used for programs that begin in that fiscal
    year, but end in the next fiscal year, beginning with fiscal
    year 2009.

       Section 1203--Enhanced Authority to Pay Incremental Expenses for
          Participation of Developing Countries in Combined Exercises

        This section would amend section 2010 of title 10, United
    States Code, so that funds authorized under that section in any
    fiscal year are available for programs that begin in that
    fiscal year, but end in the following fiscal year, starting in
    fiscal year 2009.

     Section 1204--Extension of Temporary Authority to Use Acquisition and
      Cross-servicing Agreements to Lend Military Equipment for Personnel
                          Protection and Survivability

        This section would extend the authority first granted by
    section 1202 in the John Warner National Defense Authorization
    for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364), and amended by
    section 1254 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), from September 30, 2009,
    to September 30, 2010. This section would add two additional
    elements to the existing reporting requirement regarding the
    type and disposition of equipment lent to foreign nations under
    this authority but not returned to the United States.

       Section 1205--One-Year Extension of Authority for Distribution to
       Certain Foreign Personnel of Education and Training Materials and
          Information Technology to Enhance Military Interoperability

        This section would amend section 1207 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364), to extend the authority provided in that section
    through fiscal year 2009. This section would also prohibit the
    Secretary of Defense from providing any type assistance under
    this authority that is otherwise prohibited by law and from
    providing any type of assistance to any foreign country that is
    otherwise prohibited from receiving such type of assistance
    under any other provision of law.

      Section 1206--Modification and Extension of Authorities Relating to
            Program to Build the Capacity of Foreign Military Forces

        This section would amend section 1206 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
    163), to provide authority to use funds provided in a fiscal
    year for programs begun in that fiscal year, but continued into
    the next fiscal year, beginning with fiscal year 2009. It would
    extend the authority provided in section 1206 for an additional
    two years, through fiscal year 2010.
        The committee is disappointed to learn that, in the case of
    assistance provided to the Republic of Panama, the Department
    of Defense pushed beyond the clearly articulated limits of this
    authority and is concerned about the responsible execution of
    this authority in the future. The committee continues to
    believe that capable foreign partners play a vital role in the
    international security environment but remain unconvinced that
    this authority should reside permanently with the Department of
    Defense. The committee expects that, over the long-term, these
    ``train and equip''-type authorities, which appear to be
    migrating to the Department of Defense, might better remain
    within the Department of State's jurisdiction.
        The committee believes military-to-military programs are
    beneficial in fostering a deeper sense of partnership and
    commitment between the United States, our allies, and friends
    and therefore encourages the Department of Defense to use
    members of the United States military to conduct the training
    provided under this authority whenever possible.

      Section 1207--Extension of Authority for Security and Stabilization
                                   Assistance

        This section would amend section 1207 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
    163), by extending the authority from September 30, 2008, to
    September 30, 2010.

      Section 1208--Authority for Support of Special Operations to Combat
                                   Terrorism

        This section would strike section 1208 of the Ronald W.
    Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
    (Public Law 108-375), and amend chapter 3 of title 10, United
    States Code, to create permanent authority to provide
    assistance to foreign irregular forces, groups or individuals
    supporting special operations forces. This section would also
    authorize an increase from $25.0 million to $35.0 million the
    annual amount of assistance for activities allowed under this
    section.
        This section would affirm committee support for current and
    previous activities conducted pursuant to section 1208, as
    noted above. The committee applauds the achievements resulting
    from this program.
        The committee notes that the activities authorized by this
    section are not intended to be used for broader security
    assistance activities or other traditional foreign military
    financing authorities, such as those provided under section
    1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2006 (Public Law 109-163), and as amended.

     Section 1209--Regional Defense Combating Terrorism Fellowship Program

        This section would amend section 2249c of title 10, United
    States Code, to increase the authorized annual funding level
    for the Program from $25.0 million to $35.0 million.

              Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Iraq and Afghanistan

    Section 1211--Limitation on Availability of Funds for Certain Purposes
                                Relating to Iraq

        This section would prohibit the use of funds authorized by
    this Act or any other act to establish permanent U.S. military
    installations or bases in the Republic of Iraq or to exercise
    U.S. control of the oil resources of Iraq. The section would
    also provide a definition of the term permanent.

    Section 1212--Report on Status of Forces Agreements between the United
                                States and Iraq

        This section would require the President to submit a report
    to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services, the House Committee on Foreign
    Affairs, and the House Committee on Armed Services within 90
    days after the date of enactment of this Act on each agreement
    between the United States and the Republic of Iraq relating to:
    the legal status of U.S. military personnel, Department of
    Defense civilian personnel, and Department of Defense
    contractor personnel; the establishment of or access to
    military bases; the rules of engagement under which the U.S.
    armed forces would operate in Iraq; or any security commitment,
    arrangement, or assurance that obligates the United States to
    respond to internal or external threats against Iraq. This
    section describes the elements of the report. This section
    would require that if no agreement in these areas has been
    completed within 90 days after the date of enactment of this
    Act, the President shall notify the specified congressional
    committees that no agreement or agreements have been completed
    and shall submit the required report as soon as practicable
    after the completion of the agreement or agreements.

    Section 1213--Strategy for United States-Led Provincial Reconstruction
                                 Teams in Iraq

        This section would require that the President establish a
    strategy to ensure that U.S.-led Provincial Reconstruction
    Teams, Embedded Provincial Reconstruction Teams, and Provincial
    Support Teams are supporting the strategic goals of the
    coalition and establish measures of effectiveness and
    performance in meeting work plans. This section would also
    require the President to submit a report 60 days after the date
    of enactment of this Act and every 90 days thereafter to the
    congressional defense committees, the Senate Committee on
    Foreign Relations, and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
    on the implementation of the strategy and monitoring system.

              Section 1214--Commanders' Emergency Response Program

        This section would amend section 1202 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-
    163), as amended by section 1205 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), to
    modify the authorized level of funding for the activities of
    the Commanders' Emergency Response Program. This section would
    authorize $1.7 billion for the activities of this program in
    fiscal year 2008, and $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2009. This
    section would also impose a new limitation on the amounts that
    could be obligated and expended through the Commanders'
    Emergency Response Program in the Republic of Iraq during
    fiscal year 2009 of twice the amount obligated during calendar
    year 2008 by the Government of Iraq through the Government of
    Iraq Commanders' Emergency Response Program (I-CERP). The
    section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive this
    limitation if the Secretary determined that the waiver was
    required to meet urgent and compelling needs that if unmet,
    could rationally be expected to lead to increased threats to
    United States military and civilian personnel and notified the
    Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
    Armed Services of the waiver. The notification of the waiver
    would also require a discussion of the reasons the waiver was
    required, efforts undertaken to convince the Government of Iraq
    to provide funds to meet the unmet needs and why those efforts
    were unsuccessful, and efforts of the Department of Defense to
    convince the Government of Iraq to meet such needs in the
    future.

       Section 1215--Performance Monitoring System for United States-led
                 Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan

        This section would require the President, acting through
    the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State, to develop and
    implement a performance monitoring system for the U.S.-led
    Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT) in the Islamic Republic
    of Afghanistan. The performance monitoring system would
    include: PRT-specific work plans; comprehensive performance
    indicators and measures of progress toward sustainable long-
    term security and stability in Afghanistan; performance
    standards; and progress goals with a notional timetable for
    achieving such goals. The requirements for the performance
    monitoring system would be consistent with the requirements of
    section 1230 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
        This section would further require the President to submit
    to the congressional defense committees, the Senate Committee
    on Foreign Relations, and the House Committee on Foreign
    Affairs, within 90 days after the date of enactment of this
    Act, a report on the implementation of the performance
    monitoring system.

      Section 1216--Report on Command and Control Structure for Military
                        Forces Operating in Afghanistan

        This section would express the sense of Congress that the
    command structure for military forces operating in the Islamic
    Republic of Afghanistan, which consists of the North Atlantic
    Treaty Organization (NATO) International Security Assistance
    (ISAF) forces and separate U.S. forces operating under
    Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), should be modified to better
    coordinate and de-conflict military operations and achieve
    unity of command whenever possible in Afghanistan.
        This section would further require the Secretary of
    Defense, by December 1, 2008, to submit to the congressional
    defense committees, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,
    and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs a report on the
    command and control structure for military forces operating in
    Afghanistan. The report would include the following:
              (1) A detailed description of efforts by the
            Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the senior
            leaders of NATO ISAF forces, to modify the chain of
            command structure for military forces operating in
            Afghanistan to better coordinate and de-conflict
            military operations and achieve unity of command
            whenever possible, and the results of such efforts;
              (2) A comprehensive assessment of options for
            improving the command and control structure for
            military forces operating in Afghanistan, including the
            establishment of a three-star U.S. headquarters in
            Kabul, Afghanistan to lead the U.S. forces operating
            under OEF; to lead country-wide Department of Defense-
            led initiatives; and to closely coordinate efforts with
            NATO ISAF, the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan, and other
            U.S. and international elements in Afghanistan;
              (3) A detailed description of any U.S. or NATO ISAF
            plan or strategy for improving the command and control
            structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan;
              (4) A description of how rules of engagement are
            determined and managed for U.S. forces operating under
            NATO ISAF or OEF, and a description of any key
            differences between rules of engagement for NATO ISAF
            forces and separate U.S. forces operating under OEF;
            and
              (5) An assessment of how possible modifications to
            the command and control structure for military forces
            operating in Afghanistan would impact coordination of
            military and civilian efforts in Afghanistan.
        The committee believes that the restrictive national
    caveats of NATO ISAF forces, which limit operations in
    Afghanistan, are a significant obstacle to improving the
    command and control structure in Afghanistan. In the committee
    report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the committee expressed
    strong concern about such national caveats and has not observed
    significant improvements since that time. The committee
    emphasizes that the United States must significantly strengthen
    its efforts to effectively address NATO ISAF national caveats
    and rules of engagement with NATO ISAF countries.

    Section 1217--Report on Enhancing Security and Stability in the Region
                  along the Border of Afghanistan and Pakistan

        This section would amend section 1232(b) of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-
    181), by adding the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and
    the House Foreign Affairs Committee to the congressional
    notification requirement under section 1232(b) relating to
    Department of Defense Coalition Support Funds (CSF) for the
    Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

         Section 1218--Study and Report on Iraqi Police Training Teams

        This section would require that the Secretary of Defense,
    in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Government
    of Iraq, submit a report concerning the staffing and funding
    for Police Training Teams in Iraq. This section would require
    that the report be submitted within 60 days after the date of
    enactment of this Act to the Senate Committee on Armed
    Services, the House Committee on Armed Services, the Senate
    Committee on Foreign Relations, and the House Committee on
    Foreign Affairs.

                           Subtitle C--Other Matters

         Section 1221--Payment of Personnel Expenses for Multilateral
                              Cooperation Programs

        This section would amend section 1051(a) of title 10,
    United States Code, to allow the Secretary of Defense to pay
    the travel, subsistence, and similar personal expenses of
    defense personnel of developing countries in connection with
    the attendance of such personnel at multilateral conferences,
    seminars, and other similar meetings that are in the national
    security interests of the United States.
        This section also would amend section 1051(b) of title 10,
    United States Code, to provide new authority for the Secretary
    of Defense to pay the travel, subsistence, and similar personal
    expenses of defense personnel of developing countries only in
    connection with travel to, from, and within the area of
    responsibility of the combatant commander in which the
    multilateral conference, seminar, or similar meeting is
    located. Lastly, this section would make available funds
    authorized under that section in any fiscal year for programs
    that begin in that fiscal year, but end in the following fiscal
    year, beginning with fiscal year 2009.

         Section 1222--Extension of Department of Defense Authority to
          Participate in Multinational Military Centers of Excellence

        This section would extend the authority first granted by
    section 1205 in the John Warner National Defense Authorization
    for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) and amended by
    section 1204 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) through fiscal year 2009.

    Section 1223--Study of Limitation on Classified Contracts with Foreign
                 Companies Engaged in Space Business with China

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    study the implications of prohibiting the Department of Defense
    from obligating or expending funds in fiscal year 2009, or any
    subsequent fiscal year, on contracts for classified work with a
    foreign-owned company that is engaged with the People's
    Republic of China in the development, manufacture, or launch of
    certain satellites. The prohibition would apply to companies
    engaged in work involving satellites which are not covered by
    the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). This
    section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive the
    prohibition on the use of funds if doing so is necessary to
    protect national security.
        This section would require that the Secretary's study be
    completed within 60 days of the date of enactment of this Act.
    This section would further authorize and require the Secretary
    to apply the prohibition on funding if the Secretary determines
    after performing the study that doing so promotes the national
    interest. This section would also require the Secretary to
    submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
    the House Committee on Armed Services on the results of the
    study and the Secretary's determination.

        Section 1224--Sense of Congress and Congressional Briefings on
          Readiness of the Armed Forces and Report on Nuclear Weapons
                              Capabilities of Iran

        This section expresses the sense of Congress that the
    Secretary of Defense should return the armed forces to a state
    of full readiness so that they are fully prepared to execute
    the National Military Strategy. It would require the Secretary
    of Defense to provide semiannual briefings to the Senate
    Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
    Services on matters pertaining to the preparation for the full
    range of contingencies that could occur in the Middle East
    region. The provision would also require the Secretary to
    submit a detailed annual report addressing the current and
    future nuclear weapons capabilities of the Islamic Republic of
    Iran and provide a notification to Congress when Iran has
    produced enough enriched uranium or plutonium for a nuclear
    weapon.

      TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
                                  SOVIET UNION

                                    OVERVIEW

        The budget request for the Cooperative Threat Reduction
    (CTR) Program contained $414.1 million for fiscal year 2009,
    representing a decrease of $13.9 million from the amount
    authorized in fiscal year 2008, excluding any supplemental
    funds. This request contained the following decreases: $12.9
    million for strategic offensive arms elimination in the Russian
    Federation; $23.5 million for nuclear weapons storage security
    in Russia; $6.0 million for chemical weapons destruction; and
    $10.0 million for new CTR initiatives. The request also
    contained the following increases: $6.4 million for strategic
    nuclear arms elimination in Ukraine; $3.1 million for nuclear
    weapons transportation security in Russia; $26.0 million for
    biological threat reduction in states of the former Soviet
    Union (FSU); $2.3 million for weapons of mass destruction
    proliferation prevention in the FSU; and $0.8 million for other
    assessments and administrative costs.
        The committee fully supports the goals of the CTR Program
    and continues to believe the Program is critical to U.S.
    national security and must be a top priority. In the committee
    report (H. Rept. 110-146) accompanying the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the committee expressed
    concern that a lack of effective policy guidance and
    leadership, as well as programmatic and funding constraints,
    have limited the progress of the CTR Program in recent years.
    The committee further noted that although the CTR Program has
    made significant progress over the last 10 years, much remains
    to be done, and emphasized that there must be a strong national
    commitment to reinvigorate the CTR Program.
        The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181) addressed these concerns by: repealing
    limitations on the use of CTR funds; expanding CTR authority
    outside the FSU; and increasing CTR funding by $80.0 million
    above the budget request for fiscal year 2008, including $10.0
    million for new CTR initiatives. Public Law 110-181 also
    required: reports by the National Academy of Sciences and the
    Secretary of Defense on the development of new CTR initiatives;
    a report by the Secretary of Defense regarding efforts to
    complete the chemical weapons destruction project at
    Shchuch'ye, Russia; and included other provisions to ensure
    that wherever possible, the CTR Program addresses threats
    involving nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and
    weapons-related materials, technologies, and expertise.
        The committee also notes that the Implementing
    Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law
    110-53), passed in the 110th Congress by both the House and
    Senate as H.R. 1 and commonly known as ``the 9/11 bill,''
    included a number of provisions and authorized funding to
    accelerate, strengthen, and expand the CTR Program.
        The committee believes there are additional opportunities
    for the CTR Program to address the wide variety of global
    threats arising from the proliferation of nuclear, chemical,
    and biological weapons and weapons-related materials,
    technologies, and expertise. The committee believes the CTR
    Program would continue to benefit from increased funding to
    develop new initiatives to address such threats.
        The committee authorizes $445.1 million, an increase of
    $31.0 million from the budget request for fiscal year 2009,
    which includes an increase of $10.0 million for new CTR
    initiatives that are outside the scope of existing activities
    and may include activities within Russia and the FSU, as well
    as outside the FSU.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                          Biological Threat Reduction

        The committee notes that the Biological Threat Reduction
    Program (BTRP) of the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR)
    Program has evolved from its original focus on dismantlement
    activities to a more comprehensive approach for reducing the
    full spectrum of biological threats. As a result, in recent
    years, the Department of Defense has significantly increased
    the amount of funds requested for BTRP activities relative to
    other areas of CTR work.
        The committee recognizes the importance of biological
    threat reduction activities to U.S. national security interests
    and believes the United States should be actively engaged in
    this area. However, the committee also believes that BTRP
    activities should be guided by a more comprehensive long-term
    inter-agency strategy for biological threat reduction and
    require: more robust inter-agency engagement and coordination;
    more rigorous Department of Defense management and oversight;
    better coordination and integration with other Department of
    Defense programs and activities; and concrete metrics for
    measuring BTRP progress.
        These concerns are consistent with findings and
    recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences report
    required by section 1304 of the John Warmer National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-163) on
    BTRP activities. The committee also notes that the Secretary of
    Defense submitted an accompanying report to the committee on
    April 4, 2008, which stated support for key recommendations of
    the National Academy of Sciences with respect to BTRP
    activities and described planned actions to implement such
    recommendations.
        The committee encourages actions by the Secretary of
    Defense to strengthen BTRP activities, particularly in the area
    of inter-agency engagement and coordination to ensure that the
    Department of Defense is the appropriate agency to undertake
    specific biological threat reduction activities. The committee
    also strongly encourages the Department to maintain a strong
    focus within the CTR Program on other threat reduction
    challenges, including preventing the proliferation of chemical
    and nuclear weapons and weapons-related materials,
    technologies, and expertise.

                Shchuch'ye Chemical Weapons Destruction Project

        The committee continues to believe that completion of the
    chemical weapons destruction project in the Russian Federation
    at Shchuch'ye should be a high priority for the Cooperative
    Threat Reduction (CTR) Program. On May 23, 2007, the United
    States signed an agreement with the Russian Federation that
    significantly changed the strategy for the Shchuch'ye project
    and project implementation. Given these changes, the committee
    is conducting vigorous oversight on the project.
        The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181) required a report from the Secretary of
    Defense on the Shchuch'ye project, which included a current and
    detailed cost estimate for project completion and a specific
    strategic and operating plan for project completion, which sets
    forth: plans for project management and oversight; quality
    assurance and sustainability measures; metrics for measuring
    project progress; and a projected completion date. Public Law
    110-181 also urged the Secretary to take all necessary steps to
    ensure successful project completion so that the Shchuch'ye
    facility can begin to destroy the stockpile of Russian chemical
    weapons as soon as possible.
        The committee has reviewed the report on the Shchuch'ye
    project, submitted by the Secretary as Appendix G to the Fiscal
    Year 2009 CTR Annual Report to Congress, but remains concerned
    about project completion. The committee expects the Secretary
    to keep the committee fully informed of significant
    developments with respect to the project, and continues to urge
    the Secretary to take all necessary steps to successfully
    complete the project.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

     Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs
                                   and Funds

        This section would define the programs and funds that are
    Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs and funds as those
    authorized to be appropriated in section 1301 of this Act and
    specify that CTR funds shall remain available for obligation
    for three fiscal years.

                       Section 1302--Funding Allocations

        This section would allocate specific amounts for each
    program element under the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR)
    Program from within the overall $445.1 million that the
    committee would authorize for the CTR Program. The allocation
    under this section reflects an $31.0 million increase from the
    budget request of $414.1 million for fiscal year 2009 as
    follows: $20.0 million for weapons of mass destruction
    proliferation prevention in Kazakhstan; $1.0 million for
    chemical weapons destruction; and $10.0 million to develop new
    CTR initiatives that are outside the scope of existing CTR
    activities and may include activities carried out in Russia and
    the former Soviet Union (FSU) or outside the FSU. This section
    would also require notification to Congress 30 days before the
    Secretary of Defense obligates and expends fiscal year 2009
    funds for purposes other than those specifically authorized. In
    addition, this section would provide limited authority to
    obligate amounts for a program element under the CTR Program in
    excess of the amount specifically authorized for that purpose.

                        TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

       Advance Procurement Funding for Dry-Cargo Ammunition Ships (T-AKE)

        The budget request contained $962.4 million in National
    Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF) budget line item (BLI) 0120 for the
    purchase of two dry-cargo ammunition ships (T-AKE) vessels in
    fiscal year 2009. The committee notes that one of these vessels
    was requested in fiscal year 2008. That request was authorized
    and appropriated, but subsequently the Department of the Navy
    did not execute the funding provided for procurement of the
    requested vessel.
        The committee also notes that the Department has revised
    the long range shipbuilding plan eliminating the final two
    vessels of the T-AKE class from the construction schedule. The
    committee disagrees with this course of action.
        The committee recommends an increase of $300.0 million in
    NDSF BLI 0120, and authorizes those funds for use to procure
    long lead material necessary for construction of the last two
    vessels of the T-AKE class.

        Use of the National Defense Sealift Fund for Procurement of New
       Construction Vessels in the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future)

        The budget request contained $68.7 million in the National
    Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF), Naval Sea Systems Command
    (NAVSEA), Reasearch and Development (R&D), budget line item
    (BLI) 0900, for research and development efforts associated
    with the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future).
        The committee understands that current law allows the use
    of the NDSF for research and development efforts for the
    construction of national defense sealift vessels. However, the
    committee believes that funding for research and development
    efforts for ships specifically constructed as Department of
    Defense sealift vessels more appropriately belongs in the
    appropriation Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy
    (RDTE, N).
        The committee authorizes $68.7 million, the amount of the
    budget request for research and development for the NDSF
    (NAVSEA R&D BLI 0900), but recommends a transfer of the funding
    to PE 0604567N, Ship Contract Design/Live Fire Test and
    Evaluation, in RDTE, N.

                         Subtitle A--Military Programs

                      Section 1401--Working Capital Funds

        This section would authorize $1.5 billion for Working
    Capital Funds.

                  Section 1402--National Defense Sealift Fund

        This section would authorize $1.4 billion for the National
    Defense Sealift Fund.

                      Section 1403--Defense Health Program

        This section would authorize fiscal year 2009 funds for the
    Defense Health Program and other programs.
        The budget request contained $15.5 million for procurement
    of dental modules of the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal
    Technology Application (AHLTA).
        The committee is concerned about the recent decision made
    by Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
    Affairs to postpone deployment of AHLTA Block 4 in favor of
    consolidating deployment of AHLTA Block 3. The committee is
    aware that there were significant concerns regarding Block 3
    because user interface concerns have impeded use by
    practitioners. Those concerns were to be rectified in Block 4,
    and would likely have contributed to more widespread support of
    the system. The committee believes that this decision should be
    justified, and a path forward for deployment of Block 4 clearly
    articulated to the committee before further development of the
    system proceeds.
        The committee recommends a decrease of $15.5 million from
    the funds available for procurement.

