[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.