        Section 1404--Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense

        This section would authorize $1.5 billion for Chemical
    Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense.

     Section 1405--Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-
                                      Wide

        This section would authorize $1.1 billion for Drug
    Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities.

                    Section 1406--Defense Inspector General

        This section would authorize $273.1 million for the
    Department of Defense Inspector General. This represents an
    increase of $24.0 million for operations and maintenance and
    $2.0 million for research and development. This increase would
    support increased audit, inspection policy oversight, and
    investigative efforts.

                     Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile

       Section 1411--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile Funds

        This section would authorize $41.2 million from the
    National Defense Stockpile Transaction fund for the operations
    and maintenance of the National Defense Stockpile for fiscal
    year 2009. This section would also permit the use of additional
    funds for extraordinary or emergency conditions 45 days after
    Congress receives notification.

      Section 1412--Revisions to Previously Authorized Disposals from the
                           National Defense Stockpile

        This section would authorize revisions on limitations in
    asset sales contained in section 3303(a)(7) of the Strom
    Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    1999 (Public Law 105-261), as most recently amended by section
    1412(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
        This section would further authorize revisions on the
    Fiscal Year 1998 disposal authority contained in section
    3305(a)(5) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), as most recently amended by
    section 3302(b) of the John Warner National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364).

                    Subtitle C--Armed Forces Retirement Home

                   Section 1421--Armed Forces Retirement Home

        This section would authorize over $63.0 million to be
    appropriated for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement
    Home during fiscal year 2009.

                           Subtitle D--Other Matters

             Section 1431--Inapplicability of Executive Order 13457

        This section would make Executive Order 13457, ``Protecting
    American Taxpayers from Government Spending on Wasteful
    Earmarks,'' inapplicable to this Act or to the Joint
    Explanatory Statement accompanying this Act or to the committee
    reports of Senate Committee on Armed Services or the House
    Committee on Armed Services which accompany this Act.

      TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OPERATION
                  IRAQI FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM

                                    OVERVIEW

        The committee notes that section 1008 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364) requires the budget submission to Congress for
    each fiscal year to include:
              (1) A request for the appropriation of funds for
            ongoing operations in the Republic of Iraq and the
            Islamic Republic of Afghanistan;
              (2) An estimate of all funds expected to be required
            in that fiscal year for operations; and
              (3) A detailed justification of the funds requested.
        The budget request for fiscal year 2008 complied with these
    requirements.
        The committee is concerned that the budget request for
    fiscal year 2009 did not comply with the requirements of
    section 1008. Instead, the budget request included $70.0
    billion for ongoing military operations with no supporting
    details or justification materials. However, the Secretary of
    Defense presented testimony to the committee that the
    Department of Defense anticipated a requirement for as much as
    $170.0 billion to fully fund ongoing military operations in
    fiscal year 2009.
        The committee understands that on May 2, 2008, the
    President transmitted to Congress amendments to the FY 2009
    budget totaling $70.0 billion. The budget amendments
    distributed the $70.0 billion previously submitted by
    appropriations accounts, but did not include detailed
    justification materials. The committee is disappointed that the
    amended budget request still does not comply with section 1008.
        The committee notes that it is the policy of the U.S. House
    of Representatives, as stated in section 502 of the FY 2009
    Concurrent Resolution on the Budget (H. Con. Res. 312) as
    passed by the House, that ``the Administration's budget
    requests should comply with section 1008 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-
    364), and that the Administration should no longer attempt to
    fund overseas military operations through emergency
    supplemental appropriations requests.'' The committee strongly
    supports this policy.
        The committee further notes that the fiscal year 2009
    concurrent resolution on the budget included $70.0 billion for
    Overseas Deployments and Other Activities. In accordance with
    the budget resolution, the committee recommends authorization
    of $70.0 billion for ongoing military operations in the
    Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan during
    fiscal year 2009 to assure no disruption during the
    Presidential transition. In the coming months, the committee
    expects to receive a full-year budget request and associated
    budget justification materials for ongoing military operations.
    The committee intends to address the full-year budget request
    for ongoing military operations as part of this Act prior to
    its enactment.

                        SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS

        The following table summarizes authorizations included in
    the bill for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
    Freedom.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                   Army Aircraft Repair and Recapitalization

        The committee is concerned that the continued stress of
    combat operations coupled with battle losses is reducing the
    readiness of Army aviation. The committee is recommending
    increases to improve repair and recapitalization of aviation
    assets to strengthen Army readiness.
        The committee recommends $291.4 million to inspect,
    overhaul, and repair crash damage on AH-64D, CH-47D, UH-60, MH-
    47, and MH-60K helicopters. Additionally, the committee
    recommends $113.0 million to support the recapitalization of 20
    UH-60 aircraft.

       Counter-Improvised Explosive Device Operations Integration Center

        The committee is encouraged by efforts at the Counter-
    Improvised Explosive Device Operations Integration Center
    (COIC) to provide effective reach-back capability for
    warfighters in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of
    Afghanistan. The ability to fuse intelligence from national
    agencies with data from tactical assets to provide timely
    operational support to ongoing missions is a model that is more
    relevant to the current and future threat environment than the
    predominant mechanisms developed during the Cold War.
        The committee is concerned that the capabilities of the
    COIC may be duplicative with other similar organizations within
    the military services and defense agencies. The committee
    directs the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device
    Defeat Organization to submit to the congressional defense
    committees a report detailing COICs functions and how they are
    deconflicted with other similar efforts within the Department
    of Defense and the intelligence community. This report shall be
    due within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
    and shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
              (1) A description of the capabilities provided by the
            COIC, including both technical capabilities such as
            data links and processing systems, as well as
            analytical capabilities;
              (2) What similar capabilities exist within the
            military services, combatant commands and intelligence
            community, and how they complement or duplicate the
            capabilities of the COIC;
              (3) What unique capabilities exist within the COIC
            that are not duplicated anywhere else within the
            military services, combatant commands or intelligence
            community;
              (4) What measures the COIC has taken to coordinate
            its efforts with these other entities (including, but
            not limited to, personnel exchanges, liaison
            assignments, and information exchanges);
              (5) What processes are in place to examine
            capabilities on a continuous and ongoing basis to guard
            against unwarranted duplication or redundancy; and
              (6) What actions are being taken to institutionalize
            processes and knowledge to ensure that long-term
            knowledge is preserved in the governmental personnel
            base.

                Counter Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars Program

        The budget request contained no funds for the Counter-
    Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (C-RAM) program.
        The committee notes the remarkable and unprecedented
    success of C-RAM systems in protecting forward operating bases
    in Iraq. According to field commanders, C-RAM is a force
    multiplier that is saving lives. The committee understands that
    in response to a Joint Urgent Operational Need Statement
    (JUONS), the C-RAM program office developed an architecture
    utilizing existing platforms that provides significant enhanced
    capabilities to our forward operating bases. This capability
    was designated the Integrated Base Defense System of Systems
    (IBDSoS).
        The committee recommends $246.0 million, an increase of
    $246.0 million, for C-RAM in order to meet the targeting and
    surveillance requirements of forward operating bases in Iraq
    and Afghanistan requested by United States Central Command in
    the recently approved Base Expeditionary Targeting and
    Surveillance System--Combined JUONS by utilizing and fielding
    the IBDSoS as soon as possible. The capability to be provided
    will be the combat-proven IBDSoS capability that is being
    fielded by the C-RAM program office. IBDSoS capability provided
    to Iraq and Afghanistan will include installation, training,
    support, and integration with command and control systems as
    required by theater.

                                      F-22

        The fiscal year 2009 budget request did not include any
    funds for advance procurement of an additional lot of F-22s.
    The F-22 is a multi-mission fighter aircraft that combines a
    low-observable radar signature with an ability to cruise at
    supersonic speeds without the use of thrust augmentation, and
    performs air dominance, homeland and cruise missile defense,
    and air-to-ground attack missions.
        The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force
    asserts a requirement for 381 F-22 aircraft, but that officials
    in the Office of the Secretary of Defense conclude that a force
    structure of 183 aircraft will be sufficient to meet
    requirements of the National Military Strategy.
        The committee understands and supports the Department of
    the Air Force requirement for 381 F-22 aircraft, and therefore
    recommends an increase of $523.0 million for the advance
    procurement of an additional lot of 20 aircraft in fiscal year
    2010. The committee strongly encourages the Department of the
    Air Force to include the budget necessary to fully fund 20 F-22
    aircraft in its fiscal year 2010 budget request.

               Global Improvised Explosive Device Threat Estimate

        Experiences in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation
    Enduring Freedom (OEF) have illustrated the diffusion and
    proliferation of improvised explosive device (IED) designs,
    tactics, and supporting technologies. The Joint Improvised
    Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) was established
    to handle this threat, and has invested significantly in
    developing countermeasures to IEDs.
        OIF and OEF have also illustrated how effective an
    asymmetric tactic such as IEDs can be against the United States
    military. Even as the U.S. involvement in these wars
    diminishes, it is likely that other potential adversaries in
    other regions of the world will have noted the tactical
    efficacy of IEDs in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic
    Republic of Afghanistan. In order to benefit from the lessons
    learned, U.S. military services and intelligence agencies
    should now begin to analyze the threat posed by the
    proliferation of IED technologies and tactics, particularly
    related to potential future conflict zones.
        The committee directs the Director of JIEDDO to provide a
    report, which shall be submitted to the congressional defense
    committees within one year after the date of enactment of this
    Act, on the projected IED threat for each combatant command
    area of responsibility through the year 2018. The preparation
    of this report shall be led by JIEDDO, but coordinated with all
    of the military services, combatant commands and the
    Intelligence Community, including those responsible for
    domestic homeland security and law enforcement activities. As
    needed, the team leading this effort should be
    multidisciplinary and include participants from scientific and
    engineering organizations.
        While not limited to the following items, the IED estimate
    should include:
              (1) IED operational capability and employment trends
            by terrorist groups, with emphasis on areas outside of
            Iraq and Afghanistan;
              (2) Technology trends related to deception, triggers,
            energetics, and other trends;
              (3) Red team scenarios that explore attack tactics,
            techniques, and procedures as they might be implemented
            by various non-state actors in each combatant command's
            areas of responsibility; and
              (4) Countermeasures development and deployment.

                            Increased Army Training

        The committee is concerned about the declining readiness
    posture of Army units. Department of Defense readiness reports
    indicate that every non-deployed Army and Army National Guard
    combat brigade would face significant challenges completing
    their assigned full-spectrum combat missions if they were
    called upon to fight. The Army is expending significant effort
    preparing units for combat, and Army training is focusing
    heavily on counter-insurgency operations, resulting in an
    overall reduction of full-spectrum mission capability. The
    committee is concerned about the Army's degraded capabilities
    and urges the Secretary of Defense to take every measure
    possible to restore full combat capability and reduce strategic
    risk.
        The committee is recommending funds in several areas to
    increase training and begin to restore lost full-spectrum
    capabilities. The committee recommends $350.0 million for
    increased ground operations tempo to support additional
    training of non-deployed units. The committee also recommends
    $98.0 million for exportable training programs from the combat
    training centers to enhance unit training at home station.
    Additionally, the committee recommends $32.0 million to
    increase Battle Command Training Capability.

                           Iraq Security Forces Fund

        The committee notes that the amended budget request for
    fiscal year 2009 included $2.0 billion for the Iraq Security
    Forces Fund (ISFF). The committee recommends $1.0 billion for
    ISFF. The committee believes that the Government of Iraq should
    assume greater responsibility for funding activities associated
    with building and supporting the Iraqi Security Forces. The
    committee therefore has prohibited the use of U.S.-provided
    funds in the ISFF for the construction or rehabilitation of
    infrastructure as the committee believes that the Government of
    Iraq should more properly conduct this function. The committee
    believes that the funds provided will be sufficient to conduct
    those activities necessary under the ISFF. However, the
    committee also expects that the President will make a further
    budget request to support ongoing operations in fiscal year
    2009 and will continue to monitor the need for additional funds
    for the ISFF.

                           Human Terrain Team Support

        The committee supports the concept for the prototype Human
    Terrain Teams (HTT) currently supporting Operation Iraqi
    Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. HTTs have been
    instrumental in saving the lives of coalition troops by
    reducing casualties among Afghani and Iraqi civilians. HTTs
    provide our warfighters with non-kinetic options in planning
    and carrying out their missions. The committee is aware that
    the first prototype HTT is credited with reducing kinetic
    operations by more than 60 percent during its first 6 months of
    deployment in Operation Enduring Freedom. HTTs are critical
    enablers to shaping military planning in pre-conflict
    environments, and are supportive of reconstruction and
    stabilization efforts. HTTs are currently proving their value
    in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the committee believes that
    capability would prove equally valuable in other combatant
    command areas of responsibility.
        The committee recommends $90.6 million in Operation and
    Maintenance for the purpose of fielding additional HTTs to meet
    the current Central Command requirement of 26 teams. The
    committee encourages the Department to begin training,
    equipping, deploying, and sustaining human terrain teams with
    other regional combatant commands to include at least one each
    for Pacific Command, Southern Command, and Africa Command.

          Production Rates of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles

        The committee is concerned that all industrial facilities
    that are currently producing mine resistant ambush protected
    vehicles (MRAP) are not operating at maximum capacity. This is
    troublesome because these vehicles have been proven to save
    lives in combat. The committee notes the extraordinary effort
    it took to produce 8,000 MRAPs for the theater of operations in
    Iraq and Afghanistan in just 17 months since the Secretary of
    Defense made this program his top procurement priority.
        However, the committee believes these vehicles are not
    being built in sufficient quantity to supply the troops in The
    Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and to
    supply vehicles for training facilities in the United States as
    quickly as possible. The committee believes strongly that
    troops in pre-deployment training for service in the Republic
    of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan should have the
    ability to train in the same types of equipment that they will
    use while deployed in combat theaters of operation.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report on
    the current status of production of the MRAP vehicles that
    details the current and projected output of vehicles at each
    MRAP production facility, and the overall maximum capacity of
    the facility. The report should identify any additional funding
    necessary to complete production of the validated MRAP vehicle
    requirement. Additionally, the committee directs the Secretary
    to report on the plans, if any, to field these vehicles to
    training facilities to allow familiarization training prior to
    deployment to the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of
    Afghanistan. The committee expects this information from the
    Secretary as soon as practicable either by direct briefing from
    representative of the Secretary or by written report.

          Special Operations Command Aircraft Radar Warning Receivers

        The budget request contained $52.0 million for rotary wing
    upgrades and sustainment but contained no funding to replace
    existing aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) onboard MM-60
    aircraft.
        The committee understands that existing ASE systems aboard
    160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) assets
    are inadequate to meet the current threat. The committee
    further understands that the AN/ALQ-211 suite of integrated
    radio frequency countermeasures (SIRFC) is under development to
    meet the threat. The committee recognizes that this is an
    unfunded requirement for Special Operations Command, supports
    the effort to upgrade the entire 160th fleet with SIRFC, as
    appropriate, and urges further acquisition of these systems.
        Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $74.8
    million to procure and field SIRFC systems onboard MM-60
    aircraft.

                  Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization

        The construction required to support the 2005 Base Closure
    and Realignment decisions, concurrent with the Grow the Force
    Initiative have put severe strain on military infrastructure.
    This strain was recently recognized in an Army barracks review
    that noted significant quality of life issues for our soldiers
    at multiple installations. In order to address the quality of
    life at Army installations, the Army has embarked on an
    expansive barracks modernization program to recapitalize older
    infrastructure and has elected to concentrate recapitalization
    efforts initially on permanent party barracks. At the same
    time, the Army has placed the lowest priority on recruit
    training and Advanced Individual Training barracks. These
    barracks are in a severe state of dilapidation and require a
    significant investment to arrest the continued deterioration.
    Unfortunately, the Department has decided not to request
    Operations and Maintenance funds to support Army Restoration
    and Modernization projects for fiscal year 2009. If enacted,
    this budget request would continue to exacerbate the
    accelerated decline of infrastructure in the Army.
        Additionally, the Department continues to rely heavily on
    relocatable facilities to augment basing decisions and
    accelerate rebasing requirements. While the decisions to use
    relocatable facilities are effective in the short-term, many of
    these temporary facilities remain in use well beyond their
    effective life because the Department has not programmed
    sufficient, permanent facilities. While temporary, relocatable
    structures may be appropriate to support short-term mission
    requirements, they are not acceptable to use when better, long-
    term solutions can save money and provide better quality of
    life support for our soldiers and Marines.
        Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $650.0
    million to the Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization
    account allocated as follows: $500.0 million to support Army
    Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization; $50.0
    million to support Air Force Facilities Sustainment,
    Restoration, and Modernization; $50.0 million to support Navy
    Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization; and $50.0 million
    to support Marine Corps Sustainment, Restoration, and
    Modernization. Furthermore, the committee directs the Secretary
    of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees,
    by March 1, 2009, the Department's plan to replace temporary,
    relocatable facilities with permanent facilities by fiscal year
    2015.

               War Reserve Secondary Items--Prepositioned Stocks

        The committee continues to be concerned about the status of
    prepositioned stocks of combat equipment. The Army has drawn
    down these stocks to support ongoing operations and to fill
    shortfalls across the force. This drawdown has increased the
    time it would take to deploy equipment to a contingency. The
    committee strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to work
    aggressively to restore the prepositioned stocks.
        The committee recommends an additional $150.0 million to
    support the purchase of war reserve secondary items to fill the
    Army prepositioned stocks shortages.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                             Section 1501--Purpose

        This section would establish this title and make
    authorization of appropriations available upon enactment of
    this Act for the Department of Defense, in addition to amounts
    otherwise authorized in this Act, to provide for additional
    costs due to the Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
    Freedom.

                         Section 1502--Army Procurement

        This section would authorize an additional $2.2 billion for
    Army procurement.

                Section 1503--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement

        This section would authorize an additional $1.0 billion for
    Navy and Marine Corps procurement.

                      Section 1504--Air Force Procurement

        This section would authorize an additional $6.1 billion for
    Air Force procurement.

               Section 1505--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement

        This section would authorize an additional $177.2 million
    for Defense-Wide Activities procurement.

                      Section 1506--Rapid Acquisition Fund

        This section would authorize an additional $102.0 million
    for the Rapid Acquisition Fund.

          Section 1507--Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund

        This section would authorize an additional $2.5 billion for
    the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund. This section
    would require that of the funds appropriated to the Joint
    Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund, $50.0 million shall be
    made available for the rapid fielding of additional Aerial
    Reconnaissance Multi-Sensor platforms for tactical operations
    in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

         Section 1508--Limitation on Obligation of Funds for the Joint
     Improvised Explosive Devices Defeat Organization Pending Notification
                                  to Congress

        This section would limit the amount of funds that the Joint
    Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Office (JIEDDO) may obligate
    for science and technology until the committee is provided
    JIEDDO's science and technology roadmap.
        The committee is aware that JIEDDO has been funding science
    and technology (S&T) efforts over the past three years to
    address the challenge of improvised explosive devices. Early
    investments were driven more by operational necessity than by a
    carefully considered strategic plan.
        As the wars in the Republic of Iraq and the Islamic
    Republic of Afghanistan have matured, the committee has grown
    more concerned that the lack of such an investment strategy is
    becoming a significant hindrance. It hinders the Department of
    Defense as it coordinates S&T across the services and agencies,
    it hinders Congress in providing oversight and accountability,
    and it hinders the industrial sector due to the lack of
    visibility into the needs of JIEDDO and the Department.
        The committee understands that JIEDDO has been preparing an
    S&T investment strategy that has undergone several iterations
    and has been in a review and approval process for several
    months. The committee believes that JIEDDO must put greater
    emphasis on issuing an S&T investment strategy that is both
    timely and distributed to as wide a community as possible.

           Section 1509--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

        This section would authorize an additional $387.8 million
    for research, development, test and evaluation.

                    Section 1510--Operation and Maintenance

        This section would authorize an additional $52.0 billion
    for operations and maintenance programs.

               Section 1511--Other Department of Defense Programs

        This section would authorize an additional $1.3 billion to
    other Department of Defense programs.

                    Section 1512--Iraq Security Forces Fund

        This section would authorize an additional $1.0 billion to
    the Iraq Security Forces Fund. This section would also prohibit
    the use of monies in this fund for construction purposes.

                 Section 1513--Afghanistan Security Forces Fund

        This section would authorize an additional $2.0 billion to
    the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.

                        Section 1514--Military Personnel

        This section would authorize an additional $1.2 billion for
    military personnel.

           Section 1515--Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund

        This section would authorize the transfer of $2.6 billion,
    by transfer, into the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle
    Fund.

                    Section 1516--Special Transfer Authority

        This section would authorize the transfer of up to an
    additional $4.0 billion of war-related funding authorizations
    in this title among the accounts in this title.

              Section 1517--Treatment as Additional Authorizations

        This section would state that amounts authorized to be
    appropriated by this title are in addition to amounts otherwise
    authorized to be appropriated by this Act.

        TITLE XVI--RECONSTRUCTION AND STABILIZATION CIVILIAN MANAGEMENT

                                    OVERVIEW

        This title would incorporate the text of H.R. 1084 of the
    110th Congress, which passed the House of Representatives on
    March 7, 2008. The report of the House Committee on Foreign
    Affairs on H.R. 1084 (H. Rept. 110-537) should be considered
    the definitive explanation of this title. It would amend the
    Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2351 et seq.) to
    authorize the President to furnish assistance, of up to $100.0
    million a year in fiscal years 2008-2010, following pre-
    notification to Congress, for stabilizing and reconstructing a
    country or region that is in, or is in transition from,
    conflict or civil strife. It would establish an Office of the
    Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization within the
    Department of State to conduct reconstruction and stabilization
    operations. It would authorize the Secretary of State to
    establish and maintain a response readiness corps and a
    civilian reserve corps and would authorize the appropriation of
    such sums as may be necessary during fiscal years 2007-2010 for
    personnel, education and training, equipment, travel, and
    deployment costs.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                           Section 1601--Short Title

        This section would provide that the title may be referred
    to as the ``Reconstruction and Stabilization Civilian
    Management Act of 2008.''

                             Section 1602--Findings

        This section would contain congressional findings
    describing efforts to improve the United States' capacity to
    respond to stabilization and reconstruction operations,
    including the establishment of the Office of the Coordinator
    for Stabilization and Reconstruction in June 2004, the issuance
    of the National Security Presidential Directive 44 which
    instructed the Secretary of State to coordinate and lead
    integrated United States Government efforts to prepare, plan
    for, and conduct stabilization and reconstruction operations,
    and release of Department of Defense Directive 3000.05 which
    established that stability operations are a core United States
    military mission that the Department of Defense must be
    prepared to conduct and support.

                           Section 1603--Definitions

        This section provides definitions for use in the Act.

     Section 1604--Authority to Provide Assistance for Reconstruction and
                              Stabilization Crises

        This section would amend chapter 1 of part III of the
    Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 by adding a new section 618--
    Assistance for a Reconstruction and Stabilization Crisis--which
    provides that the President may, in accordance with section
    614(a)(3) of the Foreign Assistance Act, and subject to pre-
    notification requirements and notwithstanding any other
    provision of law, furnish assistance to a country or region
    that is at risk of, in, or is in transition from, conflict or
    civil strife for stabilization or reconstruction if the
    President determines that it is in the national security
    interests of the United States for U.S. civilian agencies or
    non-federal employees to assist in stabilizing or
    reconstructing such country or region. This new section 618
    would prohibit the President from providing stabilization and
    reconstruction assistance unless Congress is notified five
    working days before such assistance is provided. This section
    would also allow funds to be made available (subject to the
    same pre-notification requirements) for stabilization and
    reconstruction assistance under any other provision of law and
    under provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 that are
    transferred or reprogrammed for the purpose of carrying out
    stabilization and reconstruction assistance.

                 Section 1605--Reconstruction and Stabilization

        This section would amend title I of the State Department
    Basic Authorities Act of 1956 by adding a new section 62, which
    would establish the Office of the Coordinator for
    Reconstruction and Stabilization within the Department of State
    and creates the Response Readiness Corps

                 Section 1606--Authorities Related to Personnel

        This section would authorize the Secretary of State, or the
    head of any U.S. agency with respect to personnel of that
    agency, to extend to any individual assigned, detailed, or
    deployed under this Act certain death gratuity, training, and
    travel expense benefits or privileges that are provided to
    members of the Foreign Service under the Foreign Service Act of
    1980.

            Section 1607--Reconstruction and Stabilization Strategy

        This section would require the Secretary of State to
    develop an inter-agency strategy to respond to stabilization
    and reconstruction operations which would include, but not be
    limited to: the identification of, and efforts to improve, the
    skills set needed to respond to and support stabilization and
    reconstruction operations; the identification of specific
    agencies that can adequately satisfy such skills sets; efforts
    to increase training of federal civilian personnel to carry out
    stabilization and reconstruction activities; efforts to develop
    a database of proven and best practices based on previous
    stabilization and reconstruction operations; and a plan to
    coordinate the activities of agencies involved in stabilization
    and reconstruction operations.

                    Section 1608--Annual Reports to Congress

        This section would require the Secretary of State to submit
    a report on the implementation of this Act to the House
    Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on
    Foreign Relations 180 days after the date of enactment of this
    Act and annually thereafter.

                DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

                                    PURPOSE

        Division B provides military construction, family housing,
    and related authorities in support of the military departments
    during fiscal year 2009. As recommended by the committee,
    Division B would authorize appropriations in the amount of
    $24,400,239,000 for construction in support of the active
    forces, reserve components, defense agencies, and the North
    Atlantic Treaty Organization security infrastructure fund for
    fiscal year 2009.

               MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW

        The Department of Defense requested $11,738,021,000 for
    military construction, $9,458,763,000 for Base Closure and
    Realignment (BRAC) activities, and $3,203,455,000 for family
    housing for fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends
    authorization of $11,831,930,000 for military construction,
    $9,458,763,000 for BRAC activities, and $3,166,455,000 for
    family housing in fiscal year 2009. The committee's
    recommendations are consistent with a total budget authority
    level of $24,400,239,000 for military construction, BRAC, and
    family housing in fiscal year 2009.

                           Section 2001--Short Title

        This section would cite Division B of this Act as the
    ``Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009.''

     Section 2002--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to be
                                Specified by Law

        This section would ensure that the authorizations provided
    in titles XXI through XXVI and title XXIX shall expire on
    October 1, 2011, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing
    funds for military construction for fiscal year 2012, whichever
    is later.

                                TITLE XXI--ARMY

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $4,615,920,000 for Army
    military construction and $1,394,690,000 for family housing for
    fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends authorization of
    $4,645,536,000 for military construction and $1,362,690,000 for
    family housing for fiscal year 2009.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                        Sierra Army Depot Drinking Water

        The committee believes that the Department of the Army is
    being proactive in submitting a military construction project
    at Sierra Army Depot that would bring the water quality into
    conformance with the State of California drinking standards. At
    the same the time, the committee is also encouraged that the
    Herlong Public Utility District has been organized to provide
    potable water to the local community and is preparing a
    proposal for the Department of the Army's consideration to
    privatize the water resources.
        The committee urges the Department to promptly consider the
    Herlong Public Utility District's proposal to privatize the
    water utility and if the proposal is in the government's best
    interest, to promptly convey the utility and offset the overall
    costs of the project by the proceeds provided by the military
    construction project.

                       Explanation of Funding Adjustments

        The committee recommends reduction or elimination of
    funding for several projects contained in the budget request
    for military construction and family housing. These reductions
    include:
        (1) $15,000,000 for the Brigade Complex at Vicenza, Italy.
    The budget request contained $30,000,000 to construct a
    standard brigade set.
        The committee supports the restationing of assets at
    Vicenza, Italy. However, the committee supports the authorizing
    for appropriations of an amount equivalent to the ability of a
    military department to execute in the year of authorization for
    appropriations. For this project, the committee believes that
    the Department of Defense has exceeded its ability to fully
    expend the funding in fiscal year 2009.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $15,000,000, a
    reduction of $15,000,000, to support construction of this
    project.
        (2) $59,500,000 for the Command and Battle Center at
    Wiesbaden Military Community, Germany. The budget request
    contained $119,000,000 to construct the headquarters element.
        The committee supports the authorizing for appropriations
    an amount equivalent to the ability of a military department to
    execute in the year of authorization for appropriations. For
    this project, the committee believes that the Department of
    Defense has exceeded their ability to fully expend the funding
    in fiscal year 2009.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $59,500,000, a
    reduction of $59,500,000, to support construction of this
    project.
        (3) $30,000,000 for Planning and Design. The budget request
    contained $176,807,000 for general planning and design support.
        The committee notes that the Department of the Army has
    elected to use planning and design funds to offset military
    construction shortfalls throughout the program. While there are
    no reprogramming restrictions that would prohibit this
    practice, the committee does not believe that it is an
    appropriate source of funds for future reprogrammings.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $146,807,000, a
    reduction of $30,000,000, to support continued planning and
    design support worldwide.
        (4) $31,000,000 for the construction of family housing
    units at Wiesbaden, Germany. The budget request contained
    $95,000,000.
        The committee notes that the German government is in the
    process of providing access to land that would allow the
    Department of Defense to construct additional family housing
    units. However, the timeline to provide access to the family
    housing complex may be delayed. Furthermore, the Department of
    the Army is reporting that construction would not start until
    summer 2009. The committee supports the authorizing for
    appropriations an amount equivalent to the ability of a
    military department to execute in the year of authorization for
    appropriations. For this project, the committee believes that
    the Department of Defense has exceeded their ability to fully
    expend the funding in fiscal year 2009.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $74,000,000, a
    reduction of $31,000,000, to support construction of family
    housing units.

                              Planning and Design

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    projects:
        (1) $300,000--Hatfield Gate Expansion, Fort Myer, Virginia.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

        Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would contain the list of authorized Army
    construction projects for fiscal year 2009. The authorized
    amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
    The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
    binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
    location.

                          Section 2102--Family Housing

        This section would authorize new construction and planning
    and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
    2009.

          Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

        This section would authorize improvements to existing units
    of family housing for fiscal year 2009.

              Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army

        This section would authorize specific appropriations for
    each line item contained in the budget request for fiscal year
    2009 for the Army. This section would also provide an overall
    limit on the amount the Army may spend on military construction
    projects.
        Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
    Certain Fiscal Year 2008 Projects
        This section would terminate certain military construction
    authorizations provided in the Military Construction
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (division B of Public
    Law 110-181).
        Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
    Certain Fiscal Year 2007 Projects
        This section would terminate certain military construction
    authorizations provided in the Military Construction
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (division B of Public
    Law 109-364).

     Section 2107--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2006
                                    Projects

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

     Section 2108--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2005
                                    Projects

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

                                TITLE XXII--NAVY

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $3,096,399,000 for Navy
    military construction and $758,840,000 for family housing for
    fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends authorization of
    $3,237,609,000 for military construction and $758,840,000 for
    family housing for fiscal year 2009.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

       Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC), Twentynine Palms,
                           California Land Expansion

        The committee understands the Marine Corps intends to
    expand the training area at MCAGCC and will begin the required
    environmental studies this year. While the committee believes
    the Marine Corps must have sufficient training lands for
    realistic training, the committee expects the Marine Corps to
    carefully consider and, to the maximum extent possible,
    minimize the loss of land to other legitimate uses in preparing
    its plans. In that regard, the committee encourages the
    Secretary of the Navy to work with the Bureau of Land
    Management in ensuring the proposed expansion of MCAGCC is
    consistent with the development plans associated with the
    Pacific Gas and Electric Mojave Solar Plant and related project
    and will minimize the withdrawal of land from public use
    available for recreational activities such as off-highway
    vehicles. The committee is encouraged by the Marine Corps
    intent to include all stakeholders in the land acquisition
    process.

                              Planning and Design

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Navy
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    project:
        (1) $1,450,000--Drydock #3, Waterfront Support Facility,
    Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Maine.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

        Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would contain the list of authorized Navy
    construction projects for fiscal year 2009. The authorized
    amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
    The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
    binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
    location.

                          Section 2202--Family Housing

        This section would authorize new construction and planning
    and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year
    2009.

          Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

        This section would authorize improvements to existing units
    of family housing for fiscal year 2009.

              Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy

        This section would authorize specific appropriations for
    each line item contained in the budget request for fiscal year
    2009 for the Navy. This section would also provide an overall
    limit on the amount the Navy may spend on military construction
    projects.

      Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry out Certain Fiscal
                               Year 2005 Project

        This section would increase the authorization for a project
    at Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific, Bangor, Washington.

      Section 2206--Modification of Authority to Carry out Certain Fiscal
                               Year 2007 Projects

        This section would increase the authorizations for projects
    at Naval Support Activity, Suitland, Maryland, and at Naval Air
    Station, Whidbey Island, Washington, and other conforming
    amendments.

          Section 2207--Report on Impacts of Surface Ship Homeporting
                                  Alternatives

        This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from
    issuing a record of decision for the proposed homeporting of
    additional ships at Naval Station Mayport until at least 30
    days after the date on which the Secretary submits a report on
    the socioeconomic impact and economic justification of the
    preferred alternatives identified in the final environmental
    impact statement.

                             TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $934,892,000 for Air Force
    military construction and $995,344,000 for family housing for
    fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends authorization of
    $976,524,000 for military construction and $990,344,000 for
    family housing for fiscal year 2009.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                       Explanation of Funding Adjustments

        The committee recommends reduction or elimination of
    funding for several projects contained in the budget request
    for military construction and family housing. These reductions
    include:
        (1) $59,638,000 for a Close Air Support Parking Apron at Al
    Udeid, Qatar. The budget request contained $59,638,000 for
    construction of the aircraft parking apron.
        The committee notes that the Department has made a request
    for this project in its request for emergency funding for
    ongoing military operations.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $0, a reduction of
    $59,638,000, to support construction of this project.
        (2) $5,000,000 for Planning and Design. The budget request
    contained $70,494,000 for general planning and design support.
        The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force
    has elected to use planning and design funds to offset military
    construction shortfalls throughout the program. While there are
    no reprogramming restrictions that would prohibit this
    practice, the committee does not believe that it is appropriate
    source of funds for future reprogrammings.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $65,494,000, a
    reduction of $5,000,000, to support continued planning and
    design support worldwide.

                              Planning and Design

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    projects:
              (1) $1,755,000--Repair Runway Pavement, Luke Air
            Force Base, Arizona;
              (2) $1,704,000--Air Traffic Control Complex, Minot
            Air Force Base, North Dakota;
              (3) $900,000--Security Forces Building Phase I,
            Lackland Air Force Base, Texas;
              (4) $1,440,000--Student Officer Quarters, Phase II,
            Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas; and
              (5) $972,000--Fire and Rescue Station, Randolph Air
            Force Base, Texas.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

     Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would contain the list of authorized Air Force
    construction projects for fiscal year 2009. The authorized
    amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
    The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
    binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
    location.

                          Section 2302--Family Housing

        This section would authorize new construction and planning
    and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal
    year 2009.

          Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

        This section would authorize improvements to existing units
    of family housing for fiscal year 2009.

            Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force

        This section would authorize specific appropriations for
    each line item contained in the budget request for fiscal year
    2009 for the Air Force. This section would also provide an
    overall limit on the amount the Air Force may spend on military
    construction projects.

     Section 2305--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2006
                                    Projects

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

     Section 2306--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2005
                                    Projects

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

                          TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $1,783,998,000 for defense
    agency military construction and $54,581,000 for family housing
    for fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends authorization of
    $1,455,969,000 for military construction and $54,581,000 for
    family housing for fiscal year 2009.
        The budget request also contained $134,278,000 for chemical
    demilitarization construction. The committee recommends
    authorization of $134,278,000 for military construction for
    fiscal year 2009.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                       Explanation of Funding Adjustments

        The committee recommends reduction or elimination of
    funding for several projects contained in the budget request
    for military construction and family housing. These reductions
    include:
        (1) $100,000,000 for the U.S. Army Medical Research
    Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) Stage 1, Increment
    III at Fort Detrick, Maryland. The budget request contained
    $209,000,000 to recapitalize and update USAMRIID.
        The committee supports the authorizing for appropriations
    of an amount equivalent to the ability of a military department
    to execute in the year of authorization for appropriations. For
    this project, the committee believes that the Department of
    Defense has exceeded its ability to fully expend the funding in
    fiscal year 2009.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $109,000,000, a
    reduction of $100,000,000, to support construction of this
    project.
        (2) $17,000,000 for the South Campus Utility Plant Phase 1
    at Fort Meade, Maryland. The budget request contained
    $31,000,000 to provide better mission assurity to maintain
    operations at Fort Mead, Maryland.
        The committee believes that the Department inappropriately
    requested a phased project that will not provide a complete and
    usable facility within the phase. The committee does believe
    that there is a complete storm water management system within
    the budget request for this project that should continue. The
    committee supports Fort Meade's mission assurity intentions and
    urges the Department to submit a project for the full scope of
    the intended effort that has been properly coordinated with the
    host installation in the next budget cycle.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $14,000,000, a
    reduction of $17,000,000, to support the construction of the
    storm water management system.
        (3) $19,761,000 for the Fuel Storage Tanks and Pipeline
    Replacement at Souda Bay, Greece. The budget request contained
    $27,761,000 to recapitalize and upgrade the existing fuel
    storage capabilities.
        The committee notes that this committee previously provided
    an authorization for this project but that the Department and
    the host nation could not reach agreement as to the necessity
    of this project. The committee understands that these
    differences have been ameliorated, but the committee believes
    that this project should be supported by the North Atlantic
    Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Programme.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $8,000,000, a
    reduction of $19,761,000, to support construction of this
    project.
        (4) $80,000,000 for the Ballistic Missile Defense System--
    European Interceptor Site. The budget request contained
    $132,600,000 to start construction of the facilities to support
    the interceptor site.
        The committee supports the full scope of the project and
    the integration with a radar site. However, the committee
    supports the authorizing for appropriations an amount
    equivalent to the ability of a military department to execute
    in the year of authorization for appropriations. For this
    project, the committee believes that the Department of Defense
    has exceeded its ability to fully expend the funding in fiscal
    year 2009. Furthermore, the committee urges the Department to
    submit this project for funding consideration in the NATO
    Security Investment Programme.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $52,600,000, a
    reduction of $80,000,000, to support construction of this
    project.
        (5) $60,000,000 for the Ballistic Missile Defense System--
    European Midcourse Radar Site. The budget request contained
    $108,560,000 to start construction of the facilities to support
    the midcourse radar site.
        The committee supports the full scope of the project and
    the integration with a interceptor site. However, the committee
    supports the authorizing for appropriations an amount
    equivalent to the ability of a military department to execute
    in the year of authorization for appropriations. For this
    project, the committee believes that the Department of Defense
    has exceeded their ability to fully expend the funding in
    fiscal year 2009. Furthermore, the committee urges the
    Department to submit this project for funding consideration in
    the NATO Security Investment Programme.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $48,560,000, a
    reduction of $60,000,000, to support construction of this
    project.
        (6) $25,500,000 for the Ballistic Missile Defense System--
    Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance -2 #3. The budget
    request contained $25,500,000 to start construction of the
    facilities to support the radar surveillance site.
        The committee supports the authorizing for appropriations
    of an amount equivalent to the ability of a military department
    to execute in the year of authorization for appropriations. For
    this project, the committee believes that the Department of
    Defense has exceeded its ability to expend the funding in
    fiscal year 2009 and may not be able to make construction award
    in fiscal year 2009.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $0, a reduction of
    $25,500,000, to support construction of this project.
        (7) $17,768,000 for Planning and Design for the Office of
    the Secretary of Defense. The budget request contained
    $43,768,000 to initiate planning and design projects but is out
    of line with previous authorizations for appropriations.
        The committee believes that the budget request represents
    unjustified growth from a fiscal year 2006 baseline.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends $26,000,000, a
    reduction of $17,768,000, to support planning and design
    efforts.
        (8) $15,000,000 for Planning and Design for various Defense
    Agencies.
        The committee notes that several Defense Agencies have
    elected to use planning and design funds to offset military
    construction shortfalls throughout the program. While there are
    no reprogramming restrictions that would prohibit this
    practice, the committee does not believe that it is appropriate
    source of funds for future reprogrammings.
        Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of
    $15,000,000, to support continued planning and design support
    worldwide.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                   Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations

        Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land
                              Acquisition Projects

        This section contains the list of defense agencies
    construction projects that would be authorized for fiscal year
    2009. The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
    installation basis. The state list contained in this report is
    intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
    authorized at each location.

                   Section 2402--Energy Conservation Projects

        This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    carry out energy conservation projects.

        Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies

        This section would authorize specific appropriations for
    each line item contained in the budget request for fiscal year
    2009 for the defense agencies. This section would also provide
    an overall limit on the amount the defense agencies may spend
    on military construction projects.

      Section 2404--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
                               Year 2007 Project

        This section would increase the existing authorization for
    a TRICARE Management Activity at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

      Section 2405--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
                               Year 2005 Projects

        This section would terminate certain military construction
    authorizations provided in the Military Construction
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (division B of Public
    Law 108-375).

     Section 2406--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2006
                                    Projects

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

              Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations

    Section 2411--Authorized Chemical Demilitarization Program Construction
                         and Land Acquisition Projects

        This section would contain the list of authorized chemical
    demilitarization construction projects for fiscal year 2009.
    The authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
    installation basis. The state list contained in this report is
    intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
    authorized at each location.

            Section 2412--Authorization of Appropriations, Chemical
                  Demilitarization Construction, Defense-Wide

        This section would authorize specific appropriations for
    each line item contained in the budget request for fiscal year
    2009 for the chemical demilitarization construction. This
    section would also provide an overall limit on the amount the
    chemical demilitarization office may spend on military
    construction projects.

      Section 2413--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
                               Year 1997 Projects

        This section would provide an authorization to continue
    chemical demilitarization construction at Pueblo Army Depot,
    Colorado.

      Section 2414--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
                               Year 2000 Projects

        This section would provide an authorization to continue
    chemical demilitarization construction at Blue Grass Army
    Depot, Kentucky.

       TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
                                    PROGRAM

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $240,867,000 for the North
    Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP)
    for fiscal year 2009. The committee recommends authorization of
    $240,867,000 for NSIP for fiscal year 2009.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

        Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
    make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
    Security Investment Program in an amount equal to the sum of
    the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of this Act
    and the amount of recoupment due to the United States for
    construction previously financed by the United States.

              Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO

        This section would authorize $240,867,000 as the U.S.
    contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
    Investment Program.

                TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $931,667,000 for military
    construction of guard and reserve facilities for fiscal year
    2009. The committee recommends authorization for fiscal year
    2009 of $1,141,147,000 to be distributed as follows:

    Army National Guard.....................................    $628,668,000
    Air National Guard......................................     142,809,000
    Army Reserve............................................     282,607,000
    Naval and Marine Corps Reserve..........................      57,045,000
    Air Force Reserve.......................................      30,018,000

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                    Planning and Design, Army National Guard

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    projects:
              (1) $579,000--Readiness Center Addition/Alteration,
            Dundalk, Maryland;
              (2) $1,005,000--Infrastructure Improvements, Arden
            Hills ATS, Minnesota;
              (3) $200,000--Readiness Center, Fort McClellan,
            Alabama;
              (4) $1,376,000--Training Complex, Camp Butner, North
            Carolina;
              (5) $3,250,000--Combined Support Maintenance Shop,
            Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;
              (6) $382,000--Readiness Center, Sumter, South
            Carolina;
              (7) $1,085,000--Readiness Center and NGB Conference
            Center, Fort Belvoir, Virginia; and
              (8) $323,000--Readiness Center, Ethan Allen Range,
            Vermont.

                       Planning and Design, Army Reserve

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    project:
              (1) $920,000--Army Reserve Center, Bryan, Texas.

                    Planning and Design, Air National Guard

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    projects:
              (1) $400,000--C-130 Squadron Operations Center,
            Greater Peoria, Illinois;
              (2) $1,700,000--TFI Digital Ground Station FOC
            Beddown, Otis Army National Guard Base, Massachusetts;
            and
              (3) $600,000--Replace Control Tower, Quonset State
            AP, Rhode Island.

                        Planning and Design, Air Reserve

        The committee recommends that, within the authorized
    amounts for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force
    complete planning and design activities for the following
    project:
              (1) $943,000--Joint Service Lodging Facility,
            Westover Air Reserve Base, Massachusetts.

                       Niagara Air Reserve Base, New York

        The committee believes that timely infrastructure
    improvements should be made at Niagara Air Reserve Base and
    should be provided priority in the Future Years Defense Program
    (FYDP). Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of the Air
    Force to accelerate projects, such as the programming to design
    and construct a small arms range at Niagara Air Reserve Base,
    New York, in the next FYDP.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

      Section 2601--Authorized Army National Guard Construction and Land
                              Acquisition Projects

        This section would authorize military construction for the
    Army National Guard for fiscal year 2009. The authorized
    amounts are listed on a location by location basis.

    Section 2602--Authorized Army Reserve Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would authorize military construction for the
    Army Reserve for fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts are
    listed on a location by location basis.

        Section 2603--Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
                   Construction and Land Acquisition Projects

        This section would authorize military construction for the
    Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve for fiscal year 2009. The
    authorized amounts are listed on a location by location basis.

       Section 2604--Authorized Air National Guard Construction and Land
                              Acquisition Projects

        This section would authorize military construction for the
    Air National Guard for fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts
    are listed on a location by location basis.

       Section 2605--Authorized Air Force Reserve Construction and Land
                              Acquisition Projects

        This section would authorize military construction for the
    Air Force Reserve for fiscal year 2009. The authorized amounts
    are listed on a location by location basis.

       Section 2606--Authorization of Appropriations, National Guard and
                                    Reserve

        This section would authorize appropriations for military
    construction for the guard and reserve by service component for
    fiscal year 2009. The state list contained in this report is
    intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
    authorized at each location.

     Section 2607--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2006
                                    Projects

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

     Section 2608--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2005
                                    Project

        This section would extend the authorizations listed until
    October 1, 2009, or the date of the enactment of an act
    authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
    2010, whichever is later.

              TITLE XXVII--BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT ACTIVITIES

                                    SUMMARY

        The budget request contained $393,377,000 for activities
    related to prior Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) activities
    and $9,065,386,000 for activities related to BRAC 2005. The
    committee recommends authorization of $393,377,000 for prior
    BRAC round activities and $9,065,386,000 for BRAC 2005
    activities.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

             Base Closure and Realignment 2005 Program Underfunding

        The committee remains concerned that the Department of
    Defense has not used the appropriate cost indices to correctly
    account for construction cost escalation and has underfunded
    the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) 2005 account. In a
    report to Congress dated February 28, 2008, the Undersecretary
    of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics reported
    that the budget request for fiscal year 2008 did not include
    the full scope of projects and indicated that the fiscal year
    2008 BRAC construction program ``is generally underfunded for
    the current construction market'' and ``will pose a clear
    challenge to executing FY 2008 projects.'' The report also
    indicated that the combined impacts of the Guidance Unit Cost
    and the Area Cost Factor would result in an 11 percent
    increase, or $736.0 million to the execution of the BRAC
    program. The committee recommends that the Department use the
    reprogramming authority to correctly fund the required scope of
    construction and not reduce the scope of the projects to match
    available funding.
        The committee is also concerned about statements from the
    Department of Defense's witnesses before the Subcommittee on
    Readiness that indicated the BRAC 2005 program is fully funded.
    Contradicting these statements is a report to Congress dated
    March 14, 2008, in which the Secretary of the Army reported
    numerous BRAC 2005 projects that have been deferred until after
    the statutory completion date.
        Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
    to submit to the congressional defense committees a report, by
    March 1, 2009, with the following information:
              (1) Progress of properly funding the BRAC 2005
            construction projects, commensurate with civilian
            construction cost indices;
              (2) Assessment of the BRAC 2005 construction program
            if the appropriate Area Cost Factors and Guidance Use
            Costs were incorporated in the budget request for
            fiscal year 2010; and
              (3) Assessment of BRAC 2005 construction projects
            that have been deferred until after the statutory
            completion date.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                           Subtitle A--Authorizations

      Section 2701--Authorization of Appropriations for Base Closure and
       Realignment Activities Funded through Department of Defense Base
                              Closure Account 1990

        This section would authorize appropriations for fiscal year
    2009 for ongoing activities that are required to implement the
    decision of the 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995 Base Closure and
    Realignment.

    Section 2702--Authorized Base Closure and Realignment Activities Funded
            through Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005

        This section would authorize military construction projects
    for fiscal year 2009 for ongoing activities that are required
    to implement the decisions of the 2005 Base Closure and
    Realignment. The table included in this title of this report
    lists the specific amount authorized at each location.

      Section 2703--Authorization of Appropriations for Base Closure and
       Realignment Activities Funded through Department of Defense Base
                              Closure Account 2005

        This section would authorize appropriations for military
    construction projects for fiscal year 2009 that are required to
    implement the decisions of the 2005 Base Closure and
    Realignment (BRAC) round. This provision would also provide an
    overall limit of the amount authorized for BRAC military
    construction projects. The state list contained in this report
    provides a list of specific projects authorized at each
    location.

            Subtitle B--Amendments to Base Closure and Related Laws

     Section 2711--Repeal of the Commission Approach to the Development of
     Recommendations in Any Future Round of Base Closures and Realignments

        This section would repeal the process for arriving at Base
    Closure and Realignment (BRAC) decisions.
        The committee remains supportive of tools that allow the
    Department of Defense to productively right size defense
    infrastructure with the current defense mission. Traditionally,
    the BRAC process was used as the process to institute this
    change. However, the 2005 BRAC process was modified from a
    method of managing excess infrastructure into a process that
    instituted internal organizational change at a time when the
    Department was undergoing severe strain and prosecuting
    conflicts on multiple fronts. Ultimately, the Department only
    marginally reduced defense infrastructure and a very activist
    BRAC Commission modified 35 percent of the Department's
    recommendation.
        In instituting the recommendations, significant changes
    have occurred since the BRAC Commission concluded their review.
    For example, the Comptroller General recently reported that the
    BRAC 2005 costs have increased by 48 percent and the projected
    savings have been reduced by 5 percent. This cost growth is
    reflective of an inadequate comparative tool that was used to
    evaluate various scenarios. Furthermore, some state and local
    communities have been unable to cope with the level of change
    recommended by the BRAC process and are expressing concerns
    about their ability to provide commensurate support in
    transportation and public school sectors.
        The committee believes that the Department needs to change
    the methods and application of the base closure process before
    requesting another base closure round.

       Section 2712--Modification of Annual Base Closure and Realignment
                             Reporting Requirements

        This section would amend the annual reporting requirements
    associated with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of
    1990 (Public Law 101-510).

    Section 2713--Technical Corrections Regarding Authorized Cost and Scope
       of Work Variations for Military Construction and Military Family
           Housing Projects Related to Base Closures and Realignments

        This section would provide a technical correction to the
    Base Closure and Realignment construction notification clause
    and require the Department of Defense to report costs and scope
    variances that exceed 20 percent or $2,000,000, whichever is
    lesser.

                           Subtitle C--Other Matters

        Section 2721--Conditions on Closure of Walter Reed Army Medical
    Hospital and Relocation of Operations to National Naval Medical Center
                                and Fort Belvoir

        This section would direct the Department of Defense to
    cease construction beyond work necessary to complete the
    foundation of the replacement facilities until the Secretary of
    Defense certifies the following items have been completed: 90
    percent of the construction design; an independent cost
    estimate to complete the realignment of the Walter Reed Army
    Medical Center; and a milestone schedule to complete the
    proposed realignment.
        The committee remains committed to implementing the
    Department's goal of transforming the National Capitol Region
    Health Care System into a world class medical center at the hub
    of our nation's premiere regional health care system serving
    our military and our nation. As such, it is critical to ensure
    that this vision is integrated into the ongoing design and
    construction required of the realignment of the Walter Reed
    Army Medical Center. Therefore, the committee believes that a
    higher level of design is required before vertical construction
    commences, better cost controls are implemented, and a
    comprehensive schedule is complete to ensure a seamless
    transition from existing capabilities into a world class
    medical system.

    Section 2722--Report on Use of BRAC Properties as Sites for Refineries
                            or Nuclear Power Plants

        This section would require a study evaluating the
    feasibility of using military installations selected for
    closure under the base closure and realignment process as
    locations for the construction of petroleum or natural gas
    refineries or nuclear power plants.

             TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                    Defense Critical Infrastructure Program

        The committee is aware that the Department of Defense
    established the Defense Critical Infrastructure Program (DCIP)
    pursuant to Department of Defense Directive (DODD) 3020.40 to
    identify and assure the availability of mission-critical
    infrastructure.
        The committee notes with concern a recent study that found
    that critical national missions are ``at an unacceptably high
    risk of extended outage from failure of the [power] grid and
    other critical national infrastructure.'' Although public works
    infrastructure, including power supply, is being analyzed as a
    part of DCIP, the committee is concerned that little progress
    has been made.
        In addition, the committee is concerned that the Department
    has not properly programmed, in the Future Years Defense
    Program, security upgrades at access points and entry gates to
    military installations. These requirements were principally
    generated in response to Joint Staff Integrated Vulnerability
    Assessments and impact the level of security for military
    assets and personnel. The committee is also concerned about
    potential limitations in contingency operations related to Tier
    One assets as identified by DODD 3020.40.
        Therefore, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense to
    include installation security- and threat reduction-related
    military construction in the near term program and budgeting
    decisions, particularly as it relates to gates and access
    points. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
    complete an assessment of Tier One assets and the corrective
    action required to provide assured power and secure and
    maintain redundancy of critical assets. This report shall be
    submitted to the congressional defense committees by March 1,
    2009.
        The committee further directs the Comptroller General to
    continue its review of the critical infrastructure program and
    assess the Department's compliance with DODD 3020.40 and submit
    a report to the congressional defense committees by October 1,
    2009.

                             Facilities Sustainment

        The committee is convinced that the Department of Defense's
    decision to pursue standardized models for facilities
    sustainment and recapitalization will provide consistent
    service throughout the Department. The committee is also
    encouraged that the Department plans to expand this effort to
    include installation support services and supports
    standardization of service metrics. However, the committee is
    concerned about several issues highlighted by a recent
    Government Accountability Office report entitled ``Continued
    Management Attention is Needed to Support Installation
    Facilities and Operations'' (GAO-08-502). In this report, the
    Government Accountability Office concluded that the facilities
    sustainment model provides a consistent and reasonable
    framework for preparing estimates of the Department's annual
    facility sustainment funding requirements. However, the
    Government Accountability Office also concluded that accuracy
    and supportability issues with the model's inputs have affected
    the reliability of the model's estimates.
        The committee believes that the inputs to the model are
    critical elements to support a reliable, standardized process
    and urges the Department to take prompt action to correct
    identified deficiencies. The committee also believes that the
    Department needs to complete a comprehensive review of the
    inputs to the model, such as the verification of each real
    property inventory record at least once every five years as
    currently dictated in the Department's directives, and better
    assess the specialized maintenance needs for its historic
    facilities and monuments.
        The committee is also concerned that the allocation of
    facility sustainment funds within the Department may not be
    consistent with requirements as determined by the sustainment
    model; an appropriate mechanism for identifying and funding
    deferred facility sustainment needs may not exist; the
    Departments lacks of a comprehensive approach to real property
    determinations of historic and monumental buildings,
    specifically including service academies and post secondary
    education facilities such as the Navy Post Graduate School; and
    the delivery of installation support services may not be
    consistent across the joint bases developed by the 2005 Base
    Closure and Realignment round. Therefore, the committee directs
    the Comptroller General to assess the following: the models'
    implementation at the installation level; the Department's
    sustainment funding allocation process ensures installations
    receive funds to adequately support its facilities; and the
    status of the Department's efforts to ensure delivery of
    adequate support services at joint bases. The Comptroller
    General shall report the results of its review to the
    congressional defense committees by March 30, 2009.

                       Formerly Used Defense Sites Review

        The committee remains concerned that Formerly Used Defense
    Sites (FUDS) receive lower priority for environmental
    remediation funding than active and Base Closure and
    Realignment installations and is concerned about the long-term
    consequences of these investment decisions. In the Defense
    Environmental Programs Report to Congress for fiscal year 2007,
    the Department identified over $16.0 billion of required
    remediation to support these FUDS activities. At many sites,
    the characterization of the environmental remediation required
    at the FUDS sites has yet to be fully completed. For example,
    the former Almaden Air Force Station, Santa Clara County,
    California, has yet to be fully characterized, and the extent
    of contamination on this property that was conveyed over 25
    years ago is unknown. The committee urges the Secretary of
    Defense to take steps to ensure the full characterization of
    all the FUDS locations, like the former Almaden Air Force
    Station.
        The committee directs the Comptroller General to review the
    FUDS program and submit to the congressional defense committees
    a report, by March 1, 2009, assessing the following:
              (1) Steps that the Department is taking to mitigate
            overall contamination at FUDS locations;
              (2) Army Corps of Engineers' management of emerging
            contaminants at FUDS locations;
              (3) Army Corps of Engineers' program management
            ability and organizational construct to manage the FUDS
            program including sponsorship for budget preparation
            requirements; and
              (4) Relationship of environmental regulators and the
            Army Corps of Engineers.

                    Guam Integrated Water Management System

        The committee recognizes the need for efficient management,
    utilization, and conservation of water resources for the
    civilian and military communities on Guam. For several years,
    the committee has encouraged the secretaries of the military
    departments to privatize utility systems where feasible. The
    committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to work
    collaboratively with the Government of Guam for a comprehensive
    and integrated water supply and wastewater system on Guam. To
    achieve this goal, the committee urges the exploration of a
    partnership to manage the distribution and supply of potable
    water on a more efficient basis on Guam.

                  Joint Land Use Study at Shaw Air Force Base

        The committee understands that the Department of Defense is
    conducting a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) funded by the Office
    of the Secretary of Defense to assess, among other things,
    current and future encroachment threats to U.S. military
    installations and operating spaces. The committee expects that,
    in conducting the JLUS, the Department will fully consider the
    implications of the services' evolving roles, missions, and
    material requirements as well as its respective and collective
    impacts upon each of the installations and operating spaces
    under review. The committee also expects that the Department
    will fully consider the realized effects and future
    implications of implementing the Base Closure and Realignment
    recommendations of 2005 while conducting the JLUS proceedings.
    The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to conduct and
    conclude its JLUS proceedings at Shaw Air Force Base, South
    Carolina, as expeditiously as possible, and it encourages the
    Secretary of Defense to conclude the JLUS before December 31,
    2008.

                     Military Spouse and Families Memorial

        The committee is aware of the widespread bipartisan support
    in the 110th Congress for the yet to be passed H.R. 3026, the
    Military Spouses Memorial Act of 2007, and recognizes that a
    memorial honoring our nation's military spouses and families is
    both fitting and proper. The committee is also aware that the
    bill does not presently conform to the provisions of the
    Commemorative Works Act of 1986 (Public Law 102-216), leading
    to a recent decision by the National Capitol Planning
    Commission to deny the siting of such a memorial in the
    District of Columbia. The committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a
    report, by January 1, 2009, assessing defense installations in
    the National Capital Area, including Navy Annex and Fort Myer,
    which may be available to site this important memorial.

            Recycled Materials for Road Construction and other Uses

        The committee supports the determined efforts of the
    construction industry to recycle road materials and incorporate
    household recycled wastes into asphalt aggregate and base
    course applications. However, the committee is concerned about
    the uneven use of the construction industry's technique across
    the United States. The committee directs the Secretary of
    Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a
    report, by March 1, 2009, with: an industry assessment by state
    and territory of using recycled materials for road
    construction; proposed modifications to the existing paving
    construction specifications that incorporate expanded recycling
    options; and overall opportunities to expand demand-side
    recycling options.

                       Safe Housing for Military Families

        The committee was briefed on the Home Safety Month program
    developed by the Home Safety Council and understands that this
    program could be effective in preventing home-related injuries.
    The committee recommends that a program similar to the Home
    Safety Month program be adopted by the Military Family Housing
    Public Private partners in their management of over 150,000
    family housing units.

                            Training Range Expansion

        The committee understands that modern weapons systems being
    fielded by each of the military services require even larger,
    more extensive range facilities than the military departments
    now have at their disposal. The use of current range facilities
    is increasingly limited by growing considerations of urban
    encroachment, endangered species mitigation, and air and
    maritime traffic congestion. The Army alone said it needs an
    additional 5,000,000 acres of training space within the United
    States, a goal the committee believes is not attainable.
    However, the committee believes the secretaries of the military
    departments should continue to aggressively pursue
    opportunities to acquire additional training land, while
    working closely with local communities. In general, the
    committee strongly discourages the use of condemnation or
    eminent domain, and believes this tool should be used as
    sparingly as possible. The committee applauds the Department's
    efforts to manage existing ranges in a sustainable manner, but
    is dismayed to note the significant encroachment reported,
    particularly at large land maneuver ranges. The committee is
    concerned about the future availability of ranges sufficiently
    large and unencumbered enough for realistic training, and
    encourages the Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the
    military departments to continue to manage existing ranges
    carefully and to seek creative ways to acquire new training
    ranges in cooperation with state and local officials.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

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

      Section 2801--Incorporation of Principles of Sustainable Design in
     Documents Submitted as Part of Proposed Military Construction Projects

        This section would require the Department of Defense to
    incorporate sustainable design concepts and life cycle analysis
    into a review of options that would be submitted with the
    annual budget documents.
        The committee continues to support construction and
    contracting innovations that the construction industry is
    pursuing, and believes accelerated contracting techniques
    should be pursued to the maximum extent possible. These
    techniques include construction management at-risk, limitations
    to the performance and payment bonds at large construction
    projects, and the continued development of alternative
    construction methods like modular construction. The Department
    should also incorporate construction materials that may require
    additional funds during construction, but are more cost
    effective over the life cycle of a facility. The committee
    urges the Secretary of Defense to continue to pursue life
    cycle, cost effective materials and procedures and include a
    review of these alternatives when finalizing life cycle
    decisions for construction.

     Section 2802--Extension of Authority to Use Operation and Maintenance
           Funds for Construction Projects Outside the United States

        This section would extend the current use of operations and
    maintenance funds toward military construction requirements,
    outside the United States, for one year.

     Section 2803--Revision of Maximum Lease Amount Applicable to Certain
     Domestic Army Family Housing Leases to Reflect Previously Made Annual
                             Adjustments in Amount

        This section would amend the maximum lease amount available
    to Army Family House Leases from $18,620 per unit to $35,000
    per unit.

     Section 2804--Use of Military Family Housing Constructed Under Build
            and Lease Authority to House Members without Dependents

        This section would amend the military family housing build
    and lease authority and allow service members without
    dependants to be assigned to those quarters. Furthermore, this
    authority would also allow the Department of Defense to convert
    the family housing units, previously provided by the build to
    lease authority, to military unaccompanied housing. Finally,
    the secretary concerned would be required to provide notice to
    the congressional defense committees prior to using the
    conversion authority.

      Section 2805--Lease of Military Family Housing to the Secretary of
                          Defense for Use as Residence

        This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to lease
    military family housing in the National Capital Region. The
    rental rate would be determined by the higher of the following
    two alternatives:
              (1) Fair market value offset by the security and
            infrastructure savings associated with housing the
            Secretary of Defense on a military installation; or
              (2) 105 percent of the monthly rate for basic
            allowance for housing of the pay grade of an O-10, with
            dependents.

       Section 2806--Repeal of Reporting Requirement in Connection with
                     Installation Vulnerability Assessments

        This section would repeal the current reporting
    requirements associated with installation vulnerability
    assessments.

    Section 2807--Modification of Alternative Authority for Acquisition and
                        Improvement of Military Housing

        This section would modify the existing privatization
    authorities and provide better real estate visibility and
    management of conveyance executed with this authority.
    Specifically, it would: require the Department of Defense to
    partner with the family housing developer; require 100 percent
    performance and payment bonds; require competition for
    conveyance actions; repeal the authority to assign service
    members to privatized family housing; and require additional
    reporting associated with general and flag officer quarters.

     Section 2808--Report on Capturing Housing Privatization Best Practices

        This section would amend section 2884(b) of title 10,
    United States Code, and require an additional reporting element
    to annual reporting requirements. Specifically, the Secretary
    of Defense would submit to the congressional defense committees
    a report on best business practices for the execution of
    housing privatization initiatives.

            Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

     Section 2811--Clarification of Exceptions to Congressional Reporting
              Requirements for Certain Real Property Transactions

        This section would clarify reporting requirements
    associated with civil works and other real estate transactions.

       Section 2812--Authority to Lease Non-Excess Property of Military
                        Departments and Defense Agencies

        This section would modify the Department of Defense's
    leasing authority and restrict certain uses of that authority.
    Specifically, the Department would be limited to leases less
    than 50 years, would be limited in the types of lease back
    agreements that could be entered, and would be limited on the
    use of proceeds derived from leases. Also, the secretaries
    concerned would be required to determine that property is not
    excess and would be required to provide expanded notifications
    to the congressional defense committees during the course of
    the lease review process. Finally, the secretary would be
    required to submit a report 30 days before the secretary enters
    into a lease that describes the agreement reached with the
    local municipality on taxation issues and further describes the
    proposed lessee payment.

       Section 2813--Modification of Utility System Conveyance Authority

        This section would modify the existing utility
    privatization authorities and provide the secretary concerned
    the discretion to convey additional, discrete utility elements
    without competition to an existing utility privatization
    interest, if certain criteria are met.

     Section 2814--Permanent Authority to Purchase Municipal Services for
                  Military Installations in the United States

        This section would authorize the Department of Defense to
    acquire certain municipal services to support installation
    requirements.

                       Section 2815--Defense Access Roads

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
    conduct a needs assessment to assess the magnitude of the
    transportation improvement required when the Secretary of
    Defense has concluded that a Department of Defense action has
    caused a significant transportation impact.

     Section 2816--Protecting Private Property Rights during Department of
                           Defense Land Acquisitions

        This section would require the Secretary of Defense to make
    every reasonable effort to acquire real property expeditiously
    by negotiation. The Secretary of Defense shall not be precluded
    from acquiring real property from willing sellers.

               Subtitle C--Provisions Related to Guam Realignment

          Section 2821--Guam Defense Policy Review Initiative Account

        This section would establish the Guam Defense Policy Review
    Account for purposes of centralizing account management for
    issues related to the realignment of military installations on
    Guam and the relocation of military personnel on Guam.
    Furthermore, not later that February 15 of every year, the
    Department shall submit a report to Congress that describes the
    military construction projects related to the realignment of
    military installations and the relocation of military personnel
    on Guam.

       Section 2822--Sense of Congress regarding Use of Special Purpose
           Entities for Military Housing Related to Guam Realignment

        This section would express the sense of Congress that the
    Special Purpose Entities proposed to support military family
    members in Guam should closely follow the model and standards
    associated with the privatized family housing initiative
    authorized by subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, United
    States Code. Furthermore, it would express the sense of
    Congress that utility funding associated with the Special
    Purpose Entity should be consolidated with the civilian
    infrastructure to maximize effectiveness of the overall system.

      Section 2823--Sense of Congress Regarding Federal Assistance to Guam

        This section would express the sense of Congress that the
    Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Interagency
    Group on Insular Affairs, should enter into a memorandum of
    understanding with the Government of Guam to identify civilian
    infrastructure associated with the capabilities expansion on
    Guam.

        Section 2824--Comptroller General Report Regarding Interagency
                    Requirements Related to Guam Realignment

        This section would require the Comptroller General to
    submit a report on the status of interagency coordination
    related to the realignment of military forces on Guam.

       Section 2825--Energy and Environmental Design Initiatives in Guam
                    Military Construction and Installations

        This section would require that facilities constructed to
    support the military expansion at Guam have energy efficiencies
    and energy conservation measures incorporated into the overall
    design process. Specifically, this section would require that
    military construction projects on Guam incorporate Leadership
    in Energy and Environmental Design to achieve not less than the
    U.S. Green Building Council silver standard for new
    construction.

    Section 2826--Department of Defense Inspector General Report Regarding
                                Guam Realignment

        This section would require the Inspector General of the
    Department of Defense to submit a report to Congress within 180
    days after the date of enactment of this Act on the efforts of
    the Inspector General to address potential waste and fraud
    associated with the realignment of military forces on Guam.

     Section 2827--Eligibility of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
        Islands for Military Base Reuse Studies and Community Planning
                                   Assistance

        This section would authorize the Commonwealth of the
    Northern Mariana Islands to be eligible to receive funds for
    military base reuse studies and community planning assistance.

                Section 2828--Prevailing Wage Applicable to Guam

        This section would require military construction contracts
    to comply with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United
    States Code, and would require a construction wage
    determination to be applied in all military construction
    contracts in Guam.

                          Subtitle D--Energy Security

     Section 2841--Certification of Enhanced Use Leases for Energy-Related
                                    Projects

        This section would require that, if a proposed enhanced use
    lease involves a project related to energy production, and the
    term of the lease exceeds 20 years, the secretary of a military
    department may not enter into the lease until 30 days after the
    Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense
    committees that the lease is consistent with the Department of
    Defense energy performance goals and plan required by section
    2911 of title 10, United States Code.

      Section 2842--Annual Report on Department of Defense Installations
                               Energy Management

        This section would amend section 2925(a) of title 10,
    United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to
    report on efforts taken to meet new energy goals set forth in
    the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law
    110-140) and on efforts to meet certification requirements for
    sustainable green-building standards for construction and major
    renovations.

                          Subtitle E--Land Conveyances

       Section 2851--Land Conveyance, Former Naval Air Station, Alameda,
                                   California

        This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to
    convey the Former Naval Air Station, California, to the Alameda
    Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, except those lands
    designated as public benefit conveyances and certain other
    surplus lands.

       Section 2852--Land Conveyance, Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point,
                              Norwalk, California

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
    to convey 10 acres at the Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point to
    the City of Norwalk, California, for recreational purposes.

     Section 2853--Land Conveyance, Former Naval Station, Treasure Island,
                                   California

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
    convey the former Naval Station Treasure Island, California, to
    the Treasure Island redevelopment authority. Consideration for
    this transfer would be provided by the redevelopment
    authority's assuming at lease one of the following: the
    remediation of known environmental contamination, or by the
    Secretary of the Navy receiving a share of the revenues.

     Section 2854--Condition on Lease Involving Naval Air Station, Barbers
                                 Point, Hawaii

        This section would require the Secretary of the Navy and
    Ford Island Properties/Hunt Development to enter into a
    memorandum of understanding with the Hawaii Community
    Development Authority to ensure that the development plan for
    the real property conforms to the final Kalaeloa Master Plan.

      Section 2855--Land Conveyance, Sergeant First Class M.L. Downs Army
                       Reserve Center, Springfield, Ohio

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    convey the Sergeant First Class M.L. Downs Army Reserve Center,
    Springfield, Ohio to the City of Springfield, Ohio for use for
    municipal government services.

        Section 2856--Land Conveyance, John Sevier Range, Knox County,
                                   Tennessee

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    convey 124 acres known as the John Sevier Range in Knox County,
    Tennessee, to the State of Tennessee for use as a public firing
    range and associated recreational activities.

      Section 2857--Land Conveyance, Bureau of Land Management Land, Camp
                                 Williams, Utah

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Interior
    to convey 431 acres to the State of Utah for military use by
    the Utah National Guard at Camp Williams, Utah.

       Section 2858--Land Conveyance, Army Property, Camp Williams, Utah

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    convey 608 acres and 308 acres, respectively, acres to the
    State of Utah for military use by the Utah National Guard at
    Camp Williams, Utah.

       Section 2859--Extension of Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail
                         through Fort Belvoir, Virginia

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    enter into a revocable at will easement with the Secretary of
    the Interior to provide land along the perimeter of Fort
    Belvoir, Virginia, to be used to extend the Potomac Heritage
    National Scenic Trail.

                           Subtitle F--Other Matters

    Section 2871--Revised Deadline for Transfer of Arlington Naval Annex to
                          Arlington National Cemetery

        This section would delay the proposed transfer of the
    Arlington Naval Annex to the Arlington National Cemetery by one
    year. This delay would allow the Department of Defense the
    opportunity to better manage tenants affected by Base Closure
    and Realignment, provide savings, and ensure the timely site
    development for future use by the Arlington National Cemetery.

      Section 2872--Decontamination and Use of Former Bombardment Area on
                               Island of Culebra

        This section would amend the Military Construction
    Authorization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-166) and remove
    restrictions to environmental remediation on the Island of
    Culebra that were incorporated to protect the former
    bombardment area on the island of Culebra, Puerto Rico, from
    further development.

         Section 2873--Acceptance and Use of Gifts for Construction of
    Additional Building at National Museum of the United States Air Force,
                     Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
    to accept a gift from the Air Force Museum Foundation that
    would allow construction of the fourth building for the
    National Museum of the United States Air Force at Wright
    Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.

      Section 2874--Establishment of Memorial to American Rangers at Fort
                               Belvoir, Virginia

        This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
    permit the American Ranger Memorial Association, Inc., to
    establish and maintain a memorial, at a suitable location at
    Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

     Section 2875--Lease Involving Pier on Ford Island, Pearl Harbor Naval
                                  Base, Hawaii

        This section would direct the Secretary of the Navy to
    enter into a two year lease with the USS Missouri Memorial
    Association to use the pier Foxtrot Five on Ford Island,
    Hawaii.

         Section 2876--Naming of Health Facility, Fort Rucker, Alabama

        This section would require the health facility located at
    301 Andrews Avenue at Fort Rucker, Alabama, to be known as the
    ``Lyster Army/VA Health Clinic.''

    TITLE XXIX--ADDITIONAL WAR-RELATED AND EMERGENCY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
                      AUTHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

                                    SUMMARY

        Title XXIX of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) authorized $2,158,741,000
    in emergency authorization of appropriations. Since enactment
    of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008,
    the Department transmitted a budget modification. The committee
    recommends an additional authorization of appropriation of
    $1,182,489,000 to support war-related and emergency military
    construction requirements.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

        Section 2901--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would authorize war-related military
    construction projects for the Army. The authorized amounts are
    listed on an installation-by-installations basis.

        Section 2902--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would authorize war-related military
    construction projects for the Navy. The authorized amounts are
    listed on an installation-by-installations basis.

     Section 2903--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
                                    Projects

        This section would authorize war-related military
    construction projects for the Air Force. The authorized amounts
    are listed on an installation-by-installations basis.

        Section 2904--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land
                              Acquisition Projects

        This section would authorize war-related military
    construction projects for the defense agencies. The authorized
    amounts are listed on an installation-by-installations basis.

     Section 2905--Termination of Authority to Carry out Fiscal Year 2008
              Army Projects for which Funds Were not Appropriated

        This section would repeal the project authorizations for
    military construction projects authorized in fiscal year 2008
    for which no funds were appropriated.

     DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
                              OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

          TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

                                    OVERVIEW

        The budget request contained $16.0 billion for atomic
    energy defense activities. Of this amount, $9.1 billion is for
    the programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration
    and $6.9 billion is for environmental and other defense
    activities. The committee recommends $16.2 billion, an increase
    of $232.7 million to the budget request.

                           ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

                    National Nuclear Security Administration

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $9.1 billion for the programs
    of the National Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year
    2009. The committee recommends $9.3 billion, an increase of
    $204.7 million to the budget request.

                               Weapons Activities

    Assessment of life extension programs

        In February 2008, the committee wrote to the Administrator
    of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and
    requested that he direct the JASON scientific advisory panel to
    undertake a technical review of warhead life extension programs
    (LEP) analogous to their 2007 review of the Reliable
    Replacement Warhead (RRW) program. On March 17, 2008, the
    Administrator responded that NNSA would direct the JASON panel
    to conduct such a study, for which planning would commence
    later this year.
        The committee welcomes this analysis, and believes a fuller
    understanding of the risks, uncertainties, and challenges
    associated with the warhead life extension programs will enable
    a more robust comparison between the current program of record
    and any proposed modifications or alternatives, including the
    RRW proposal.
        The committee believes the JASON review should encompass a
    broad range of options, including some not included in previous
    LEPs. The committee therefore encourages the Administrator of
    the NNSA to prepare an assessment of the expected technical and
    financial costs and benefits of expanding the scope of life
    extension programs, to include reuse of legacy primary and
    secondary components. The committee believes such an assessment
    should inform and be part of the JASON review.

    Reliable Replacement Warhead

        The budget request contained $10.0 million within Directed
    Stockpile Work for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW)
    program.
        The committee notes that the budget does not provide
    sufficient funds to complete the Phase 2a design and cost study
    for RRW. Instead, the request provides modest funding to
    ``address questions raised by the JASON review of RRW
    feasibility study activities.'' The committee notes that funds
    are also requested elsewhere in the National Nuclear Security
    Administration (NNSA) budget, within Advanced Certification and
    Enhanced Surety, to support further examination of
    certification issues raised by the RRW proposal.
        The committee sees value in research focused on the
    certification and stewardship issues raised not only by the RRW
    proposal, but also by the annual assessment process and
    certification issues raised by planned warhead life extension
    programs. Such research is critical to sustaining and
    modernizing the Stockpile Stewardship Program (SSP), whether or
    not the RRW program proceeds.
        The committee recommends no funds, a decrease of $10.0
    million, for the Reliable Replacement Warhead within Directed
    Stockpile Work. Instead, the committee recommends an additional
    $10.0 million within Advanced Certification for research to
    address questions raised by the JASON review of RRW, and to
    support evaluation of other high priority SSP challenges,
    including certification of weapons using existing pits or
    primaries, weapons subject to life extension programs, and
    weapons modified to include advanced surety and safety
    features.

    Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility

        The budget request contained $32.5 million for the Pit
    Disassembly and Conversion Facility (PDCF)--Other Project Costs
    within Weapons Dismantlement and Disposition, an increase of
    $24.9 million above the fiscal year 2008 appropriated level.
        The committee supports construction of the PDCF, but finds
    the justification for the proposed increase insufficient.
        The committee recommends $25.0 million, a decrease of $7.5
    million, for the Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility--Other
    Project Costs.

    Stockpile Services

                Research and Development Support
        The budget request contained $36.2 million for Research and
    Development Support within Stockpile Services.
        The committee is supportive of these activities, but finds
    insufficient grounds for the proposed increase over the fiscal
    year 2008 appropriated level.
        The committee recommends $32.7 million, a decrease of $3.5
    million from the request.
                Research and Development Certification and Safety
        The budget request contained $193.4 million for Research
    and Development Certification and Safety within Stockpile
    Services.
        The committee supports the National Nuclear Security
    Administration's efforts to transform the existing nuclear
    weapons complex into a more modern and responsive
    infrastructure. The committee notes that, in addition to
    infrastructure modernization, the scientific tools that sustain
    the Stockpile Stewardship Program also must be modernized over
    time. The committee understands, for example, that there is the
    potential to develop hydro-dynamic test capabilities, which
    currently require large, expensive facilities, at a scale that
    would not require new facilities. Instead, such ``facility
    free'' hydro-dynamic test capabilities would be small enough to
    be portable.
        The committee recommends $198.4 million in Research and
    Development Certification and Safety, an increase of $5.0
    million specifically for research into the potential for
    ``facility free'' hydro-dynamic test capabilities.
                Pit Manufacturing and Pit Manufacturing Capability
        The budget request contained $145.3 million for Pit
    Manufacturing and $53.6 million for the Pit Manufacturing
    Capability, both within Stockpile Services. Each sub-program is
    defined as aiming to ``establish the capability to manufacture
    pits other than the W88 pit,'' and to ``improve manufacturing
    processes used to manufacture all pit types.'' The committee
    notes redundancy in the two efforts, and urges the National
    Nuclear Security Administration to examine the potential for
    combining these into one activity.
        The committee recommends $110.3 million for Pit
    Manufacturing, a reduction of $35.0 million from the request,
    and $38.6 million in Pit Manufacturing Capability, a reduction
    of $15.0 million from the request.

    Advanced Certification

        The budget request contained $20.0 million for Advanced
    Certification, a program begun in fiscal year 2008 to fund
    activities specifically targeting the challenges associated
    with the assessment and certification of the nation's aging
    nuclear weapons.
        The committee supports such research, and regards it as
    crucial to the sustainment and modernization of the Stockpile
    Stewardship Program. In particular, the committee regards the
    Advanced Certification activity as integral to advancing new
    approaches to Stockpile Stewardship, including pit or primary
    reuse options in the life extension programs.
        The committee recommends $30.0 million for Advanced
    Certification, an increase of $10.0 million above the request.
    The committee recommends the additional funds for research to
    address questions raised by the JASON review of RRW, and to
    support evaluation of other high priority SSP challenges,
    including certification of weapons using existing pits or
    primaries, weapons subject to life extension programs, and
    weapons modified to include advanced surety and safety
    features.

    Engineering Campaign

                Enhanced Surety
        The budget request contained $35.6 million for Enhanced
    Surety within the Engineering Campaign. According to the
    request, the Enhanced Surety sub-program is designed to
    ``develop options for weapon system designers during stockpile
    alterations, modifications, and transformations.'' The effort
    further addresses ``other refurbishments and stockpile
    improvement projects needed to meet future Department of
    Defense requirements.''
        The committee supports such activities, but understands
    that the request is insufficient to support analysis of certain
    options for augmenting the surety of existing legacy stockpile
    systems, including the surety of the B61 warhead.
        The committee recommends $40.6 million for Enhanced Surety,
    an increase of $5.0 million above the request, for research
    into emerging options for increasing the surety of existing
    weapons systems, including the B61 warhead.
                Enhanced Surveillance
        The budget request contained $68.2 million for Enhanced
    Surveillance within the Engineering Campaign. This sub-program
    is designed to develop models and other technologies necessary
    for early identification and assessment of stockpile aging
    issues.
        The committee supports this activity, but understands that
    the request does not fully support research into emerging
    technologies for embedded surveillance. The committee notes the
    promise in such technologies.
        The committee recommends $71.2 million for Enhanced
    Surveillance, an increase of $3.0 million over the request, for
    research into embedded surveillance.

    Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield Campaign

        The budget request contained $421.2 million for the
    Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield Campaign,
    including $180.4 million for facility operations and target
    production.
        The committee supports the National Ignition Campaign
    (NIC), and believes the successful execution of this campaign
    is critical to the success of the Stockpile Stewardship
    Program. The committee understands the fiscal year 2009 request
    does not fully fund the National Ignition Campaign Baseline
    Execution Plan, and further understands that additional risk
    reduction resources are needed to meet NIC milestones.
        The committee recommends $195.0 million, an increase of
    $14.6 million, for facility operations and target production,
    of which $4.6 million is for fully funding the National
    Ignition Campaign Baseline Execution Plan, and $10.0 million is
    for supporting enhanced target production and risk reduction
    activities.

    Readiness Campaign--Tritium Readiness

        The budget request contained $82.3 million for Tritium
    Readiness sub-program within the Readiness Campaign.
        The committee supports Tritium Readiness activities, but
    understands that the sub-program maintains uncosted,
    uncommitted balances of more than $25.0 million above the
    Department of Energy established threshold. The committee is
    concerned that such funds reflect an imbalance between Tritium
    Readiness resources and the sub-program scope of work.
        The committee recommends $72.3 million, a decrease of $10.0
    million, for Tritium Readiness in the Readiness Campaign.

    Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities

                Operations of Facilities--Lawrence Livermore National
                        Laboratory
        The budget request contained $85.2 million for operations
    at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) within
    Readiness and Technical Base and Facilities--Operations of
    Facilities.
        The committee notes the request is $4.2 million below the
    fiscal year 2008 level. The committee also understands the
    request is insufficient to fully support removal of Category 1
    and Category 2 special nuclear material from LLNL. The
    committee notes such removal is an important element of the
    Complex Transformation effort.
        The committee recommends $95.2 million for LLNL Operations
    of Facilities, an increase of $10.0 million above the request,
    to support reduction and removal of special nuclear materials
    from LLNL.
                Operations of Facilities--Pantex Plant
        The budget request contained $104.4 million for operations
    at the Pantex Plant within Readiness and Technical Base and
    Facilities--Operations of Facilities.
        The committee is concerned that the request is $8.5 million
    below the fiscal year 2008 level at a time when the volume of
    work at Pantex is not expected to diminish. The committee also
    understands the request is insufficient to support planned
    fiscal year 2009 operations at the Pantex Plant.
        The committee recommends $114.4 million for Pantex Plant
    Operations of Facilities, an increase of $10.0 million above
    the request.
                Operations of Facilities--Y-12
        The budget request contained $216.9 million for operations
    at the Y-12 National Security Complex within Readiness and
    Technical Base and Facilities--Operations of Facilities.
        The committee notes that while maintenance needs at the Y-
    12 complex are growing, the request is more than $7.0 million
    below the fiscal year 2008 funded level. The committee also
    understands that with additional resources, Y-12 could
    accelerate the transfer of material from existing facilities
    into the new Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility
    (HEUMF), thereby reducing the security costs of securing those
    materials prior to their transfer to the HEUMF.
        The committee recommends $223.9 million, an increase of
    $7.0 million above the request. Of the increase, the committee
    recommends $5.0 million to support maintenance of facilities at
    the Y-12 National Security Complex, and $2.0 million to support
    the relocation of containers and material during the transition
    into the HEUMF at the Y-12 National Security Complex.

    National Nuclear Security Administration nuclear weapons transport

        The committee believes the increased use of air
    transportation of nuclear weapons by the National Nuclear
    Security Administration (NNSA) merits consideration. The Office
    of Secure Transportation (OST) within the NNSA currently
    transports nuclear weapons between certain NNSA and Department
    of Defense facilities for activities such as maintenance,
    surveillance, disassembly, and the exchange of limited life
    components.
        The committee, therefore, directs the Administrator of the
    NNSA and the Secretary of the Air Force, in coordination with
    the Nuclear Weapons Council, to conduct a feasibility study of
    transporting nuclear weapons, components, and materials by
    aircraft. This study should evaluate options for increasing the
    use of air transportation between sites and facilities, while
    taking into account all safety and security concerns. It should
    assess the need for air assets as a part of OST and the role,
    schedule, and priority of these missions supportable by air
    transportation assets from the NNSA and the Air Force
    consistent with other requirements. The study should compare
    the safety and security costs, risks, and benefits associated
    with both air and ground transportation of nuclear weapons,
    components, and materials to and from all NNSA, Air Force, and
    Navy facilities.
        The committee recognizes that much of the information
    necessary for inclusion in such a report will be classified.
    Therefore, the committee directs that a classified report with
    an unclassified executive summary be submitted to the
    congressional defense committees by December 31, 2008.

    National Nuclear Technical Forensics

        The budget request contained $221.9 million for Nuclear
    Weapons Incident Response, including $12.9 million for National
    Technical Nuclear Forensics (NTNF).
        The committee notes that the American Association for the
    Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the American Physical Society
    (APS) recently released a report, ``Nuclear Forensics: Role,
    State of the Art, and Program Needs.'' The committee notes that
    the AAAS-APS report recommended accelerated training for
    personnel trained in disciplines relating to nuclear forensics,
    including graduate scholarship and fellowship programs to
    produce three to four new Ph.D.s per year in relevant
    disciplines. The AAAS-APS report also recommended upgrading
    equipment currently available to the Department of Energy
    national laboratories which support the NTNF.
        The committee recommends $226.9 million for Nuclear Weapons
    Incident Response, including $17.9 million in NTNF, an increase
    of $5.0 million, to support fellowships for disciplines
    critical to support the mission of the National Technical
    Nuclear Forensics effort and to upgrade and modernize
    laboratory equipment.

    Defense Nuclear Security--Operations and Maintenance--Physical Security
            systems--Y-12

        The budget request contained $690.2 million for Operations
    and Maintenance, including $77.2 million for Physical Security
    Systems, within Defense Nuclear Security.
        The committee recommends $693.2 million, including $80.2
    million for Physical Security Systems, an increase of $3.0
    million, to implement physical security upgrades and enable
    compliance with the Design Basis Threat at the Y-12 National
    Security Complex.

                        Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation

        The budget request contained $1.2 billion for Department of
    Energy National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Defense
    Nuclear Nonproliferation programs.
        The committee fully supports the goals of NNSA's
    nonproliferation programs and continues to believe that such
    programs are critical to U.S. national security and must be a
    top national security priority. In the committee report (H.
    Rept. 110-146) accompanying the National Defense Authorization
    Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the committee expressed concern that
    a lack of effective policy guidance and leadership, as well as
    programmatic and funding constraints, have limited the progress
    of NNSA and other nonproliferation programs in recent years.
    The committee further noted that although NNSA nonproliferation
    programs have made significant progress over the last 15 years,
    much remains to be done, and emphasized that there must be a
    strong national commitment to reinvigorate these programs.
        The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
    (Public Law 110-181) addressed these concerns by increasing
    funding for NNSA nonproliferation programs by $235.0 million
    above the budget request for fiscal year 2008. Public Law 110-
    181 also: required a report by the President on nuclear
    terrorism prevention; required reports by the Secretary of
    Energy on strengthening and expanding the NNSA International
    Radiological Threat Reduction and NNSA International Nuclear
    Materials Protection and Cooperation programs; and included
    other provisions to ensure that wherever possible, NNSA
    nonproliferation programs address threats involving nuclear and
    radiological weapons and weapons-related materials,
    technologies, and expertise.
        The committee also notes that the Implementing
    Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law
    110-53), passed in the 110th Congress by both the House and
    Senate as H.R. 1 and commonly known as ``the 9/11 bill,''
    included a number of provisions and authorized funding to
    accelerate, strengthen, and expand NNSA nonproliferation
    programs. Provisions include the establishment of both a
    presidential coordinator and a congressional-executive
    commission on the prevention of weapons of mass destruction
    proliferation and terrorism.
        The committee believes that there are additional
    opportunities for NNSA nonproliferation programs to address the
    wide variety of global threats arising from the proliferation
    of nuclear and radiological weapons and weapons-related
    materials, technologies, and expertise. The committee believes
    NNSA nonproliferation programs would continue to benefit from
    increased funding to address such threats.
        The committee recognizes and appreciates recent actions by
    NNSA to eliminate impediments to timely obligating and
    executing authorized and appropriated funds for NNSA
    nonproliferation programs. Such actions have enabled NNSA to
    achieve a level of uncommitted uncosted balances for most NNSA
    nonproliferation programs that is below the acceptable levels
    established by NNSA in close coordination with the Government
    Accountability Office. The committee urges NNSA to continue its
    efforts to eliminate any remaining impediments to timely
    obligating and executing funds for NNSA nonproliferation
    programs. The committee further expects that any additional
    funds that it recommends for NNSA nonproliferation programs
    under this Act will be obligated and executed in a timely
    manner. The committee further urges NNSA nonproliferation
    programs to maintain a particular focus on securing nuclear and
    radiological weapons and weapons-related materials and
    technologies at the source wherever possible.
        The committee recommends $1.5 billion, an increase of
    $208.1 million. This includes an increase of $215.0 million for
    NNSA nonproliferation programs and a decrease of $6.9 million
    for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. In addition,
    elsewhere in this title, the committee recommends an increase
    of $5.0 million for the Office of the Administrator for Defense
    Nuclear Nonproliferation program direction.

    Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development

        The budget request contained $275.1 million for
    Nonproliferation Research and Development (R&D). The committee
    fully supports the goals of the R&D program, and notes that the
    program is the sole remaining U.S. Government capability for
    long-term nuclear nonproliferation research and development.
    The committee emphasizes the importance of expanding U.S.
    scientific skills and resources and improving U.S. Government
    capabilities relating to both short- and long-term innovative
    nonproliferation research and development that will maintain
    U.S. technological advantage in this area.
        The committee recommends $275.1 million, the amount of the
    budget request.
                Radiation detection technology
        The committee encourages the National Nuclear Security
    Administration to continue to work closely with the Department
    of Homeland Security's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office on the
    research and development of radiation detection technology to
    ensure there is no duplication of research efforts, but rather
    a collaborative complementary approach to research in areas of
    common interest.
                Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Capabilities
                        Replacement Laboratory
        The committee continues to support the role of the National
    Nuclear Security Administration in the construction of the
    Capabilities Replacement Laboratory at the Pacific Northwest
    National Laboratory, which would house critical capabilities
    for national security missions.

    Nonproliferation and International Security

        The budget request contained $140.5 million for
    Nonproliferation and International Security (NIS). The
    committee fully supports the goals of the NIS program, although
    notes its concern below about the Global Nuclear Energy
    Partnership (GNEP).
        The committee recommends $128.6 million for NIS reflecting
    a decrease of $6.9 million from GNEP, and a transfer of $5.0
    million from Global Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention to
    high-priority activities within International Nuclear Materials
    Protection and Cooperation.
                Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
        The budget request contained $6.9 million for Global
    Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) activities from within
    Nonproliferation and International Security (NIS).
        The committee notes that since fiscal year 2006, the
    Department of Energy has funded a portion of the Global Nuclear
    Energy Partnership from within various National Nuclear
    Security Administration (NNSA) Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
    program lines. NNSA has characterized GNEP, which promotes the
    use of nuclear energy throughout the world, as an important
    nonproliferation initiative.
        The committee finds NNSA's proposed nonproliferation
    arguments for GNEP unpersuasive and is not convinced that GNEP
    will achieve its stated nonproliferation objectives. Rather,
    the committee is concerned about proliferation risks associated
    with GNEP. For these reasons, the committee does not support
    any funding for GNEP activities from within any NNSA Defense
    Nuclear Nonproliferation program line.
        The committee recommends none of the funding in the budget
    request for GNEP from within NIS, a decrease of $6.9 million.
                Global Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention
        The budget request contained $23.8 million for Global
    Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (GIPP) from within
    Nonproliferation and International Security.
        The committee has been conducting vigorous oversight on the
    GIPP program and the program's funding of Russian institutes,
    which are involved with separate work on nuclear projects in
    the Islamic Republic of Iran. The committee appreciates the
    information provided by the National Nuclear Security
    Administration (NNSA) on the GIPP program to date and
    recognizes the important nonproliferation objectives of the
    program.
        The committee encourages NNSA to continue strengthening the
    management and implementation of the GIPP program as necessary
    to ensure that the program achieves its intended
    nonproliferation objectives and in no way undermines U.S.
    national security interests. The committee expects that NNSA
    will continue to keep it fully informed of significant
    developments involving the program.
        The committee also directs the Secretary of Energy to
    submit to the congressional defense committees, within 120 days
    after the date of enactment of this Act, a report on the
    funding for GIPP projects. The report should include: (1) the
    amount of authorized and appropriated funds to be obligated or
    expended for each GIPP project for fiscal year 2009; and (2)
    the purposes for which these amounts will be obligated or
    expended.
        The committee recommends $18.8 million, reflecting a
    transfer of $5.0 million to high-priority activities within
    International Nuclear Materials Protection and Cooperation.

    International Nuclear Materials Protection and Cooperation

        The budget request contained $429.7 million for
    International Nuclear Materials Protection and Cooperation
    (MPC&A). The committee fully supports the goals of the MPC&A
    program.
        The committee recommends $479.7 million, an increase of
    $50.0 million, as follows: $28.0 million for security upgrades
    to Russian nuclear sites, pursuant to the U.S.-Russia
    Bratislava Nuclear Security Initiative; and $22.0 million to
    secure nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material located
    outside the United States, and to install radiation detection
    equipment at border crossings and a key port of transit to
    deter, detect, and interdict illicit transfers of materials
    that could be used in weapons of mass destruction or a
    radiological dispersion device, known as a ``dirty bomb.''
                Second Line of Defense
        The committee continues to encourage the National Nuclear
    Security Administration to closely coordinate its Second Line
    of Defense efforts to deter, detect, and interdict illicit
    transfers of nuclear and radioactive materials at border
    crossings and ports with the efforts of any other relevant U.S.
    agency or department, including the Department of Homeland
    Security and the Department of Defense.

    Elimination of Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production

        The budget request contained $141.3 million for Elimination
    of Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production (EWGPP). The committee
    fully supports the goals of the EWGPP program.
        The committee recommends $141.3 million for EWGPP, the
    amount of the budget request.

    Fissile Materials Disposition

                United States Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition
        The budget request contained $40.8 million for the United
    States Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition program.
        The committee fully supports the goals of the United States
    Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition program. The committee
    notes that historically, funding for the United States Surplus
    Fissile Materials Disposition program included funding for the
    disposition of U.S. surplus weapons-grade plutonium and
    construction of the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility
    for use in disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. The
    committee views these activities as important to U.S.
    nonproliferation objectives and national security goals.
        The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-
    161), transferred funding for the MOX project to the Department
    of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology
    (NE), and transferred funding for the Pit Disassembly and
    Conversion Facility and Waste Solidification Building projects
    to the National Security Administration (NNSA) Weapons
    Activities program.
        The committee does not believe the transfer of funding for
    disposition of U.S. surplus weapons-grade plutonium, including
    the transfer of funding for the MOX project to NE, was
    necessary. The committee understands, however, that the
    Department of Energy has constructed an arrangement between the
    National Security Administration (NNSA) Office of Defense
    Nuclear Nonproliferation (NN) and NE through which NE is able
    to fund the MOX project and NN is able to manage and execute
    the MOX project. The committee notes that the Department of
    Energy General Counsel has judged this arrangement to be
    consistent with the requirements of the National Nuclear
    Security Administration Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-65). The
    committee views this arrangement as an appropriate means of
    balancing the requirements of Public Law 110-161 and Public Law
    106-65.
        The committee supports execution of program activities and
    functions relating to disposition of U.S. surplus weapons-grade
    plutonium and the MOX project, including management and
    direction of the MOX project, from within NN, given the
    important nonproliferation objectives and benefits associated
    with these activities.
        For fiscal year 2009, the Department of Energy has
    requested funding for the MOX project from within Other Defense
    Activities--Nuclear Energy, and requested funding for the Pit
    Disassembly and Conversion Facility and Waste Solidification
    Building projects from within NNSA Weapons Activities--Weapons
    Dismantlement and Disposition. The committee therefore
    authorizes funding for the MOX project under section 3103 of
    this Act, and authorizes funding for the Pit Disassembly and
    Conversion Facility and Waste Solidification Building projects
    under section 3101 of this Act.
        The committee recommends $40.8 million for U.S. Fissile
    Materials Disposition, the amount of the budget request.
                Russian Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition
        The budget request contained $1.0 million for the Russian
    Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition program.
        The committee fully supports the goals of the Russian
    Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition program, which include
    disposition of the Russian Federation's surplus weapons-grade
    plutonium. The committee further emphasizes the importance of
    nonproliferation programs with Russia, including the Russian
    Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition program, to U.S
    nonproliferation objectives and national security goals.
        The committee urges the National Nuclear Security
    Administration (NNSA) to resolve any outstanding issues with
    Russia relating to the Russian Surplus Fissile Materials
    Disposition program and to move the program forward in a manner
    that is consistent with the program's nonproliferation
    objectives. The committee emphasizes its strong concern with
    the use of fast reactors under the program and expects NNSA to
    pursue a disposition path for Russia's surplus weapons-grade
    plutonium which ensures that any reactors used under the
    program do not produce plutonium and include necessary
    monitoring and inspection controls.
        The committee also notes that the Consolidated
    Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-161), rescinded prior
    fiscal years funds for the Russian Surplus Fissile Materials
    Disposition program. The committee expects NNSA to keep the
    committee fully informed of significant program developments
    and any funding needs to continue program activities during
    fiscal year 2009.
        The committee recommends $1.0 million, the amount of the
    budget request.

    Global Threat Reduction Initiative

        The budget request contained $219.6 million for the Global
    Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI). The committee fully
    supports the goals of the GTRI program.
        The committee recommends $389.6 million, an increase of
    $170.0 million, as follows: (1) $50.0 million to accelerate
    conversion of domestic and international research reactors from
    the use of weapons-usable highly-enriched uranium to low-
    enriched uranium; (2) $50.0 million to expand and accelerate
    efforts to secure U.S. research and test reactors and sites
    with high-priority radiological sources; (3) $8.0 million to
    accelerate the removal of excess and unwanted radiological
    sources within U.S. borders; (4) $10.0 million to accelerate
    the removal of vulnerable radiological sources located outside
    the United States; (5) $12.0 million to secure vulnerable sites
    with high-priority radiological sources located outside the
    United States; and (6) $40.0 million to remove and dispose of
    vulnerable weapons-usable highly-enriched uranium located
    outside the United States.

    Office of the United States Coordinator for the Prevention of Weapons
            of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism

        The committee notes that the Implementing Recommendations
    of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53), passed
    in the 110th Congress by both the House of Representatives and
    the Senate as H.R. 1 and commonly known as ``the 9/11 bill,''
    established the Office of the United States Coordinator for the
    Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and
    Terrorism, within the Executive Office of the President, and
    required a presidentially-appointed U.S. Coordinator to: (1)
    serve as the advisor to the President on all matters relating
    to the prevention of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
    proliferation and terrorism; (2) formulate a U.S. strategy for
    preventing WMD proliferation and terrorism; (3) lead
    interagency coordination of U.S. efforts to implement the
    strategy and policies; (4) conduct oversight and evaluation of
    accelerated and strengthened implementation of initiatives and
    programs to prevent WMD proliferation and terrorism by
    government agencies; (5) oversee the development of a
    comprehensive and coordinated budget for programs and
    initiatives to prevent WMD proliferation and terrorism; and (6)
    report annually on strategy and policies.
        The committee further notes that Public Law 110-53
    expressed the sense of Congress that the President should
    engage the President of the Russian Federation in a discussion
    on the goals of establishing the Office of the U.S.
    Coordinator, and the importance of strong cooperation between
    the U.S. Coordinator and a senior Russian official to
    coordinate planning and implementation of activities to prevent
    WMD proliferation and terrorism.
        The committee is seriously concerned that the President has
    not yet appointed the U.S. Coordinator or engaged the President
    of Russia in the discussion called for in Public Law 110-53.
    The committee expects the President to appoint the U.S.
    Coordinator at the earliest possible time, and urges the
    President to engage with the President of Russia in the
    discussion called for in Public Law 110-53.

                          Office of the Administrator

        The budget request contained $404.1 million for the
    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Office of the
    Administrator. The committee is concerned by continued reports
    of limited staff capacity and resources for implementation of
    critical NNSA nonproliferation programs.
        The committee recommends $409.1 million, an increase of
    $5.0 million. The committee intends this increase for NNSA
    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation program direction to expand
    and strengthen staff capacity, capabilities, and resources
    relating to NNSA nonproliferation programs.

                   Environmental and Other Defense Activities

                                    Overview

        The budget request contained $6.9 billion for environmental
    and other defense activities. The committee recommends $6.9
    billion, an increase of $28.0 million.

                         Defense Environmental Cleanup

    Defense Environmental Cleanup program funding

        The budget request contained $5.3 billion for Defense
    Environmental Cleanup, a decrease of $52.1 million from the
    amount appropriated for fiscal year 2008.
        The committee is encouraged by recent efforts made by the
    Environmental Management (EM) program to improve corporate
    management practices, including independent validation of
    lifecycle costs and schedules for the EM program's remaining
    scope of work. However, as a result of this re-baselining, EM
    now estimates the total life cycle costs of remaining cleanup
    to be between $265.1 and $305.0 billion, a 35 to 55 percent
    increase over previous life cycle cost estimates. Furthermore,
    while total life cycle cleanup cost estimates are increasing,
    overall funding for the EM program has been decreasing.
        The committee is concerned that the EM program is in need
    of additional resources at a number of different sites and
    urges the Department of Energy to put additional resources into
    this activity in future years' budget requests. The committee
    recommends an additional $10.0 million within Defense
    Environmental Cleanup for high risk cleanup activities at the
    Hanford Site.

    Federal facility agreement and consent order milestones

        The committee understands that the Department of Energy
    (the Department) enters into legally enforceable agreements on
    environmental cleanup milestones with local and state
    authorities. The committee is concerned that the Department may
    fail to meet up to 31 of these federal facility agreements or
    consent order milestones in fiscal year 2009. These regulatory
    milestones apply to activities at Los Alamos National
    Laboratory in New Mexico, the Oak Ridge Reservation in
    Tennessee, the Hanford Site in Washington, and the Savannah
    River Site in South Carolina.
        The committee is aware that two-thirds of the 31 afore-
    mentioned milestones are at risk due to funding constraints.
    The committee considers recent funding reductions for Defense
    Environmental Cleanup to be out of step with the Department's
    remaining cleanup scope of work. The committee supports the
    Department's intent to execute its work scope by placing the
    highest priority on projects that address the greatest risks to
    human health and the environment. But the committee also
    expects the Department to continue to strive to meet all
    milestones.

    Consolidation and disposition of surplus special nuclear materials

        The committee understands that the Department of Energy
    (the Department) expects to complete plans in fiscal year 2008
    for the consolidation and disposition of approximately 166
    metric tons (MT) of surplus, non-programmatic, special nuclear
    materials. This quantity includes approximately 58 MT of
    plutonium and approximately 108 MT of highly enriched uranium.
    These materials are stored at multiple locations including the
    Savannah River Site (SRS), Hanford Site, Los Alamos National
    Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the Pantex
    Plant, and the Y-12 National Security Complex.
        The committee supports consolidation and disposition of
    these surplus materials to the maximum extent practicable in
    order to reduce the possibility that they could fall into the
    wrong hands, and to reflect the United States' commitment to
    the reduction of proliferation risks. The committee notes that
    consolidation and disposition should also reduce security costs
    associated with safeguarding these materials.
        Pursuant to the requirements of section 3155 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public
    Law 107-107), in September 2007, the Department set forth a
    baseline disposition plan for 13 MT of surplus ``non-pit''
    plutonium. The Secretary of Energy presented this plan as part
    of a three-pronged approach for disposition of surplus
    plutonium:
              (1) A Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility,
            Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility, and Waste
            Solidification Building planned for SRS to dispose of
            at least 34 MT of weapon-grade plutonium (the MOX
            program);
              (2) A plutonium vitrification capability to dispose
            of up to 13 MT of non-weapon-grade plutonium, also
            planned for SRS; and
              (3) Use of the existing H-Canyon/HB-Line at SRS to
            process approximately two MT of plutonium bearing
            materials.
        Notwithstanding this planned approach, the committee notes
    the Department is exploring the feasibility of processing all
    surplus weapons-usable plutonium through the MOX facility and
    H-Canyon, without constructing a plutonium vitrification
    facility. The committee is aware that the technical feasibility
    depends in part on determining whether un-irradiated fuel
    assemblies originally intended for the Fast Flux Test Facility
    at the Hanford Site can be processed through H-Canyon/HB-Line.
        The committee expects the Secretary of Energy to notify the
    Senate Committee on Armed Services, the House Committee on
    Armed Services, the Senate Committee on Appropriations, and the
    House Committee on Appropriations of the Department's updated
    disposition strategy for surplus non-weapon-grade plutonium
    prior to shipping the un-irradiated fuel assemblies currently
    stored at Hanford and destined for the proposed plutonium
    vitrification facility to the Savannah River Site.

    Coordination of disposition efforts

        The committee understands that several offices within the
    Department of Energy participate in the consolidation and
    disposition of special nuclear materials (SNM), including the
    National Nuclear Security Administration, the Offices of
    Environmental Management, Nuclear Energy, and Science, and the
    General Counsel. Because of this dispersed authority, the
    committee regards the Nuclear Material Disposition
    Consolidation Coordinating Committee (NMDCCC) as a valuable
    tool for the Department of Energy. The committee encourages the
    Secretary of Energy to ensure that the NMDCCC, or a similar
    coordinating office, remains in place.

    Mound Site cleanup

        The budget request contained $45.9 million for closure
    sites, including $30.6 million for the Miamisburg, Ohio Closure
    Project cleanup.
        The committee recommends $55.9 million for closure sites,
    an increase of $10.0 million, for additional cleanup of the
    Mound Site in Miamisburg, Ohio.

    Low-activity waste treatment and disposition at Hanford

        The budget request contained $288.4 million for radioactive
    liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition for the Office
    of River Protection, including $1.0 million for a Demonstration
    Bulk Vitrification System (DBVS).
        Approximately 53 million gallons of radioactive waste are
    stored underground at the Department of Energy Hanford site,
    including both high-level waste (HLW) and low-activity waste
    (LAW). The Waste Treatment Plant (WTP), currently under
    construction, is designed to process 100 percent of the HLW but
    only approximately 50 percent of the LAW at the Hanford site.
    Therefore, the Department of Energy has been evaluating a
    supplemental bulk vitrification technology, the DBVS, to treat
    the remaining fraction of low-activity waste. According to the
    budget request, DBVS was expected to reach Critical Decision-2
    (CD-2), approval of the performance baseline, in January 2008.
    However, at the time of this report, the CD-2 determination has
    not been made.
        The Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management
    testified to the committee on March 12, 2008, that the
    Department of Energy has retained independent experts to assess
    the range of options for supplemental LAW treatment, including
    bulk vitrification and others. Further, the Assistant Secretary
    testified that this analysis is expected to be completed in
    June 2008.
        The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to provide a
    plan for treating and disposing of all low-activity waste at
    Hanford to the Senate Committee on Armed Services, the House
    Committee on Armed Services, the Senate Committee on
    Appropriations, and the House Committee on Appropriations by
    January 1, 2009.
        The committee recommends $288.4 million for radioactive
    liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition, the amount of
    the budget request.

                            Other Defense Activities

    Nuclear energy--Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility

        The budget request contained $487.0 million for the Mixed
    Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility, including $19.2 million
    in operations and maintenance and $467.8 million in
    construction and other project costs, within Other Defense
    Activities--Nuclear Energy.
        Pursuant to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008
    (Public Law 110-161), funding for the MOX project was
    transferred to the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and
    Technology (NE). As discussed elsewhere in this report, the
    committee views the MOX project as a nonproliferation and
    national security activity, and does not believe the transfer
    of funding for the MOX project to NE was necessary. The
    committee understands, however, that the Department of Energy
    has constructed an arrangement between the National Nuclear
    Security Administration Office of Defense Nuclear
    Nonproliferation (NN) and NE through which the MOX project can
    be funded through NE but managed and executed by NN.
        The committee recommends $487.0 million for the Mixed Oxide
    Fuel Fabrication Facility, the amount of the request.

                         Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal

        The budget request contained $247.4 million for defense
    nuclear waste disposal, all to be directed towards the Yucca
    Mountain project. The committee continues to support the need
    for a permanent deep geologic repository for high-level
    radioactive waste.
        The committee recommends $247.4 million for defense nuclear
    waste disposal, the amount of the budget request.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

              Subtitle A--National Security Program Authorizations

             Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration

        This section would authorize funds for the National Nuclear
    Security Administration for fiscal year 2009, including funds
    for weapons activities, defense nuclear nonproliferation
    programs, naval reactor programs, and the Office of the
    Administrator.

                  Section 3102--Defense Environmental Cleanup

        This section would authorize funds for defense
    environmental cleanup activities for fiscal year 2009.

                     Section 3103--Other Defense Activities

        This section would authorize funds for other defense
    activities for fiscal year 2009, including funds for the Mixed
    Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah River Site,
    South Carolina.

                  Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal

        This section would authorize funds for defense nuclear
    waste disposal for fiscal year 2009.

                  Section 3105--Energy Security and Assurance

        This section would authorize funds for energy security and
    assurance programs for fiscal year 2009.

       Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

      Section 3111--Utilization of International Contributions to Russian
                         Plutonium Disposition Program

        This section would provide the Secretary of Energy with
    authority to accept international contributions for the
    effective and transparent disposition of the Russian
    Federation's surplus weapons-grade plutonium under the Russian
    Plutonium Disposition program. This section would require the
    Secretary of Energy, within 30 days after the receipt of an
    international contribution under this section, to provide the
    congressional defense committees, the Senate Committee on
    Foreign Relations, and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
    with notice of such contribution. This section would also
    require the Secretary of Energy, by October 31 of each year,
    beginning in the fiscal year in which the first contributions
    under this section are retained, to submit to the congressional
    defense committees, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,
    and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs a report on the
    receipt and use of any international contributions under this
    section during the preceding fiscal year. The authority under
    this section would expire on December 31, 2013.

     Section 3112--Extension of Deadline for Comptroller General Report on
                Department of Energy Protective Force Management

        This section would extend the deadline established in the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public
    Law 110-181) for the Comptroller General to conduct an
    assessment of the Department of Energy's management of
    protective forces at departmental sites with category one
    special nuclear material. This section would establish a new
    deadline of March 1, 2009.

              TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

                                    OVERVIEW

        The budget request contained $25.5 million for the Defense
    Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2009. The
    committee recommends $25.5 million, the amount of the request.

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                          Section 3201--Authorization

        This section would authorize funds for the Defense Nuclear
    Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2009.

                     TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

                 Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations

        This section would authorize $19.1 million for fiscal year
    2009 for operation and maintenance of the Naval Petroleum and
    Oil Reserves.

                      TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

                             LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

       Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2009

        This section would authorize a total of $387.8 million for
    the Maritime Administration of the Department of Transportation
    for fiscal year 2009. Of the funds authorized, $171.8 million
    would be available for operations and training activities,
    $193.5 million would be available for the Maritime Security
    Program of which $19.5 million would be available for
    maintenance reimbursement for the Maritime Security Fleet,
    $18.0 million for the program to dispose of obsolete vessels,
    $25.0 million for assistance to small shipyards, and $30.0
    million for the loan guarantee program authorized by chapter
    537 of title 46, United States Code, commonly referred to as
    the Title XI Loan Program.

     Section 3502--Limitation on Export of Vessels Owned by the Government
      of the United States for the Purpose of Dismantling, Recycling, or
                                   Scrapping

        This section would require that any vessel owned or
    controlled by the United States Maritime Administration, United
    States Navy, or any other government agency shall not be
    approved for export to a foreign country for purposes of
    dismantling, recycling, or scrapping. The Administrator of the
    Maritime Administration may waive this requirement only with
    certification that there is no available capacity for disposal
    in the United States, a compelling need exists for the vessel
    to be dismantled or scrapped, and that the foreign shipyard
    conducting the dismantling or scrapping would adhere to the
    safety, labor, and health requirements equivalent to the laws
    of the United States.

               Section 3503--Student Incentive Payment Agreements

        This section would authorize the Secretary to increase
    student incentive payments at the State Maritime Academies from
    $4,000 per year to $8,000 per year.

                 Section 3504--Riding Gang Member Requirements

        This section would amend section 1018 of the John Warner
    National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2007 (Public
    Law 109-364) to require that all persons onboard vessels
    involved in the carriage of cargo for the Department of
    Defense, with the exception of supercargo personnel, possess a
    merchant mariners' document or a transportation worker security
    card issued pursuant to the requirements of chapter 73 of title
    46, United States Code. In addition, this section would
    stipulate that supercargo personnel onboard the vessels at the
    direction of the Secretary may satisfy the requirement for a
    merchant mariners' document or a transportation worker security
    card by passing a background security check conducted by the
    Secretary and that these supercargo personnel are not
    considered riding gang members pursuant to section 8106 of
    title 46, United States Code.

      Section 3505--Maintenance and Repair Reimbursement Program for the
                            Maritime Security Fleet

        This section would amend section 3517 of the Maritime
    Security Act of 2003 (46 U.S.C. 53101 note) requiring that the
    Secretary of Transportation implement the Maintenance and
    Repair Reimbursement Pilot Program with one or more contractors
    currently participating in the Maritime Security Program under
    chapter 531 of title 46, United States Code.

      Section 3506--Temporary Program Authorizing Contracts with Adjunct
            Professors at the United States Merchant Marine Academy

        This section would authorize the Administer of the Maritime
    Administration to continue current contracts with Adjunct
    Professors and enter into contracts as necessary for Adjunct
    Professors until December 30, 2009. All such contracts entered
    into under this authority would terminate six months after that
    date. This temporary authority is required to allow time for
    the Merchant Marine Academy to develop and implement a
    personnel and budget plan to eliminate the use of Adjunct
    Professors hired under personal services contracts by the
    Academy.

                               DEPARTMENTAL DATA

        The Department of Defense requested legislation, in
    accordance with the program of the President, as illustrated by
    the correspondence set out below:

                  DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST

                                 Department of Defense,
                                     Office of General Counsel,
                                      Washington, DC, February 5, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
    the Congress enact the enclosed National Defense Authorization
    Bill for Fiscal Year 2009.
        The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
    section-by-section analysis.
        In the coming weeks, the Department will propose a few
    additional legislative initiatives for inclusion in the same
    bill.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
    program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
    your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
                Sincerely,
                                          William J. Haynes II,
                                                       General Counsel.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                 Department of Defense,
                                     Office of General Counsel,
                                        Washington, DC, March 14, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
    the Congress enact the enclosed legislative proposals as part
    of the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year
    2009.
        The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
    section-by-section analysis.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
    program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
    your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
                Sincerely,
                                           Daniel J. Dell'Orto,
                                                Acting General Counsel.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                   Department of State,
                                 Office of Legislative Affairs,
                                        Washington, DC, March 18, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Skelton: The enclosed letter, putting forward a
    legislative proposal for Presidential authority to waive
    Section 1083 of the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act and
    signed by the Secretaries of State, Defense, Commerce and
    Energy, was transmitted by the Department of State to the House
    and Senate leaders this morning
        We hope this information is useful to you and other Members
    of Congress and we look forward to working with you on this
    important initiative. Please do not hesitate to contact us if
    we can be of further assistance.
                Sincerely,
                                            Jeffrey T. Bergner,
                                                   Assistant Secretary.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                 Department of Defense,
                                     Office of General Counsel,
                                        Washington, DC, March 20, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
    the Congress enact the enclosed legislative proposals as part
    of the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year
    2009.
        The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
    section-by-section analysis.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
    program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
    your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
                Sincerely,
                                           Daniel J. Dell'Orto,
                                                Acting General Counsel.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                 Department of Defense,
                                     Office of General Counsel,
                                        Washington, DC, April 18, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
    the Congress enact the enclosed legislative proposals as part
    of the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year
    2009.
        The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
    section-by-section analysis.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
    program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
    your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
                Sincerely,
                                           Daniel J. Dell'Orto,
                                                Acting General Counsel.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                 Department of Defense,
                                     Office of General Counsel,
                                        Washington, DC, April 25, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
    the Congress enact the enclosed legislative proposals that
    would implement initiatives concerning military spousal
    benefits presented by the President in his State of the Union
    Address.
        The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
    section-by-section analysis.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
    program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
    your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
                Sincerely,
                                           Daniel J. Dell'Orto,
                                                Acting General Counsel.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                 Department of Defense,
                                     Office of General Counsel,
                                        Washington, DC, April 25, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that
    the Congress enact the enclosed legislative proposals as part
    of the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year
    2009.
        The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying
    section-by-section analysis.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
    program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for
    your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
                Sincerely,
                                           Daniel J. Dell'Orto,
                                                Acting General Counsel.
        Enclosure: As stated.
                                    ------

                                  Department of Transportation,
                                           Washington, DC, May 8, 2008.
    Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC.
        Dear Madam Speaker: There is transmitted herewith for the
    consideration of Congress and referral to the appropriate
    committees a proposed bill,
        ``To authorize certain maritime programs of the Department
    of Transportation, and for other purposes.''
        The proposal seeks to enhance the operations of the United
    States Maritime Administration through amendments and
    improvements to certain maritime programs.
        The proposal would provide the Secretary of Transportation
    (Secretary) authority to donate non-retention vessels to
    foreign Governments for use as training vessels and would
    clarify the disposal of non-retention government vessels.
        The proposal would allow the Maritime Administration to
    retain proceeds from sale and scrapping of non-retention
    vessels into the Vessel Operations Revolving Fund with a
    waterfall of how such funds can be expended. The proposal would
    also allow the Maritime Administration to deposit insurance
    proceeds and recoveries resulting from accident litigation and
    arbitration awards from third parties into the Vessel
    Operations Revolving Fund instead of such funds being deposited
    into the Treasury, allowing the Agency to be ``made whole'' for
    damage to its vessels.
        The proposal would amend Title XIII of the Merchant Marine
    Act, 1936, to exempt Academy graduates who serve on active duty
    for five years from certain performance service obligations
    under the commitment agreement requirements. The proposal would
    allow the United States Merchant Marine Academy (Academy) and
    State maritime academies to collect the cost of tuition and
    student incentive payments (SIP) from certain graduates
    defaulting on their service obligations. The proposal would
    also allow the Academy to contract with individuals as personal
    service contractors to serve as adjunct professors.
        The proposal would allow the Secretary to waive the
    requirements that an individual pass the Coast Guard licensing
    examination as a condition of graduation from a State maritime
    academy. The waiver would allow accommodation for individuals
    with disabilities. The proposal would also increase SIP from
    $4,000 to $8,000 per academic year and service obligation
    requirements for students receiving SIP from six (6) years to
    eight (8) years relating to time in reserves and Coast Guard
    licensing.
        The proposal would also authorize the Secretary to provide
    for the construction and reconstruction of suitable training
    vessels with modern equipment and instruments to replace
    vessels furnished to State maritime academies. The proposal
    would likewise provide the Secretary with the authority to
    administer an intermodal and marine facilities program
    comprising of port infrastructure development or expansion. The
    program would be subject to the availability of appropriations.
    It would also extend authority for the Marine War Risk program
    from December 31, 2010 until December 31, 2015.
        Lastly, the proposal would provide tax relief for only U.S.
    citizen merchant mariners serving on Liquefied Natural Gas
    vessels operated under the registry of a foreign country.
        The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
    no objection to the presentation of this proposed legislation
    to Congress, and that its enactment would be in accord with the
    program of the President.
                Sincerely yours,
                                                Mary E. Peters,
                                           Secretary of Transportation.
        2 Enclosures.
              Identical letter to the President of the Senate.
              Draft bill and section-by-section analysis.

                               COMMITTEE POSITION

        On May 14, 2008 the Committee on Armed Services, a quorum
    being present, approved H.R. 5658, as amended, by a vote of 61-
    0.

                      COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES

                              House of Representatives,
                                Committee on Natural Resources,
                                          Washington, DC, May 14, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to review
    the text of H.R. 5658, the National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2009, for provisions which are within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural Resources. Among these
    provisions are those dealing with compensation and benefits for
    the NOAA Corps, off-installation mitigation authority in
    natural resources management, Guam realignment issues, and
    extension of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail through
    Fort Belvoir, Virginia, among others.
        Because of the continued cooperation and consideration that
    you have afforded me and my staff in developing these
    provisions, I will not seek a sequential referral of H.R. 5658
    based on their inclusion in the bill. Of course, this waiver is
    not intended to prejudice any future jurisdictional claims over
    these provisions or similar language. I also reserve the right
    to seek to have conferees named from the Committee on Natural
    Resources on these provisions, and request your support if such
    a request is made.
        Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
    5658 and the Congressional Record during consideration of the
    measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
    spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
    others between our respective committees.
        With warm regards, I am
                Sincerely,
                                            Nick J. Rahall, II,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Nick J. Rahall, II,
    Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Natural Resources has valid
    jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
    legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
    schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of expediting
    consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive consideration
    of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee on Natural
    Resources is not waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                 Committee on Veterans Affairs,
                                          Washington, DC, May 15, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. There are certain provisions in the legislation which
    fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Veterans'
    Affairs.
        In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed
    expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill,
    the Committee on Veterans' Affairs agrees not to request a
    sequential referral. By waiving consideration of H.R. 5658, the
    Committee on Veterans' Affairs does not waive any future
    jurisdictional claim over any subject matter contained in the
    bill which falls within its jurisdiction. The Committee on
    Veterans' Affairs reserves its right to seek conferees on any
    provisions within its jurisdiction which are considered in a
    House-Senate conference, and requests your support if such a
    request is made.
        Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
    5658 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of
    the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
    spirit in which you have worked with the Committee on Veterans'
    Affairs regarding this matter and others between our respective
    committees.
                Sincerely,
                                                    Bob Filner,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Bob Filner,
    Chairman, Committee on Veterans Affairs,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Veterans Affairs has valid
    jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
    legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
    schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of expediting
    consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive consideration
    of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee on Veterans
    Affairs is not waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                              Committee on Education and Labor,
                                          Washington, DC, May 15, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to confirm our mutual
    understanding regarding consideration of H.R. 5658, the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, which
    was referred to the Committee on Armed Services. As you know,
    this legislation contains subject matter within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Education and Labor.
        Given the importance of moving this bill forward promptly,
    I do not intend to request the sequential referral of H.R. 5658
    to the Committee on Education and Labor. I do so, however, only
    with the understanding that this procedural route should not be
    construed to prejudice this Committee's jurisdictional
    interests and prerogatives on this bill or any other similar
    legislation. In addition, should this bill or similar
    legislation be considered in a conference with the Senate, I
    would expect members of the Committee on Education and Labor to
    be appointed to the conference committee.
        Finally, I ask that you include a copy of our exchange of
    letters in your committee's report on H.R. 5658 and in the
    Congressional Record during consideration of this bill on the
    House Floor. If you have any questions regarding this matter,
    please do not hesitate to call me. I thank you for your
    consideration.
                Sincerely,
                                                 George Miller,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. George Miller,
    Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Education and Labor has
    valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
    important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
    decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest
    of expediting consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive
    consideration of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee
    on Education and Labor is not waiving its jurisdiction over
    these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                          Washington, DC, May 15, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I write to you regarding H.R. 5658, the
    ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009''.
    This legislation authorizes military activities of the
    Department of Defense and other programs.
        H.R. 5658 contains provisions that fall within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring
    this legislation before the House in an expeditious manner and,
    accordingly, I will not seek a sequential referral of the bill.
    However, I agree to waive consideration of this bill with the
    mutual understanding that my decision to forego a sequential
    referral of the bill does not waive, reduce, or otherwise
    affect the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure over H.R. 5658.
        Further, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
    reserves the right to seek the appointment of conferees during
    any House-Senate conference convened on this legislation on
    provisions of the bill that are within the Committee's
    jurisdiction. I ask for your commitment to support any request
    by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for the
    appointment of conferees on H.R. 5658 or similar legislation.
        Please place a copy of this letter and your response
    acknowledging the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure's jurisdictional interest in the Committee
    Report on H.R. 5658 and in the Congressional Record during
    consideration of the measure on the House Floor.
        I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass
    this important national defense legislation.
                Sincerely,
                                        James L. Oberstar, M.C.
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. James L. Oberstar, M.C.,
    Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
    provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
    appreciative of your decision not to schedule a mark-up of this
    bill in the interest of expediting consideration. I agree that
    by agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
    bill, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is not
    waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                Committee on Homeland Security,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
    jurisdictional interest of Committee on Homeland Security in
    matters being considered in H.R. 5658, the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.
        Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5658 and
    the need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore,
    while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I do
    not intend to request a sequential referral. This, of course,
    is conditional on our mutual understanding that nothing in this
    legislation or my decision to forego a sequential referral
    waives, reduces or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the
    Committee on Homeland Security, and that a copy of this letter
    and your response acknowledging our jurisdictional interest
    will be included in the Committee Report and as part of the
    Congressional Record during consideration of this bill by the
    House.
        The Committee on Homeland Security also asks that you
    support our request to be conferees on the provisions over
    which we have jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference.
        Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
                Sincerely,
                                            Bennie G. Thompson,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Bennie G. Thompson,
    Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Homeland Security has valid
    jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
    legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
    schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of expediting
    consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive consideration
    of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee on Homeland
    Security is not waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                    Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
    jurisdictional interest of Permanent Select Committee on
    Intelligence in matters being considered in H.R. 5658, the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.
        Our committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5658 and
    the need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore,
    while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I do
    not intend to request a sequential referral. This, of course,
    is conditional on our mutual understanding that nothing in this
    legislation or my decision to forego a sequential referral
    waives, reduces or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the
    Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and that a copy of
    this letter and your response acknowledging our jurisdictional
    interest will be included in the Committee Report and as part
    of the Congressional Record during consideration of this bill
    by the House.
        The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence also asks
    that you support our request to be conferees on the provisions
    over which we have jurisdiction during any House-Senate
    conference.
        Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
                Sincerely,
                                               Silvestre Reyes,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Silvestre Reyes,
    Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Permanent Select Committee on
    Intelligence has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
    provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
    appreciative of your decision not to schedule a mark-up of this
    bill in the interest of expediting consideration. I agree that
    by agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
    bill, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is not
    waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                  Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
                                          Washington, DC, May 13, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing about H.R. 5658, the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, which
    the Committee on Armed Services plans to markup on May 14,
    2008.
        I appreciate your effort to consult with the Committee on
    Oversight and Government Reform regarding those provisions of
    H.R. 5658 that fall within the Oversight Committee's
    jurisdiction. These provisions involve the federal civil
    service and federal acquisition policies.
        In the interest of expediting consideration of H.R. 5658,
    the Oversight Committee will not request a sequential referral
    of this bill. I would, however, request your support for the
    appointment of conferees from the Oversight Committee should
    H.R. 5658 or a similar Senate bill be considered in conference
    with the Senate. Moreover, this letter should not be construed
    as a waiver of the Oversight Committee's legislative
    jurisdiction over subjects addressed in H.R. 5658 that fall
    within the jurisdiction of the Oversight Committee.
        Finally, I request that you include our exchange of letters
    on this matter in the Committee on Armed Services Committee
    Report on H.R. 5658 and in the Congressional Record during
    consideration of this legislation on the House floor.
        Again, I appreciate your willingness to consult the
    Committee on these matters.
                Sincerely,
                                               Henry A. Waxman,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Henry A. Waxman,
    Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Oversight and Government
    Reform has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in
    this important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
    decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest
    of expediting consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive
    consideration of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee
    on Oversight and Government Reform is not waiving its
    jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                  Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing you concerning the bill,
    H.R. 5658, the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2009. There are certain provisions in the
    legislation as reported by the Committee on Armed Services
    which fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Foreign Affairs.
        In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed
    expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill, I
    am prepared to waive the right of the Committee on Foreign
    Affairs to sequential referral. I do so with the understanding
    that by waiving consideration of the bill, the Committee on
    Foreign Affairs does not waive any future jurisdictional claim
    over the subject matters contained in the bill which fall
    within the Committee's Rule X jurisdiction. I will seek to have
    Members of the Committee designated as members of any future
    conference regarding H.R. 5658, and I request that you urge the
    Speaker to appoint Members of this Committee to any conference
    committee which is named to consider any such provisions.
        I appreciate your cooperation on these matters, and I would
    ask that you place this letter into the Committee Report on
    H.R. 5658.
                Sincerely,
                                                 Howard Berman,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Howard Berman,
    Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Natural Resources has valid
    jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
    legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
    schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of expediting
    consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive consideration
    of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee on Natural
    Resources is not waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                              Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: I write with regard to H.R. 5658, the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009. The
    bill contains provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of
    the Committee on Energy and Commerce. I support passage of the
    bill, and I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring it up
    on the House floor in an expeditious manner.
        The Committee will not seek a sequential referral of the
    bill. This decision is based on my understanding that you have
    agreed that the inaction of the Committee with respect to the
    bill does not in any way serve as a jurisdictional precedent as
    to our two committees. Further, as to any House-Senate
    conference on the bill, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
    reserves the right to seek the appointment of conferees for
    consideration of portions of the bill (or similar legislation)
    that are within the Committee's jurisdiction.
        The provisions of the reported bill that are within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce include
    the following:
        Sec. 313. Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency
    for Certain Costs in Connection with Moses Lake Wellfield
    Superfund Site, Moses Lake, Washington.
        Sec. 601. Fiscal Year 2009 Increase in Military Basic Pay.
        Sec. 608. Guaranteed pay increase for members of the Armed
    Forces of one-half of one percentage point higher than
    Employment Cost Index.
        Sec. 619. Use of New Skill Incentive Pay and Proficiency
    Bonus Authorities to Encourage Training in Critical Foreign
    Languages and Foreign Cultural Studies.
        Sec. 1033. Extension of Commission to Assess the Threat of
    the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack.
        I request that you send a letter to me confirming our
    agreements as to jurisdiction, and that our exchange of letters
    be included in your Committee's report on the bill and inserted
    in the Congressional Record as part of the consideration of the
    bill.
        I look forward to working with you on this important
    legislation. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please
    do not hesitate to contact me.
        With every good wish,
                Sincerely,
                                               John D. Dingell,
                                                              Chairman.
                                    ------

                              House of Representatives,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                          Washington, DC, May 16, 2008.
    Hon. John D. Dingell,
    Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
    5658, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2009. I agree that the Committee on Natural Resources has valid
    jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
    legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
    schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of expediting
    consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive consideration
    of certain provisions of the bill, the Committee on Natural
    Resources is not waiving its jurisdiction over these matters.
        This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
    report on the bill.
                Very truly yours,
                                                   Ike Skelton,
                                                              Chairman.

                                  FISCAL DATA

        Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
    House of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain
    annual outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 2009
    and each of the following five fiscal years. The results of
    such efforts are reflected in the committee cost estimate,
    which is included in this report pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of
    rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                      CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

        In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House
    of Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the
    Congressional Budget Office and submitted pursuant to section
    402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is as follows:

              Congressional Budget Office Mandatory Cost Estimate

                                                          May 16, 2008.
    Hon. Ike Skelton,
    Chairman, Committee on Armed Services
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
    prepared the enclosed table showing a preliminary estimate of
    the direct spending effects of H.R. 5658, the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, as ordered reported by
    the House Committee on Armed Services on May 14, 2008. CBO's
    complete cost estimate for H.R. 5658, including the
    discretionary costs of the bill, will be provided shortly.
        Based on the legislative language for H.R. 5658 that was
    provided to CBO on May 15, 2008, CBO estimates that enacting
    this bill would increase direct spending by $2 million in 2009,
    and decrease such spending by $13 million over the 2009-2013
    period and by $75 million over the 2009-2018 period. The
    largest budgetary effects would result from changes in the
    TRICARE pharmacy benefit and retirement programs, and the sale
    of assets from the National Defense Stockpile. Enactment of the
    bill would not affect revenues. For the purposes of this
    estimate, we assume that H.R. 5658 will be enacted near the
    beginning of fiscal year 2009.
        If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
    pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew
    Schmit, who can be reached at 226-2840.
                Sincerely,
                                               Peter R. Orszag,
                                                              Director.
        Enclosure.

                            COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

        Pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
    House of Representatives, the committee generally concurs with
    the mandatory estimate as contained in the report of the
    Congressional Budget Office.

                         COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XXI

        Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
    of Representatives, the committee is required to include a list
    of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited
    tariff benefits, as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of
    Rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, which
    are in the bill or the report. The following table provides the
    list of such provisions which are included in the bill and the
    report:

                               OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

        With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
    the House of Representatives, this legislation results from
    hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the
    committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and are
    reflected in the body of this report.
        With respect to clause 3(c) of rule XIII of the Rules of
    the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this legislation does not
    include any new spending or credit authority, nor does it
    provide for any increase or decrease in tax revenues or
    expenditures. The bill does, however, authorize appropriations.
    Other fiscal features of this legislation are addressed in the
    estimate prepared by the committee under clause 3(d)(2) of rule
    XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                    GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

        With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of
    the House of Representatives, this legislation would address
    several general and outcome-related performance goals and
    objectives. The general goal and objective of this legislation
    is to provide the necessary resources and authorities to
    restore military readiness, take care of service members and
    their families, increase focus on the war in Afghanistan, and
    improve interagency cooperation, all of which further the
    national security interests of the United States.
        With respect to the outcome-related goal of restoring
    military readiness and reducing strategic risk, the objective
    of this legislation is to:
              (1) Address manpower needs with an increase of 7,000
            personnel in the Army, 5,000 in the Marine Corps, 1,023
            in the Navy, and 450 in the Air Force in 2009. This
            would bring end strength levels to 532,400 for the
            Army, 194,000 for the Marine Corps, 326,323 for the
            Navy, and 317,050 for the Air Force.
              (2) Direct approximately $2 billion toward unfunded
            readiness initiatives requested by the services;
              (3) Authorize $8.6 billion for the Army and $1.8
            billion for the Marine Corps to fully fund equipment
            reset requirements;
              (4) Authorize $932.2 million for equipment shortfalls
            and equipment maintenance and authorize $800 million
            for the National Guard and Reserve to purchase
            equipment on its unfunded requirements list;
              (5) Provide $650 million in addition to the
            President's request for Sustainment, Restoration, and
            Modernization accounts to keep defense facilities in
            good working order and to address urgent issues such as
            dilapidated military barracks.
        With respect to the outcome-related goal of taking care of
    service members and their families, the objective of this
    legislation is to:
              (1) Provide a 3.9 percent across the board pay raise
            for our men and women in uniform. The raise would
            reduce the pay gap between the military and private
            sector pay to 2.9 percent;
              (2) Prohibit increases in both TRICARE and pharmacy
            user fees, which would prevent over $1.2 billion in
            healthcare costs from being passed on to service
            members; and
              (3) Meet the needs of today's service members and
            their families by increasing funding for family support
            programs by $15 million, establishing a tuition
            assistance program for eligible military spouses,
            authorizing a career intermission pilot program, and
            creating new preventive health care initiatives.
        With respect to the outcome-related goal of increasing
    focus on the war in Afghanistan, the objective of this
    legislation is to:
              (1) Address the need to improve the command and
            control structure for military forces operating in
            Afghanistan to better coordinate military operations
            and achieve a unity of command;
              (2) Require more robust congressional reporting on
            the Afghan National Security Forces; and
              (3) Require the administration to submit separate
            budget requests for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
        With respect to the outcome-related goal of increasing
    interagency cooperation, the objective of this legislation is
    to:
              (1) Require the President to develop and implement a
            system to measure the performance of U.S.-led
            Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in Iraq and
            Afghanistan; and
              (2) Require reports on PRT personnel recruitment and
            training, planning for future requirements, security
            for PRTs, and planning for future stability operations.
              (3) Establish a Strategic Communication Management
            Board including interagency participation to provide
            strategic direction to the Department of Defense's
            efforts this area.

                       CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

        Pursuant to Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the Rules of the
    House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for
    this legislation in Article I, Section 8 of the United States
    Constitution.

                         STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES

        Pursuant to section 423 of Public Law 104-4, this
    legislation contains no federal mandates with respect to state,
    local, and tribal governments, nor with respect to the private
    sector. Similarly, the bill provides no federal
    intergovernmental mandates.

                                  RECORD VOTES

        In accordance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
    the House of Representatives, record votes were taken with
    respect to the committee's consideration of H.R. 5658. The
    record of these votes is contained in the following pages.
        The committee ordered H.R. 5658 reported to the House with
    a favorable recommendation by a vote of 61-0, a quorum being
    present.

             CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

        The committee has taken steps to make available the
    analysis of changes in existing law made by the bill, as
    required by clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
    of Representatives, and will make the analysis available as
    soon as possible.

                                ADDITIONAL VIEWS

        We support H.R. 5658 and feel that it reflects our
    committee's strong and continued support for the brave men and
    women of the United States armed forces. In many ways, this
    bill is a good bill. It authorizes the President's request for
    $531.4 billion for the Fiscal Year 2009 base budget of the
    Department of Defense and national security programs of the
    Department of Energy. Additionally, it includes more than $70
    billion to fund war costs for the first few months of Fiscal
    Year 2009.
        The Army and Marine Corps end-strength growth in this
    legislation continues initiatives started by this committee
    several years ago: in Fiscal Year 2009, the Army would be
    authorized 532,400 active duty personnel--7,000 more than
    authorized last year--and the Marine Corps would be authorized
    194,000 active duty personnel--5,000 more than last year. It
    continues this committee's commitment to force protection by
    adding $2.4 billion for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
    vehicle.
        In addition, we commend the insertion of a provision that
    would require the Secretary of Defense to provide an annual
    report on the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear capabilities.
    We observe that Iran continues to enrich uranium--a pacing item
    for a nuclear weapons capability--and expand its enrichment
    capability, but we do not have insight into these activities.
    Our national and international security depends upon a
    transparent understanding of Iran's nuclear enrichment
    capabilities and intentions.
        As proud as we are of this legislation, we also recognize
    that this bill is not a perfect bill.
        As a nation, we can never adequately repay our brave men
    and women in uniform and their families for the sacrifices they
    make to protect our freedom. In that regard, we believe that
    Congress has the unmistakable obligation to ensure that our
    troops and their families, and in particular their survivors,
    are afforded every benefit to the full extent intended to
    support their needs arising from military service.
        Thus, we regret and express our disappointment that the
    committee did not enact an amendment to increase payments to
    military surviving spouses and children by repealing the SBP-
    DIC offset or Widow's Tax. The amendment directed the chairman
    of the Budget Committee to use the authority in the House-
    passed fiscal year 2009 budget resolution to provide the
    mandatory and discretionary spending necessary to eliminate
    SBP-DIC offsets.
        The chairman of the House Budget Committee has the
    authority in Section 301 of H. Con. Res. 312 to ``revise the
    allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate levels...for any
    bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report
    that......(4) expands eligibility to permit additional disabled
    military retirees to receive both disability compensation pay
    and retired pay and (5) eliminates the offset between Survivor
    Benefit Plan annuities and veterans' dependency and indemnity
    compensation.''
        We are also severely disappointed in the budget gimmick
    used to fund the prohibition on TRICARE pharmacy co-pay
    increases. Instead of finding a reasonable approach to
    adjusting mandatory spending levels to assist the committee in
    finding $40 million in mandatory spending offsets, the House
    leadership suggested a budgetary gimmick that requires military
    retirees to take a cut of one percent in their retired pay for
    a month.
        We believe that all Members of Congress owe our soldiers,
    sailors, airmen, and marines the very best available equipment,
    training, and support. To fulfill this obligation, Armed
    Services Committee members must authorize policies, programs,
    and appropriations that provide our courageous servicemembers
    with the best possible tools to undertake their missions. This
    is especially true during a time of war.
        Therefore, we must express our strong disappointment,
    concern, and frustration with the failure of this committee to
    adopt an amendment that would have made it the policy of the
    United States to commit a minimum of 4 percent of the Nation's
    gross domestic product to the base defense budget, or $606
    billion in fiscal year 2009.
        Rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea are expanding
    their arsenals of ballistic missiles and proliferating both
    missile and nuclear technology. Our North Atlantic Treaty
    Organization (NATO) allies recognize this threat and in April
    2008 provided unanimous endorsement of the ``substantial
    contribution to the protection of Allies from long-range
    ballistic missiles to be provided by the planned deployment of
    European-based United States missile defence assets.'' This
    initiative would also protect the American people and our
    forward-deployed forces, and complement other U.S. and NATO
    missile defense systems.
        The Administration and our NATO allies have committed to
    our collective security, the Congress has demanded it, and yet
    this legislation significantly reduces funds for the European
    missile defense initiative. We believe this sends a terrible
    signal to our allies and emboldens Iran. This is a crucial time
    for the U.S. to continue its leadership; in addition to NATO,
    we have key allies such as Israel and Japan who are relying on
    U.S. commitments to missile defense.
        We are therefore dismayed that the committee would waiver
    in its support of this effort, particularly after significant
    progress has been made to meet the conditions outlined in last
    year's legislation. We are equally concerned that the committee
    was unwilling to restore funds for the Multiple Kill Vehicle
    program, which is a key investment program to address more
    sophisticated ballistic missile threats that we see on the
    horizon. As the Secretary General of NATO said at a speech in
    Prague on May 5, 2008, ``In tomorrow's uncertain world, we can
    not wait for threats to mature before deciding how to counter
    them.''
        We also remain concerned about China's actions in space.
    According to the Pentagon's annual China military report, its
    undeclared and unexplained January 2007 anti-satellite test is
    only one part of a larger Chinese counterspace program to
    prevent the use of space. Thus, we were strongly disappointed
    and troubled by the rejection of an amendment that would have
    directed an independent study to examine the feasibility of
    space-based defense concepts. Such a system might also provide
    another layer of defense against ballistic missile threats.
        H.R. 5658 also reflects a funding reduction of $233 million
    to the Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. This
    represents the fourth consecutive funding cut to the FCS
    program totaling over $1 billion dollars. We agree that the
    Army needs a higher top-line, but the Army's funding crisis
    cannot be solved by making year after year funding reductions
    to critical modernization programs such as the FCS program.
    This committee has been asking the hard questions in regard to
    FCS all the way back to 2004. Consequently, the Army has made
    some positive changes to the program as a result of our
    oversight activities and direction.
        We believe that four consecutive years of funding
    reductions will have a negative impact on the program. Work
    will have to be deferred which means critical decision points
    will have to be moved to the right. The Government
    Accountability Office (GAO), at our direction, does a detailed
    report on FCS every year. We believe that the GAO does very
    good work, and over the years they have highlighted many issues
    and concerns with the FCS program which the committee has taken
    into consideration in the form of legislation.
        The title of this year's report is: `2009 Review of Future
    Combat System Is Critical to Program's Direction.' They chose
    this title because in 2007 this committee wrote and the
    President signed into law a provision that directs the
    Secretary of Defense to conduct a `Go, No-Go' review of the FCS
    program following its Preliminary Design Review in 2009. We
    directed that at the end of the 2009 review the Secretary of
    Defense must decide to continue the FCS program as planned,
    restructure the program, or terminate the program.
        At some point Congress must give the Army the opportunity
    to demonstrate whether the system can perform. We believe the
    Army should have at least one year of stable funding in order
    to let the Secretary of Defense and the Army decide the fate of
    the FCS program in 2009.
        In addition to the funding cut to the FCS program, H.R.
    5658 includes a provision that would prevent the Army from
    using a Lead Systems Integrator during low rate initial
    production and full rate production. We support this provision,
    but believe that it might need to be modified in conference to
    ensure that there is no negative impact to the Army's ability
    to conduct a successful Initial Operational Test and
    Evaluation.
        As a nation, we face a multitude of threats to our way of
    life and our national security interests. As legislators, we
    must accept that it is our duty to ensure that our men and
    women in uniform, who have bravely volunteered to serve our
    nation, have the best available tools at their disposal to
    combat those threats and protect those interests. This bill
    goes a considerable way in demonstrating this committee's
    resolve, but we can--and should--improve it.
        We owe that much to our men and women, who answer the call
    in defense of our nation.

                                       Duncan Hunter.
                                       Jim Saxton.
                                       John M. McHugh.
                                       Terry Everett.
                                       Roscoe G. Bartlett.
                                       Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon.
                                       Mac Thornberry.
                                       Robin Hayes.
                                       W. Todd Akin.
                                       J. Randy Forbes.
                                       Joe Wilson.
                                       Frank A. LoBiondo.
                                       Tom Cole.
                                       Rob Bishop.
                                       John Kline.
                                       Phil Gingrey.
                                       Mike Rogers.
                                       Trent Franks.
                                       Bill Shuster.
                                       Thelma D. Drake.
                                       K. Michael Conaway.
                                       Doug Lamborn.
                                       Robert J. Wittman.

    ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES JIM MARSHALL, TOM COLE, ROB BISHOP
                              AND MICHAEL TURNER.

        We submit additional views concerning Section 327, Guidance
    for performance of civilian personnel work under Air Force
    civilian consolidation plan, the Committee's guidance to the
    Secretary of the Air Force regarding efforts to centralize
    personnel management services, particularly as this effort
    affects the large civilian work centers (``LCCs'' which include
    Wright-Patterson, Robins, Tinker, Hill and Bolling Air Force
    Bases).
        Pursuant to a 1993 DoD directive, the Air Force has sought,
    with varying levels of enthusiasm, to centralize personnel
    management functions in one location, largely removing them
    from the on-site control of the base commander. Unlike most AF
    instillations, the success of the mission at its large civilian
    work centers (Wright-Patterson, Robins, Tinker, Hill and
    Bolling AFBs, the ``LCCs'') depends upon a complicated civilian
    workforce numbering in the thousands with hundreds of job
    classifications. So AF rightly delayed removing major personnel
    functions from the LCCs, centralizing only those personnel
    services that might easily be provided by email or telephone
    (e.g. some IT support, responding to routine employee inquiries
    about benefits, etc.).
        Aware that Air Force was balking, DoD sought to use the
    recent BRAC process to advance total centralization of the Air
    Force personnel functions. But the BRAC Commissioners rejected
    DoD's proposed BRAC language on this subject. Instead, for the
    LCCs, the Commissioners directed that each LCC ``retain
    sufficient positions and personnel to perform the personnel
    management advisory services, the non-transactional functions,
    necessary to support . . . the civilian workforce.'' For each
    LCC, the Commissioners directed that only the ``transactional
    functions of the Civilian Personnel Office'' would be moved to
    Randolph AFB, the currently planned site for centralization.
        Mr. Marshall's amendment makes clear that the meaning of
    ``transactional'' and ``non-transactional'' will vary depending
    upon the nature of the affected installation, furthering the
    BRAC Commissioners' goal of assuring that LCCs ``retain
    sufficient positions and personnel to perform the personnel
    management advisory services . . . necessary to support . . .
    the civilian workforce,'' a goal that is vitally important to
    mission performance at each LCC.
        Missions and activities have different levels of value and
    importance. Some are critical. Some are not. For example, a
    brief interruption of IT service for one activity (landing
    aircraft) might cause grave problems while elimination of IT
    service altogether for another (scheduling lawn service) might
    be no big deal. Besides such differences in criticality, the
    cost or practicality of delivering services will vary for
    different missions and activities. Infantrymen on patrol do not
    enjoy food service levels comparable to soldiers stationed in
    large bases, yet food for the active infantryman is more
    important than for those in the rear. It is laudable but
    typically impractical and wasteful to try to provide the
    highest level of civilian personnel management services to all
    AF bases. AFPC's service delivery targets will have to vary
    among installations and missions. There is no other practical,
    cost effective alternative. AF Commanders accept and understand
    that. In all walks of life--business, government, education,
    even pastoring--uniform provision of services is the exception,
    not the rule.
        By postponing centralization of the Civilian Personnel
    Offices of the AF large civilian work centers (``LCCs''--
    Bolling, Hill, Robins, Tinker and Wright Pat), AF has already
    treated them differently from other commands. The LCCs are
    different. Their missions are civilian driven. Productivity of
    their civilian workforce is critical. Productivity will suffer
    significantly if key personnel management functions are removed
    to a different command and location. A remotely located
    management team responding to a separate command is also more
    remote from consequences and feedback. Its motivation,
    responsiveness and understanding cannot equal that of a
    management team that is part of the overall LCC team.
    Centralization of this sort did not work for the Soviet Union.
    It will not work for the Air Force.
        Mr. Marshall's amendment directs that certain personnel
    management functions must remain staffed at the LCCs, commanded
    by the LCC commander. These include: Staffing positions filled
    through internal or external recruitment processes, Development
    of position classifications or job descriptions, Employee
    management relations, including performance management
    programs, conduct or discipline programs and labor management
    programs, Labor force planning and management, including
    internal pay pool management and employee performance reviews,
    and Managing workers compensation program pursuant to chapter
    81 of title 5, United States Code, or relevant State Workers'
    compensation programs.
                                       Jim Marshall.
                                       Tom Cole.
                                       Rob Bishop.
                                       Michael Turner.

                 ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES ROB BISHOP

        While I support H.R. 5658 as a good, bi-partisan bill
    providing for our nation's defense for fiscal year FY'09, I
    have some serious reservations.
        It was disappointing that the Administration submitted an
    FY'09 defense budget which was a record $17 billion short of
    meeting verified military requirements. While this Committee
    tried its best to fill in some of the blanks, it too did not go
    far enough in several critical areas, such as aircraft
    procurement, because it was hemmed-in by the FY'09 Budget
    Resolution proffered by the House Democratic Leadership which
    shortchanges defense to fund misplaced priorities. We cannot
    continue to go down the road of placing demands on our military
    with aging equipment and 40-year old jet fighters, and still
    expect that our nation retain its status as a military
    superpower. We either need to reduce the demands that are
    placed upon the military, which is not always possible given
    emerging world threats, or else we remember our Constitutional
    duty to provide for the common defense and provide the
    resources needed to fulfill the military's mission. We now have
    aging F-15 aircraft disintegrating in mid-flight. We cannot
    continue to ask our pilots to fly fourth-generation fighters,
    which are nearing the end of their service life, without
    adequately providing for fifth-generation fighters in
    sufficient numbers to fulfill validated requirements and
    provide manufacturing efficiencies.
        The Army has not given sufficient attention to adequately
    funding its Military Construction (MILCON) program. When
    reviewing the Army's MILCON priorities again in FY'09, it is
    clear that they are placing nearly all of their dollars into
    Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) mandated moves and the
    ``Grow the Force'' initiative for the forseeable future, and
    are neglecting non-BRAC bases or supporting installations. This
    disinvestment creates serious consequences for both readiness
    and morale at those other locations.
        A case-in point is Tooele Army Depot, Utah, with World War
    II era facilities, and 489 full-time Army civilian employees
    and 102 contractor employees. More munitions have been shipped
    to supply our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan from Tooele than
    from any other location in the CONUS, and yet, the civilian
    workforce works on loading docks and other facilities that are
    over 60 years of age with no upgrades in sight. Tooele has not
    had any of its identified MILCON or improvement projects
    forwarded to Congress by the Army in over fifteen years. The
    Army keeps slipping Tooele's projects off of its five year
    defense plan (FYDP) in what's become an annual budgetary game.
    Even the most fiscally-conservative private business enterprise
    recognizes that it must invest a minimum of 3-5% in facilities
    upkeep and modernization just to stay ahead of the profit and
    loss curve. Some of the facilities at Tooele are so far gone
    that they must simply be razed due to deterioration, but the
    Army hasn't even funded that. If the Army continues to rely on
    Tooele to do a mission, then it must adequately provide for it
    and not expect the workforce to continue to do more with
    facilities falling down around them, especially when hundreds
    of millions, and even billions of dollars, are flowing to other
    Army installations around the country each year for MILCON
    projects.
        Another area of chronic neglect is in the area of
    environmentally-responsible Conventional Munitions disposal at
    Tooele and elsewhere. The Army's open-pit, open-burn method of
    disposal grows increasingly intolerable due to environmental
    concerns. This is something the Army should address in a more
    aggressive manner.
        The Army has also neglected Dugway Proving Grounds.
    Workload at Dugway has increased by nearly 800 percent since
    September 11, 2001 in chemical and biological defense testing,
    even as the Army has actually disinvested in Dugway's
    facilities. As a result, a vitally needed laboratory addition
    project has been continuously postponed in the Army's budget
    submission for the last several years. Army scientists at
    Dugway have no choice but to conduct sensitive BioLevel-3 level
    testing work in crowded and inadequate temporary trailers.
    Dugway's water system is 50 years old, deteriorating, and fails
    to meet basic water quality standards. Yet, the MILCON project
    to upgrade the water system continually falls off the Army's
    FYDP. The quality of life for persons living at Dugway's remote
    and isolated location is being neglected. Dugway's community
    club, the only retail dining opportunity for residents within
    an hour's drive of the base, has been partially condemned due
    to lack of running water and asbestos tile hazards. It is a
    monumental embarrassment. A small MILCON project to replace it
    has been postponed for several years, and this year, was
    completely removed by the Army from the FYDP even though
    Congress provided design money for the project two years ago.
    These disinvestments risk alienation of state and community
    support.
        Finally, I am greatly concerned that the 110th Congress
    passed an Energy Bill that included Section 526 virtually
    precluding contracts between the Department of Defense and
    other entities engaged in alternative energy projects. As fuel
    costs increase, they are wreaking havoc on the Department's
    budgets. Since 2001, the amount spent for fuel by the
    Department for regular operations, not including wartime
    efforts, has more than doubled to nearly $7 billion. Every
    penny increase in the cost of jet fuel costs the services tens
    of millions of dollars that have to come out of personnel,
    modernization or facilities.
        Energy is one of the most critical national defense
    commodities. And yet, the House Democratic Leadership has
    precluded any common-sense, rational alternative fuels
    development by virtually prohibiting any Department of Defense
    support for oil shale extraction or coals to liquid fuel
    production by passing Section 526 of the recently enacted
    Democratic Energy bill.
        The United States has the largest known reserves of oil
    shale deposits in the entire world. According to the Energy
    Department, there are over 1 trillion barrels of recoverable
    oil locked into oil shale deposits in 3 western states of Utah,
    Colorado and Wyoming. This was recognized decades ago when the
    Department of Defense set aside significant Naval Oil Shale
    reserves in Eastern Utah. They were viewed specifically as a
    key component of our defense energy security reserves.
        Modern oil shale extraction technologies have advanced
    greatly and are much more environmentally sensitive. It is
    commercially viable and competitive with conventional oil
    sources at $50 a barrel. Would that we could return to the days
    of $50 a barrel!
        Another aspect of refining jet fuel derived from oil shale
    is the higher energy or BTU content when compared with
    conventional fuel sources. This could be important in extending
    the range of fighter jet aircraft. That benefit is also being
    precluded by Section 526. As enacted, Section 526 is the wrong
    policy and must be modified to include a waiver by the
    Department of Defense.
        Congress should be encouraging, not discouraging, domestic
    oil shale and coal-to-liquids development for use by the
    Department of Defense. Section 526 should be repealed or
    modified as quickly as possible. Such a repeal or modifying
    amendment was not possible during the Armed Services Committee
    deliberations on H.R. 5658 due to procedural and jurisdictional
    concerns among House committees. This is a vital issue that
    deserves a re-examination on the House floor when this bill is
    debated and voted by the Full membership of the House.

                                       Rob Bishop.

                ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE NIKI TSONGAS

        I strongly support the underlying authorization. I also
    applaud the work of the Seapower Subcommittee, for their
    commitment to a 313 ship fleet and their efforts to control the
    ever increasing cost of shipbuilding in this country while
    supporting the industrial base. However, I am concerned by the
    potential consequences of the proposed pause in continued
    procurement of follow-on ships of the DDG-1000 ZUMWALT class. I
    appreciate that the Committee recommends $400 million for
    advanced procurement for surface combatants so that Navy has
    the flexibility to move forward with DDG-1000 or restart DDG-51
    procurement, but I am concerned about the impacts that this
    will have on our surface fleet manufacturing and technology
    base and on the future of our surface combatant capabilities.
        The DDG-1000 is the primary development program for the
    Navy's Family of Ships (FoS) strategy. Eliminating the
    authorization for funding the DDG-1000 class in this bill could
    dramatically increase the cost of current and future Navy
    shipbuilding programs, including the next generation cruiser,
    CG(X). Additionally, the industrial base that is so vital to
    our transition to a 21st century fleet of surface combatants
    could be decimated. There are more than 10,000 skilled workers
    in the U.S. working on the Mission Systems Equipment that is
    intended to support not only DDG-1000, but the entire Family of
    Ships. It will be extremely difficult and costly to
    reconstitute this workforce in the future.
        Sustaining this program lays the groundwork for the Navy's
    long standing plan, which includes the transition from this new
    destroyer to the next generation cruiser, CG(X), using the
    ZUMWALT hull and systems. Funding the third ship in the ZUMWALT
    Class is essential in FY09 to avoid the potential cost and
    long-term schedule implications of a break in production.
        I am also concerned that restarting procurement of the DDG-
    51 could have unforeseen costs that could negate the perceived
    financial benefit of returning to the older class of ship. The
    Chief of Naval Operations submitted the request for the DDG-
    1000 and clearly stated the Navy's need to build a total of 7
    ships of this class. The Navy has ensured that the ten key
    technologies incorporated into this new ship class have been
    well tested and their performance verified, and the ship design
    prior to start of construction will be more mature than that
    for any other surface combatant ship--indicators that the Navy
    well understands the program's costs. The Navy and Congress
    have supported this critical multi-purpose ship for fleet
    operations as a result of rigorous review, engineering
    development model risk reduction, computer-aided design,
    significant research and development investment, and updated
    cost modeling.
        This ship is designed to provide critical capabilities to
    defeat current and future evolving threats. DDG-1000 has been
    designed to carry out Navy missions while putting half as many
    sailors at risk when compared to the ships the Navy currently
    has to do complete these missions. It is designed for higher
    operational tempo and lower life-cycle costs than current Navy
    destroyers. Again, I appreciate the expertise of the Seapower
    Subcommittee and full Committee on these issues and for their
    dedication to our men and women of the Navy and Marine Corps. I
    ask that consideration of the above concerns be made as we move
    forward.

                                       Niki Tsongas.